Utopia Talk / Politics / Hank Johnson D-GA to boycott SOTU addres

Habebe Member	Tue Feb 04 17:39:09 Thats right the guy who thought the ISLAND OF GUAM WOULD CAPSIZE....let that sink in. Is boycotting Trumps SOFTU. I didnt know this guy was still in office.
kargen Member	Tue Feb 04 18:53:39 “To think that I would attend the #SOTU to hear the message of an IMPEACHED president is a thought that in no way would be consistent w/ my fight and struggle against this dishonorable president. I will certainly NOT be there!” Waters tweeted. They are really working in "IMPEACHED" in their statements. Was doing some channel hopping this weekend and it became obvious quick that the talking points handed out to the liberal press directed them to say "impeached for life Trump" whenever they mention the president.
kargen Member	Tue Feb 04 20:05:58 We forgot to throw out a list of words for the SOTU drinking game. I'm thinking "beautiful" might be one to get a person tipsy.
kargen Member	Tue Feb 04 20:16:01 Looks like if I wanted to drink I shoulda took "low" "high" and "record"
Habebe Member	Tue Feb 04 20:27:40 Yup..... A little heavy on the black pandering too.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Feb 04 20:36:44 with all the accomplishments he's claiming, to have an approval rating under 50% really shows what a piece of garbage he is
Forwyn Member	Tue Feb 04 21:16:13 http://new...pproval-averages-february.aspx MARCH 7, 2012 Obama Approval Averages 45% in February Forty-seven percent disapproving mirrors the 50% calling his presidency a "failure"
Habebe Member	Tue Feb 04 21:24:19 Trump is at 49%. For him an all time high. He took flavor flavs job. Now Trump is the greatest hype man in the business.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Feb 04 21:27:27 Nancy just ripped up his speech very clearly at the end :p
kargen Member	Tue Feb 04 22:01:06 Rasmussen poll has his approval rating among likely voters at 51%. Nancy also shook her head no when President Trump asked for a bipartisan bill on infrastructure and then one of the main talking points of the Democrats response was about bipartisan solutions to the infrastructure. I'm guessing no matter who controls the house after 2020 election she will no longer be speaker of the house. Her response when asked why she ripped up the speech was pure stupidity. To be fair though President Trump didn't shake her hand at the start when she offered so she wasn't the only one that wasn't quite civil.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Feb 04 22:01:17 one particularly disgusting part is Trump claiming under his administration pre-existing conditions will always be protected (as he lies often) and those lying sack of shit Rs all standing and applauding they have been trying to end Obamacare continuously, they have a court case trying to strike it down that Trump supports (and the weasels are asking the Supreme Court not to rule til after election to spring that possible surprise on every idiot believing the lies) ending Obamacare would end all protection under pressure, some Rs promise to keep protections but never commit to forcing insurance companies not to charge more, -which is the important part- (I'm sure Trump has never commented on that one way or the other as I'm sure he has no clue what I'm talking about... just knows 'protecting pre-existing conditions' are popular words to say in that order)
Habebe Member	Tue Feb 04 22:55:00 Tw, I'll give you that. He is trying to take claim for pre existing conditions. That said Trump actually supports a good amount of historically democrat positions on things. Usmca adds things that labor unions are for like raising wages for auto makers, US steel protections etc. Paid family leave is another.Now this seems to be bipartisan its probably more popular with dems... I like it though.
jergul large member	Wed Feb 05 00:46:30 http://pro...proval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo Approval rating 43.5.
Dukhat Member	Wed Feb 05 01:05:16 Cuckservatives care even more than Democrats do. Never heard of the guy. Good for him for tuning out just like most of the nation will. How anyone on any side can listen to Trump speak is beyond me. We all know he's an idiot.
kargen Member	Wed Feb 05 01:27:55 So Obamacare is the only thing in the entire universe that can include pre-existing conditions. Good to know.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Feb 05 01:28:19 "Paid family leave is another" it is kinda funny he forced R's into that... although it was hardly his issue, it required his love-interest bouncing on his knee
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Feb 05 01:35:39 @kargen Trump: "I have also made an ironclad pledge to American families: We will always protect patients with pre-existing conditions — that is a guarantee. And we will always protect your Medicare and your Social Security." if Obamacare cancelled by the court case (as he advocates) that protection ends... (not that he has any idea what it means) no R plan had same protections, and no R plan would be suddenly implemented anyway so it's a 100% definite lie the R's also stood & clapped on the Medicare & SS part... that being just deliberately misleading rather than flat lie as they consider the cuts as protecting/saving it, but to dimwits out there it sounds like he won't cut benefits (& head dimwit Trump doesn't even seem to know that R's want to cut benefits)
kargen Member	Wed Feb 05 14:10:42 My point still stands. You are acting as if it is an impossibility for protecting pre-existing conditions outside of Obamacare. You remember the term repeal and replace?
hood Member	Wed Feb 05 14:26:01 Remember how hilariously bad the "replace" efforts were?
kargen Member	Wed Feb 05 15:46:39 were being the key word. We are talking about moving forward here.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Feb 05 18:20:25 can you cite a Trump plan that protects them in the same way they are attempting to destroy? also, there IS NO replacement... so he's actively trying to end them, no protect them, by ending Obamacare join me in reality (plus i guarantee he doesn't even know what it means)
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Feb 05 18:31:02 "Republicans will totally protect people with Pre-Existing Conditions, Democrats will not! Vote Republican." "I stand stronger than anyone in protecting your Healthcare with Pre-Existing Conditions. " "I would not sign Graham-Cassidy if it did not include coverage of pre-existing conditions. It does! A great Bill. Repeal & Replace." (it weakened protections notably) "Republicans will protect people with pre-existing conditions far better than the Dems!" "I will always protect your Pre-Existing Conditions, the Dems will not!" ^ these are lies from a fraud. ...except middle one just misleading... i'm sure he was too ignorant to even know the truth, he has never known any part of any health plan
kargen Member	Wed Feb 05 18:34:30 "can you cite a Trump plan that protects them in the same way they are attempting to destroy?" No because I don't have super powers such as yours. I can't read peoples minds and I can't see the future.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Feb 05 19:05:44 "We will always protect patients with pre-existing conditions — that is a guarantee" he openly supports the court striking down Obamacare... no sudden legislation slides in if that happens, so this 'guarantee' is OBVIOUSLY BULLSHIT... OBVIOUSLY OBVIOUSLY OBVIOUSLY you have lost this argument (also you have to be an idiot not to notice he's lying his ass off on this issue... R's certainly are NOT the party championing protecting people w/ pre-existing conditions... healthcare was a major component of their massive defeat in 2018, so now they are just plain LYING)
kargen Member	Wed Feb 05 19:14:25 So we are learning more about your imaginary little world. Only one thing can happen at a time. No simultaneous anything ever. Does your world have gravity or is that just a conservative hoax as well?
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Feb 05 19:43:06 so you trust Trump has a secret healthcare plan that he will immediately announce and Congress will immediately approve? to you, that's more likely than him simply lying? I know this may come as a surprise to you, but he lies extremely frequently, including making things up on the spot
Habebe Member	Wed Feb 05 20:07:39 All the true proposals for US HC seem horrible...some less than others. A socialist idea or not single payer HC is a better and more efficient system than this hodgepodge we call US HC. A state system could be feasible with a voucher style. Nationally it is probably not so the next best alternative is single payer. Also the worst thing we habe is linking HC to your job.... Idk what retard came up with that idea...
kargen Member	Wed Feb 05 21:11:44 Who said anything about a secret plan? This might be when we remind you there is this thing called time and it keeps everything from happening at once. Part of what the president (any president) talks about in the State of the Union Address is what is yet to come. Especially a president in their first term.
obaminated Member	Wed Feb 05 21:53:50 god damn trump is on fire. remember when the democrats and talking heads at the liberal press screeched about him starting ww3 by killing that iranian commander? keeps on winning.
Dukhat Member	Wed Feb 05 21:56:10 Trump just lies and lies. He knew he was being killed on the healthcare issue so he just straight-up lied again. All he cares about is winning and has no morals whatsoever. If Habebe really wants an honest discussion about healthcare, insurance being attached to where you work is a legacy of WWII and price and wage controls put in place. Companies couldn't compete by paying higher wages so they competed by offering better health insurance and then they lobbied for advantageous tax treatment under the law. As people started living longer and the baby boomers aged, the costs begin to rise geometrically. The ACA actually bent the cost growth downward (amazing since the boomers are still aging) but Trump has returned the trend back above the curve by deliberately trying to sabotage the act. During the formation of the ACA, Republicans were fully involved and allowed to add many amendments, many of which made the final law. The bill isn't perfect by any means, but it's far better than what we had before. It's basically the most market-friendly, and actually workable national health insurance plan out there. I support it alone for making health insurance portable so I'm not stuck with an asshole employer. This is especially important to me as I age. The next big step in saving costs in healthcare is just getting rid of pointless administrative costs. Republicans always whine about government bureaucracy but completely ignore private bureaucracies which is what health insurance companies complex is. A huge part of costs for hospitals is dealing with insurance companies and vice versa over what is and isn't covered. This is just a waste of time and money. Better to just have a single administrator set a single rate in terms fo efficiency. Of course Republicans have sold out to the idea that government is always bad unless it helps a defense contractor or billionaire so this idea will never see the light of day. Maybe medicare for all will get there.
Habebe Member	Thu Feb 06 00:12:05 Dukhat, Make a thread if you want. I doubt it was just companies pleading with Congress to link HC to a job.... Even if im wrong, its about as dumb as mormonism.
hood Member	Thu Feb 06 08:15:29 Just a quick fyi: administrative costs are not the main issue in healthcare costs in the US. Price is. Reducing administrative costs sounds like a win all around, but it's not nearly as impactful as some might have you believe. Fee for service, especially with the excessive fees, is extremely expensive.
Forwyn Member	Thu Feb 06 15:57:33 "insurance being attached to where you work is a legacy of WWII and price and wage controls put in place. Companies couldn't compete by paying higher wages so they competed by offering better health insurance and then they lobbied for advantageous tax treatment under the law." And that's...the fault of private companies, not the government for instituting income caps. "At the same time, while the number of individual Americans affected is small, discrepancies between low personal incomes and very high personal incomes should be lessened; and I therefore believe that in time of this grave national danger, when all excess income should go to win the war, no American citizen ought to have a net income, after he has paid his taxes, of more than $25,000 a year. It is indefensible that those who enjoy large incomes from State and local securities should be immune from taxation while we are at war. Interest on such securities should be subject at least to surtaxes." God, I need to go to Hyde Park and shit on that faggot's grave
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: