How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 So sad it's funny   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

So sad it's funny

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


25 posted 10-25-2009 08:05 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Well Mike -- My dad and you might have gotten along ok -- but don't think that just because he didn't like Bubba Clinton that he was in alignment with you.

He was a Truman Democrat who voted for Ike, Nixon, and Reagan -- and was furious at Nixon and Bush, Hated Ford, liked Bob Dole, hated the radical religious right.

He'd tell you that Roosevelt saved his life and was a staunch civil-libertarian who was ahead of his time on equal rights for women and racial equality.

Went to war for his country in Europe but was saved by a virus because it kept him out of a battle that wiped out his entire unit.

He had many friends who agreed to disagree with him though and he didn't mind taking their money on the back nine.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


26 posted 10-25-2009 08:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Doesn't matter his views, LR. Anyone with spunk like that  would be aces in my book.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


27 posted 10-26-2009 08:08 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

I agree.

LR's Dad had great spunk.

Ringo
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 02-20-2003
Posts 3696
Saluting with misty eyes


28 posted 10-26-2009 09:54 PM       View Profile for Ringo   Email Ringo   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ringo

quote:
If you actually bothered to read the section you're quoting you'd find that it related to grandfathered policies. Basically it stops insurance companies selling sub-standard policies and ripping off innocent customers but oddly it allows any existing policies to continue.

Actually, Grinch, I read the entire bill, and that sectioin more than once (I wasn't working at the time, and had the time to actually do so). I never said that it did not allow existing coverage... what it says is that companies may no longer write NEW business... such as that which would be written from people getting new jobs, or such. The only health insurance I have at the moment is the VA... were that plan to have passed, I would not be permitted to get any insurance with a private company after the law took effect, because as the bill plainly states:
quote:
Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

This seems to me that, yes, I would be allowed to keep my BC/BS policy offered through the job I have now (grandfathered)... however, if the company were to close down and I got a new job at a factory, then I could not get their coverage through, say, Humana, or whatever because it took place after the bill became law, because they are not permitted to write new business...unless I marry my girlfriend and put her and her kids on my policy.... however, that is another thread.

quote:
You've been listening to Beck for too long Ringo.

Well, according to my local listings, Glenn Beck comes on FNC at 5:00 pm EST... as I do not get out of work until 6:30, and do not get home until 7:30 on nights I do not have rehearsal (when I get home around 11:00), it seems to me that the lovely and talented Mr. Beck does not cross my path. And, if my thoguhts are anything even close to his, then it is very simply that he and I have understood that passage to mean very similar things. I knew I liked that man for some reason

quote:
How can I put this without offending anyone - You're statement is not in alignment with what most people would generally accept as being a true representation of the truth.

Very few people have what it takes to offend me, so that is not even half a concern. As for my statement not "being in line with what most people would generally accept as the truth"... I couldn't care less... it is my opinion of how that passage reads, and there are too many others out there who read it the same way for me to begin to think that I am completely off the line in this matter. Also, most people generally accepted the fact that (then) Senator Obama was going to make the economy the best it had ever been, and that he was going to be the best president to ever hit the Oval... and now, most people (judging from the multiple polls being released) accept the fact that he is not what they thought at first.... It's funny about how most people can't quite figure out what in the name of Thor's Holy Hammer they believe.

quote:
Obviously 'sad' is in reference to our 'sad clown' Mr. Beck

Obviously, not, if more than one person saw it as otherwise.

quote:
you'll never look at the sniveling dry-drunk again without wondering if Procter and Gamble's stock just went up!

I always figured personal attacks were beneath you, LR.

Anyhow, those are my thoughts.

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


29 posted 10-27-2009 12:30 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

Note, Ringo, that it doesn't say offering any coverage? It is, indeed, quite specific about which coverage can no longer be offered.

Policies that are currently in effect but do not meet the new legal requirements will continue to remain in effect (grandfathered). Those same policies however, policies that do not meet the new legal requirements, cannot be offered if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1. Essentially, "The old policies are bogus and unfair to people, but okay, we'll let you keep them. Going forward, however, you can only write new policies as provided by law."

That's what "such coverage" means, Ringo. That passage doesn't preclude any coverage by health insurance companies. Just, such coverage.

Make sense?
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


30 posted 10-27-2009 04:00 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
if my thoguhts are anything even close to his, then it is very simply that he and I have understood that passage to mean very similar things.


Understood?

I'd say misunderstood was closer to the mark, normally that isn't an issue. When someone makes a mistake that's pointed out to them they take another look, see the error and amend their opinion so they don't repeat or compound the error. It's human nature, we all make mistakes - it's how we learn. The difference between most people and Beck though is that he's making the error over and over again presumably on purpose, I say on purpose because more people than you could shake a stick at have explained what that passage actually means so he's had the chance to check it out and amend his opinion. Has he amended his opinion? Heck no, he just moves on to the next manufactured misunderstanding.

If he turned around on one of his shows and said "We ran a story last week where I said X, Y and Z, well after taking a closer look at the issue it turns out that we were wrong", I'd have a tad more respect for the guy.

As it stands - he comes across as a jerk.

BTW.

Beck isn't even screened in the UK, I get my laughs by watching him online - you should try it, you'll get a better understanding of how big of a jerk he really is if you watched him in action.

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


31 posted 10-27-2009 06:55 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Ringo,

          Does what Grinch says about the reading of that section make sense to you?  Does what Ron says make sense to you?

     I am terrible at reading legalese and am glad for the clarification put into English, myself.  I try to keep up on Limbaugh, which I find difficult enough, and I only run across Beck occasionally.  I don't even particularly like his beer, being more fond of Samuel Smith's products and some of the Irish stouts.  You can see I'm not very familiar with his product at all.

     I will, however, travel quite a way for a bad joke, if I think I can get there.  Getting back is often a different story.

Sincerely, Bob Kaven
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


32 posted 10-27-2009 10:28 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

I always figured personal attacks were beneath you, LR.



Sauce for the goose?

But it isn't really a personal attack is it?  Maybe if I had lead with the 'sniffing underpants' thing -- that would be a personal attack.  I don't have any proof that he doesn't sniff little boys underpants though.  So it's a question.  (You see - this is how Glenn Beck works -- like when he didn't believe that FEMA was building concentration camps -- but, he couldn't prove that they weren't.)

At any rate -- what I said -- I confess, was bait.  Because however far down it was -- it is still above Beck.

When he, for instance, attacks Van Jones as a 'self proclaimed Marxist' -- if the same standard were to be applied to Mr. Beck we would call him a self proclaimed drug addict.

But at least I acknowledged Beck as a 'dry' drunk and took him at his word that he's changed.  But I can't prove he isn't on drugs.  And we know he abuses Vicks'.

I would also have to say that he's still a Catholic and not a Mormon -- because -- in Beck world -- people don't change.

If I applied the same Beck standard to his affiliations --as he applies to ACORN -- I would call him out for being affiliated with a church that knowingly covered up and facilitated the rape of children by priests, or in his current affiliation -- the trafficking of minor girls in polygamist marriage schemes, blood atonement (murder), and necromancy.

But, I'm above that.  So, I don't.

quote:

Obviously, not, if more than one person saw it as otherwise.



How can this be?  Is the perception of what I say more important than what I meant?  A point I've been trying to make for years.  Progress.... bravo.


 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> So sad it's funny   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors