ikol

In theory that is correct, but that is not the current state of health insurance. Insurance is expected to cover everything, even routine visits and chronic conditions. This is where a lot of the problem lies. You're not saving any money on insurance if you're paying them to pay for something that you will definitely need versus something that you will probably not need.

There's been so much partisan back and forth ad nauseum, I thought it would be nice to start a thread about the issues on which you disagree with your party/side. There's so many issues and so many different ways to think about them that it's pretty much impossible for one to agree with any one side on everything. (At least I hope everyone's not either a McCain or Obama sycophant zombie.) So where is your side wrong and the other side right? I'll start: I am against the death penalty and torturing military prisoners. I am closer to the liberal side on gay marriage/pseudo-marriage-civil-union

Here's a question I have about universal healthcare: How much control would providers have in billing? Would the government be capping how much providers can charge for services, procedures, etc. or would the providers be able to set the price on their own?

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday!

With my bat signal in the background?

Which is a better motive. The government fucks things up for fun.

As someone who was posting brilliant political commentary at bobsquared's age, I say being young does not prevent one from having well-formed opinions.

Now you're just faking it. You didn't even use "fuck" once.

Calm down! Why all the anger?

Pretty much. Pretty much.

The same way they've dealt with a VP who has a lesbian daughter.

Just out of curiosity, who do you think he should've nominated? Given McCain's positions on the issues, is there a running mate he could've picked that you wouldn't be slinging mud at?

I heard that Obama made a left turn without signaling. Do we really want someone like that running our country?

Once again, just to be clear, we are debating the circumstances under which Palin gave birth in evaluating her qualification to be VP? Wow...just...wow.

Does anyone realize that we are debating whether a VP candidate is qualified for the job based on how she chose to give birth? Yeah, she should be at home taking care of the kids like a good housewife! That's a very progressive view.

Did the DNC email this to you? They even divided the talking points up into convenient bullet points for maximum rhetorical efficiency! I'm sorry to hear that McCain lost your vote with his VP pick. He should've been more discerning about the leftwing blogosphere rumors when he picked a running mate.

Sorry. I was way off base. It's hilarious to reduce impending natural disasters to their effects on an election. Some people may have to lose their homes or lives, but at least God is ensuring a Democrat wins the election. Nice little assumption about my financial status you make there. I'm actually in a situation pretty close to yours, minus the wife and paychecks.

Or maybe, as incompetent as he is, he really does care. At least he cares more than Michael Moore.

Happy Birthday!

Sex is pretty invasive for a woman. Just sayin'.

Agreed.

So can a good dose of LSD. But it is reasonable to kill a fetus?

Why is the uterus special? We don't have a Constitutional right to control (or lose control of) our nervous systems. Would you vote for a candidate that's in favor of keeping LSD illegal?