The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-25-2013, 09:15 AM   #201
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
Solid Starter
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 230

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
The good news /sarc is now you can do both!

Although the primary care copay will probably be something like $50. So for that $800 plus a month (likely more), you'll at least get a slight discount on those office visits.
Hmmm, do I pay for health insurance, or buy food? tough choice.....
Al Wilson 4 Mayor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 09:23 AM   #202
Pony Boy
"Whoa Nellie"
 
Pony Boy's Avatar
 
Omaha !!!

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,583

Adopt-a-Bronco:
mellon head
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
Hmmm, do I pay for health insurance, or buy food? tough choice.....
Which monthly bill will get paid first by the 20 and 30 year old generation, the health insurance premium or the cell phone bill?
Pony Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 11:31 AM   #203
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,627
Default

Quote:
The only real way to repeal the healthcare law is to win elections.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...347257028.html
TonyR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 11:55 AM   #204
Crushaholic
Armchair Poster
 
Crushaholic's Avatar
 
Get off my lawn, you kids!

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 22,469

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Isaiah Burse
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
You're absolutely correct. I despised Romney, but I saw it as a way to get Obamacare repealed. Also, the Republicans needed to take the Senate. That didn't happen, either. Fast forward to today, the Republicans can stomp their feet all they want. They don't have the votes to get rid of Obamacare. The only hope is if Democrats start listening to the small businesses and people who had chosen not to buy healthcare insurance...
Crushaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 12:08 PM   #205
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,598
Default

Our government can barely avoid shutting every few months yet some of you want to put your healthcare in their hands? Insanity.
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 12:15 PM   #206
Blart
I'm gay for the Broncos!
 
Blart's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,910

Adopt-a-Bronco:
all @ same time
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
One, Life Expectancy means next to nothing. And Two, while actual Healthcare in the US may be wasteful, and/or non-universal, in most cases it produces very good outcomes. Better than the rest of the world in many cases.
Yes, US healthcare is unquestionably top-notch, but what happens when your insurance denies you that top-notch care?

Don't feel so comfy because you have "great health insurance". Someone's job at that insurance company is to deny you care, and they're some of the best detectives in the country. If your claim for treatment is denied by Aetna/BlueCross/Company X and you die, the adjustor who denied you is getting a bonus. Profiting from death? That's capitalism.

In 2007, CIGNA refused to pay for the liver transplant 17-year-old Nataline Sarkisyan desperately needed to survive because it was "too experimental." She ended up dying from lack of treatment.

A 12-year-old boy who was born with only one arm, had been denied coverage for his prosthesis on the grounds that he had reached his "lifetime maximum benefit for prosthetic devices." The insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan

Otto Raddatz, a lymphoma patient, lost his health care coverage while still undergoing chemotherapy. Fortis Insurance said it terminated his policy because he didn't disclose a note that a doctor once wrote in his file -- that he didn't know about -- indicating he had a small aneurysm and gallstones.

Blue Cross agreed to insure Wittney Horton and accepted her premium payments -- until she got sick. After Horton sought treatment, Blue Cross opened an investigation into her medical records and found a note from one of her doctors suggesting that she might have polycystic ovaries. Based on the note, which Horton never knew about, Blue Cross rescinded her medical coverage.

Ian Pearl, who was diagnosed with muscular dystrophy soon after birth, survives with the help of medical technology, including the ventilator he needs to breathe. Late last year, however, his insurer, Guardian, scaled back his coverage even though the limited care is, according to his family, likely to kill him.

Shortly before Robin Beaton was scheduled to undergo a double mastectomy in 2008, her insurance company revoked her policy. Beaton, a breast cancer patient, never disclosed that she'd previously seen a dermatologist for acne, a condition her insurer, Blue Cross, said qualified as a pre-existing condition. "The sad thing is, Blue Cross gladly took my high premiums, and the first time I filed a claim and was suspected of having cancer, they searched high and low for a reason to cancel me," Beaton told a House committee.

They'll deny you for acne. Hope the guy who found that got a lot of money.

Also, I looked into the data you posted. It was based on AEI (right-wing think tank) research from the 80's & 90's, and the data shows fatal injury rates relative to the average. Which is why there are so many anomalies in the graph, like Japan having lower life expectancy without fatal injuries. In other words, it's not showing life expectancy minus fatal injuries as the image states, and seems more like outdated mathturbation as Wags pointed out.

Last edited by Blart; 09-25-2013 at 12:19 PM..
Blart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 12:27 PM   #207
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,903

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blart View Post
Yes, US healthcare is unquestionably top-notch, but what happens when your insurance denies you that top-notch care?

Don't feel so comfy because you have "great health insurance". Someone's job at that insurance company is to deny you care, and they're some of the best detectives in the country. If your claim for treatment is denied by Aetna/BlueCross/Company X and you die, the adjustor who denied you is getting a bonus. Profiting from death? That's capitalism.
This is what the righties don't get. When you have something that is not profitable to do (actually provide care), relying on profit motive to regulate is insane.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 12:40 PM   #208
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,651

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blart View Post
Yes, US healthcare is unquestionably top-notch, but what happens when your insurance denies you that top-notch care?

Don't feel so comfy because you have "great health insurance". Someone's job at that insurance company is to deny you care, and they're some of the best detectives in the country. If your claim for treatment is denied by Aetna/BlueCross/Company X and you die, the adjustor who denied you is getting a bonus. Profiting from death? That's capitalism.

In 2007, CIGNA refused to pay for the liver transplant 17-year-old Nataline Sarkisyan desperately needed to survive because it was "too experimental." She ended up dying from lack of treatment.

A 12-year-old boy who was born with only one arm, had been denied coverage for his prosthesis on the grounds that he had reached his "lifetime maximum benefit for prosthetic devices." The insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan

Otto Raddatz, a lymphoma patient, lost his health care coverage while still undergoing chemotherapy. Fortis Insurance said it terminated his policy because he didn't disclose a note that a doctor once wrote in his file -- that he didn't know about -- indicating he had a small aneurysm and gallstones.

Blue Cross agreed to insure Wittney Horton and accepted her premium payments -- until she got sick. After Horton sought treatment, Blue Cross opened an investigation into her medical records and found a note from one of her doctors suggesting that she might have polycystic ovaries. Based on the note, which Horton never knew about, Blue Cross rescinded her medical coverage.

Ian Pearl, who was diagnosed with muscular dystrophy soon after birth, survives with the help of medical technology, including the ventilator he needs to breathe. Late last year, however, his insurer, Guardian, scaled back his coverage even though the limited care is, according to his family, likely to kill him.

Shortly before Robin Beaton was scheduled to undergo a double mastectomy in 2008, her insurance company revoked her policy. Beaton, a breast cancer patient, never disclosed that she'd previously seen a dermatologist for acne, a condition her insurer, Blue Cross, said qualified as a pre-existing condition. "The sad thing is, Blue Cross gladly took my high premiums, and the first time I filed a claim and was suspected of having cancer, they searched high and low for a reason to cancel me," Beaton told a House committee.

They'll deny you for acne. Hope the guy who found that got a lot of money.

Also, I looked into the data you posted. It was based on AEI (right-wing think tank) research from the 80's & 90's, and the data shows fatal injury rates relative to the average. Which is why there are so many anomalies in the graph, like Japan having lower life expectancy without fatal injuries. In other words, it's not showing life expectancy minus fatal injuries as the image states, and seems more like outdated mathturbation as Wags pointed out.
Dude, I can find you a million different sources who will tell you that Life Expectancy is nearly the ****tiest way imaginable to measure a healthcare system.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...alth_care.html

Now please please please show me the dreaded Yglesias/Koch smoking gun.

Anyway you can nitpick and slam sources all you want, but it's undeniably true that this particular favored stat of the left has next to zero relevance when it comes to health care. How long we live has much more to do with how we live our lives as opposed to what doctors we see when.

As far as sob stories, we don't live in a perfect world. Turning it over to the government doesn't make it any less so:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...s-exposed.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-revealed.html

The supply is limitless.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 01:32 PM   #209
Blart
I'm gay for the Broncos!
 
Blart's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,910

Adopt-a-Bronco:
all @ same time
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
this particular favored stat of the left has next to zero relevance when it comes to health care. How long we live has much more to do with how we live our lives as opposed to what doctors we see when.
This has the feel of "moving the goalposts", but fine. Life expectancy isn't totally accurate, it's a bit like comparing QB's based on their TD/INT ratio. It's not going to tell you if John Elway was better than Joe Montana, but a quick glance can tell you which one is Brian Griese and which one is Peyton Manning:

1.20
2.14

Regardless, let's throw out life expectancy. Long lives are a tool of the left (the longer you live, the more taxes they take)!


We still have the WHO comparisons.
We have OECD comparisons of mortality amendable to healthcare (people who die that could have been treated with healthcare), physicians & hospital beds per capita, and other metrics.
We have the non-partisan Commonwealth Fund comparisons, which I believe to be the most precise:


Source: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/me..._wall_2010.pdf

We don't need life expectancy to show the problem with US healthcare.

My question is: If the methodologies are so murky and can go either way, where are the comparisons from non-partisan organizations showing the efficiency and success of US healthcare?

Last edited by Blart; 09-25-2013 at 01:48 PM..
Blart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 01:42 PM   #210
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,733
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blart View Post
My question is: If the methodologies are so murky and can go either way, where are the comparisons from non-partisan organizations showing the efficiency and success of US healthcare?
There ain't none - other than right-wing blatant cherry picks designed to defend the privileges of wealth.
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 02:11 PM   #211
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,651

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blart View Post
This has the feel of "moving the goalposts", but fine. Life expectancy isn't totally accurate, it's a bit like comparing QB's based on their TD/INT ratio. It's not going to tell you if John Elway was better than Joe Montana, but a quick glance can tell you which one is Brian Griese and which one is Peyton Manning:

1.20
2.14

Regardless, let's throw out life expectancy. Long lives are a tool of the left (the longer you live, the more taxes they take)!


We still have the WHO comparisons.
We have OECD comparisons of mortality amendable to healthcare (people who die that could have been treated with healthcare), physicians & hospital beds per capita, and other metrics.
We have the non-partisan Commonwealth Fund comparisons, which I believe to be the most precise:


Source: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/me..._wall_2010.pdf

We don't need life expectancy to show the problem with US healthcare.

My question is: If the methodologies are so murky and can go either way, where are the comparisons from non-partisan organizations showing the efficiency and success of US healthcare?
All of them call themselves "non-partisan"

AEI, Heritage... Brookings, Commonwealth Fund, etc. Yet all have ideological bents.

non-partisan does not mean non-ideological. Commonwealth Fund is no more objective than Cato. That's not to say you can't listen to either or both. But one's face value is no higher than the other's.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 02:32 PM   #212
Blart
I'm gay for the Broncos!
 
Blart's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,910

Adopt-a-Bronco:
all @ same time
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
All of them call themselves "non-partisan"

AEI, Heritage... Brookings, Commonwealth Fund, etc. Yet all have ideological bents.

non-partisan does not mean non-ideological. Commonwealth Fund is no more objective than Cato. That's not to say you can't listen to either or both. But one's face value is no higher than the other's.
Commonwealth Fund is a think-tank? When was the last time CATO built hospitals?

OECD is a liberal think-tank? That's a first.


If this were think tank vs think tank, the right would win since they dominate think-tank funding.

Last edited by Blart; 09-25-2013 at 02:36 PM..
Blart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 02:41 PM   #213
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,651

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blart View Post
Commonwealth Fund is a think-tank? When was the last time CATO built hospitals?

OECD is a liberal think-tank? That's a first.


If this were think tank vs think tank, the right would win since they dominate think-tank funding.
I didn't say they were all think tanks. I said they all called themselves 'nonpartisan' yet are all obviously in one ideological camp or the other.

Trivia Question. You like connecting dots. I've seen it.

What was the head of the Commonwealth Fund's job before he took leadership of the organization? Oh, and which party does his brother, who just coincidentally happens to be a US Senator belong to?
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 02:48 PM   #214
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Surprise! Obamacare foe Cruz votes with Democrats on spending plan

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/25/politi...html?hpt=hp_t1

You can't make this **** up.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 02:56 PM   #215
Blart
I'm gay for the Broncos!
 
Blart's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,910

Adopt-a-Bronco:
all @ same time
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
I didn't say they were all think tanks. I said they all called themselves 'nonpartisan' yet are all obviously in one ideological camp or the other.

Trivia Question. You like connecting dots. I've seen it.

What was the head of the Commonwealth Fund's job before he took leadership of the organization? Oh, and which party does his brother, who just coincidentally happens to be a US Senator belong to?
At the time of the above report (2010) Karen Davis was president of the Commonwealth Fund. Prior to that, she was a chairman at John Hopkins School of Public Health, which is arguably the best public health school in the country.
Blart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 03:35 PM   #216
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,432

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Surprise! Obamacare foe Cruz votes with Democrats on spending plan

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/25/politi...html?hpt=hp_t1

You can't make this **** up.
I don't understand what the point of voting against a procedural step would be. You're acting like this is a huge gotcha, and it's just a vote on allowing amendments. Doesn't it make sense that Cruz might have amendments of his own to add?

What do I expect - you're touting a CNN headline...

UNBELIEVABLE! He voted in favor of adding amendments to the bill! YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS UP!

Your overreaction is puzzling.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 03:43 PM   #217
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I don't understand what the point of voting against a procedural step would be. You're acting like this is a huge gotcha, and it's just a vote on allowing amendments. Doesn't it make sense that Cruz might have amendments of his own to add?

What do I expect - you're touting a CNN headline...

UNBELIEVABLE! He voted in favor of adding amendments to the bill! YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS UP!

Your overreaction is puzzling.
You honestly think his constituents will be able to put that logic together, particularly when he was taking the stance of "stop Obamacare at all costs"?

I can't wait until the next town hall meeting he hosts when he has to answer the question on why he voted for Obamacare.

"Well...because...I had to vote for it...so I could vote against it!"

Yeah, that will go over well.

And in addition...please, regale us on what amendment he's going to propose that has any chance of passing. His own party hates him, how do you think the Democrats feel about him, other than in an "awww, how cute" sort of way?
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 03:43 PM   #218
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,432

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

I think this is the context that people are missing in this recent theatre:

The last 24 hours wasn't Ted Cruz vs. Democrats. Not at all really. The last 24 hours was about Ted Cruz (and the new school republicans) vs. John McCain, Mitch McConnell, and everyone else in the old school. This is just an extension of the Republican civil war.

Ted Cruz, whether people have the savvy to understand this or not, just fired across Mitch Mconnell's bows, and the entire Republican establishment. If you get a chance, watch the exchange that he had during primetime during the speech with Dick Durbin. He laid out the whole strategy there. Or better yet, just check the first post of this thread - which pretty well nailed everything that happened this week before it even happened.

This whole thing is about the senate fight in 2014 and the new guard letting the old guard know "we have the floor now - stand down."
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 03:46 PM   #219
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,432

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

[QUOTE=houghtam;3924551]You honestly think his constituents will be able to put that logic together, particularly when he was taking the stance of "stop Obamacare at all costs"?[quote]

Uh what? I don't think it will matter. Nobody cares about procedural votes except apparently CNN and you. This doesn't even count as a blip on the political radar. It's like voting to adjourn for a bathroom break - big whoop.

You (and CNN) are desperate to find a gotcha here, and it doesn't exist.


Quote:
I can't wait until the next town hall meeting he hosts when he has to answer the question on why he voted for Obamacare.
Wow. What? Dude do you even know what's going on? Your line of attack is bizarre and out of focus.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 03:47 PM   #220
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,432

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
And in addition...please, regale us on what amendment he's going to propose that has any chance of passing. His own party hates him, how do you think the Democrats feel about him, other than in an "awww, how cute" sort of way?
I wouldn't guess what amendments he might propose, but I couldn't care less about "his party hating him." Those guys have their necks out right now, not Cruz. Visit any grass roots web site (such as RedState.org). Cruz is a hero with the base right now, while these old school guys are being talked about as hens ready for the slaughter.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 03:52 PM   #221
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,432

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Read this article - just one of hundreds you can find right now, and tell me that the Republican party hates Ted Cruz:
http://www.redstate.com/2013/09/25/t...obamacare-lie/

You're getting your information from the establishment media if you think that's true, and they're doing everything they can to rally around the president.

Ted Cruz is winning big right now.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 03:54 PM   #222
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

[QUOTE=Taco John;3924554][QUOTE=houghtam;3924551]You honestly think his constituents will be able to put that logic together, particularly when he was taking the stance of "stop Obamacare at all costs"?
Quote:

Uh what? I don't think it will matter. Nobody cares about procedural votes except apparently CNN and you. This doesn't even count as a blip on the political radar. It's like voting to adjourn for a bathroom break - big whoop.

You (and CNN) are desperate to find a gotcha here, and it doesn't exist.




Wow. What? Dude do you even know what's going on? Your line of attack is bizarre and out of focus.
You're attributing too much intelligence to the average voter, and are apparently unable to comprehend the effect that the media has on people's opinions.

Once the media keeps playing this vote over and over again, and then when his opponent picks it up, you can rest assured he's going to have to answer those questions, likely from the same guy who shouted "get your government hands off my Medicare."

Cruz is done.

Yeah, yeah, "mark my words", "hear me now, believe me later" and all those other favorite sayings of yours that turn out to be woefully incorrect.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 04:03 PM   #223
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,432

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
You're attributing too much intelligence to the average voter, and are apparently unable to comprehend the effect that the media has on people's opinions.
Pfffft!

First of all, this silly procedural vote means nothing to the average voter. It actually means nothing to the sophisticated voter as well. It's just a procedural vote. It got one silly article on CNN in a flurry of news about a million other things. Who do you think is paying attention to this silly story outside of "Gotcha Monkeys" who are trying to drum up whatever it is you're trying to drum up...


Quote:
Once the media keeps playing this vote over and over again....
Really? You think this procedural vote is going to get even a news cycles worth of coverage? Bizzare.

Quote:
Cruz is done.
Yeah, clearly:
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-09-25.html

I hate Ann Coulter. She's a front running media bag. But let me say that again: she's a front running media bag. Ted Cruz is not going anywhere. You can't possibly believe what you're writing here. You spend your time in politics forums. How can you understand so little about political calculus? It's almost like you just straight up believe what the media says and aren't able to critically evaluate it based on the actual facts on the ground.

Quote:
Yeah, yeah, "mark my words", "hear me now, believe me later" and all those other favorite sayings of yours that turn out to be woefully incorrect.
Yeah. Huh. Anyone can read the first post of this thread and tell me how "woefully incorrect" I am. Go ahead. Read it again.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 04:05 PM   #224
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
Read this article - just one of hundreds you can find right now, and tell me that the Republican party hates Ted Cruz:
http://www.redstate.com/2013/09/25/t...obamacare-lie/

You're getting your information from the establishment media if you think that's true, and they're doing everything they can to rally around the president.

Ted Cruz is winning big right now.
Hmm..let's see...how many people pay attention to redstate.com?

How many people follow CNN?

Watch the evening news (any channel) tonight, see what they're saying and how they characterize it.

Hell, watch Fox News (America's most watched network) even they're characterizing him as an outsider.

But hey, you're the one who thought Ron Paul could beat both Romney and Obama. You're the one who thinks Rand Paul is going to be the next president. You're the one who thinks Ted Cruz will be the House Majority leader, assuming the Republicans will pick up enough seats for that AND that they will then choose a guy to lead them who they hate.

And then you say you don't care whether his party hates him.

You're waaaay out there, buddy.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2013, 05:04 PM   #225
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,432

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Yeah, it sure sounds like Ted Cruz is finished...

https://soundcloud.com/senator-ted-c...z-talks-defund

Like with Coulter, I'm no fan of Limbaugh, but Limbaugh speaks to a large part of the base. The establishment is the one out on a limb right now. McConnell is about to get primaried...
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:20 AM.


Denver Broncos