Edit Preferences
Logout
Laserbeam's Comments (591)
View Comments:
Sort:
1 - 25 of 591
Fear of Flying, Again
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 16:13:23 in World
“I wold only add that we should also be paying these people at a high enough level that it says to them that the job they do is valued by the rest of us.
Well said, and I agree with MNKen - want a job? Just tell DeMint you're anti-union. Their side lies all the times to get what they want....”
Well said, and I agree with MNKen - want a job? Just tell DeMint you're anti-union. Their side lies all the times to get what they want....”
Fear of Flying, Again
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 16:11:33 in World
“I won't be flying until they get rid of some of these stupid new rules. They don't make any of us any safer but they sure do harm those of us with chronic and incurable illnesses who need access to meds from a carry-on, blanket for the extreme cold, and the ability to stand up for a moment if necessary.
Boycott and let's see how fast they review these new rules.”
Boycott and let's see how fast they review these new rules.”
"Bring It On" Dick Cheney and Jim DeMint
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 14:41:36 in Politics
“And you ask an excellent question! You are absolutely correct- wjhy wouldn't he do it again? I will go even further and say you may be correct all the way around...s
Republican Hypocrisy on Terrorism Reaches New Levels of Awful
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 13:37:51 in Politics
“Faved and fanned (if I haven't fanned you already)!”
lyta replied on Jan 01, 2010 at 11:28:44
“ditto”
TN60 replied on Dec 31, 2009 at 14:45:32
“Thank you.”
Republican Hypocrisy on Terrorism Reaches New Levels of Awful
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 13:37:15 in Politics
“Bill Clinton was absolutely LAMBASTED by your ilk for going after Osama Bin Laden and al Queda after the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole. You all said that he was just trying to distract you from the Monica Lewinsky affair.
Congratulations.”
Congratulations.”
Republican Hypocrisy on Terrorism Reaches New Levels of Awful
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 10:57:22 in Politics
“LOL! Pleased to be your first fan.”
TN60 replied on Dec 31, 2009 at 12:54:31
“Make that 3.....”
Republican Hypocrisy on Terrorism Reaches New Levels of Awful
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 10:56:37 in Politics
“*sheer*
Shear = knife”
Shear = knife”
Wishing Won't Make it 60
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 18:19:30 in Politics
“There are also no limits placed on premiums for senior citizens, women, and people with pre-existing conduitions (which can include high blood pressure or rape, amongst others). All of those groups will be charged four times as much for their coverage, according to all of the coverage I have witnessed (NPR, MSNBC, CNN, PBS...)”
melodramy replied on Dec 23, 2009 at 10:43:17
“You are not correct. If you are going to oppose something, do it based on correct facts.
- The age rate difference is limited to 3:1 in the senate version and 2:1 in the house version. In today's world, the rate differences between a young and healthy vs. older person are ABSOLUTELY UNLIMITED. In the current world, Insurers are perfectly free, and consistently do charge older people well over 3 times more than for a young healthy person. I already pay nearly 3x more now than what I paid only 4 years ago. Locking rate differences to the rate of a young person by a fixed ratio is a GOOD THING.
- The tobacco use rate difference is only 1.5: 1 .
- There is NO rate difference allowed for your health status or pre-existing condition.
- There is NO rate difference allowed for gender.
- There is NO recission.
http://www
- The age rate difference is limited to 3:1 in the senate version and 2:1 in the house version. In today's world, the rate differences between a young and healthy vs. older person are ABSOLUTELY UNLIMITED. In the current world, Insurers are perfectly free, and consistently do charge older people well over 3 times more than for a young healthy person. I already pay nearly 3x more now than what I paid only 4 years ago. Locking rate differences to the rate of a young person by a fixed ratio is a GOOD THING.
- The tobacco use rate difference is only 1.5: 1 .
- There is NO rate difference allowed for your health status or pre-existing condition.
- There is NO rate difference allowed for gender.
- There is NO recission.
http://www
iqfinsvcs replied on Dec 22, 2009 at 18:31:43
“This is false. Howard Dean raised this issue as one reason why he initially recommended that the Senate not approve the bill and was updated and corrected by Obama's lead person on the legislation. Dean has since changed his mind and is now supporting passage.”
Wishing Won't Make it 60
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 18:15:36 in Politics
“Maryanne, what YOU do not understand is that this bill will set women's healthcare back decades. I don't feel that we women should be asked to sacrifice our healthcare so that men can have it. We should all be able to have it.
It has been painfully obvious that all of the people calling for us to lighten up and pass a bad bill in hopes it can be improved *someday in the future* are all men. They are calling on women to make sacrificies they themselves would never be willing to make.
Enough, already. Men who actually care about women will stand up for our rights rather than telling us to be quiet and accept this bill for the greater good (namely men).”
It has been painfully obvious that all of the people calling for us to lighten up and pass a bad bill in hopes it can be improved *someday in the future* are all men. They are calling on women to make sacrificies they themselves would never be willing to make.
Enough, already. Men who actually care about women will stand up for our rights rather than telling us to be quiet and accept this bill for the greater good (namely men).”
Wishing Won't Make it 60
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 18:09:51 in Politics
“Hi Aaron, Fred's old assistant here. I'm going to send him the link for this column.
Hope you're doing extremely well!”
Hope you're doing extremely well!”
hp blogger Aaron E. Carroll replied on Dec 22, 2009 at 21:07:28
“Please do - Thanks!”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 14:09:37 in Politics
“AGAIN - WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING AT US?”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:59:18 in Politics
“Everyone is pro-life; I believe you are referring to those who are anti-choice.”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:58:04 in Politics
“Wow - you are the master of sarcasm. Well composed!”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:57:25 in Politics
“Right. So what if men and boys wil receive healthcare at the expense of women's health?
Hey, all you other women, apparently we're supposed to sit down and shut up as usual. We just don't get that it is the male of the species who is important - certainly not us.”
Hey, all you other women, apparently we're supposed to sit down and shut up as usual. We just don't get that it is the male of the species who is important - certainly not us.”
Ipanemagirl replied on Dec 22, 2009 at 15:43:45
“yeah, these pro lifer men should be made to pay and care for all the unwanted baies that are not going to be aborted now...espe
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:54:13 in Politics
“So a 50-50 risk would be okay with you?
You're astoundingly ignorant.”
You're astoundingly ignorant.”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:52:43 in Politics
“How about valuing the lives of women and girls for a start? We've been waiting an awfully long time.”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:51:28 in Politics
“We women already pay FAR more than you do for coverage.
If you're such a fan of the news, why aren't you paying attention to it?”
If you're such a fan of the news, why aren't you paying attention to it?”
Channel4NewsTeam replied on Dec 22, 2009 at 23:50:44
“Sorry if that went over your head.”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:49:34 in Politics
“If you're pro-choice you should be against this bill. This bill will put in place restrictions on women by encouraging health insurance companies not to offer abortion coverage at all.
I'm astounded at your ignorance. You actually state, "any person could come up with $400-$500 if they had to." Really? Please tell me how, because I can't afford any Christmas presents this year nor even to pay my rent on time (first time).
There are tens of thousands of us - at LEAST - who would not be able to come up with that kind of cash.
Furthermore, as a man, what makes you think your opinion needs to be made public? If I were a man I would only be speaking out in support of choice. Men don't get pregnant.”
I'm astounded at your ignorance. You actually state, "any person could come up with $400-$500 if they had to." Really? Please tell me how, because I can't afford any Christmas presents this year nor even to pay my rent on time (first time).
There are tens of thousands of us - at LEAST - who would not be able to come up with that kind of cash.
Furthermore, as a man, what makes you think your opinion needs to be made public? If I were a man I would only be speaking out in support of choice. Men don't get pregnant.”
Women on the Verge
Commented Dec 22, 2009 at 13:44:28 in Politics
“It's simple: it feels like straight men don't care about women. If they truly did, they'd make a phonecall or write a letter. Apparently, though, that's too much effort for women to ask of them.
I would qualify the above statement by saying that many in the LGBT community HAVE stood with women on equality - and I stand with them, forever.”
I would qualify the above statement by saying that many in the LGBT community HAVE stood with women on equality - and I stand with them, forever.”
Will One Senator Stand Up for Women?
Commented Dec 21, 2009 at 19:44:25 in Politics
“I agree. Where are the women legislators? Why aren't they standing up for other women?
Maybe they are rich enough that they and their loved ones wil never have to be concerned about receiving proper medical care, but what about the rest of us? I guess we don't matter to them - with the notable exception of Barbara Boxer.
I used to eb a constitutent of Barbara Boxer. I sent her a letter once on abortion rights that was so confidential to me that I m arked the outsiede of the letter, "So Confidential that If Barbara Boxer can't open it and read it herself, I want you to shred it unopened". About a week later I received a heartfelt, three-page hand-written letter form her.”
Maybe they are rich enough that they and their loved ones wil never have to be concerned about receiving proper medical care, but what about the rest of us? I guess we don't matter to them - with the notable exception of Barbara Boxer.
I used to eb a constitutent of Barbara Boxer. I sent her a letter once on abortion rights that was so confidential to me that I m arked the outsiede of the letter, "So Confidential that If Barbara Boxer can't open it and read it herself, I want you to shred it unopened". About a week later I received a heartfelt, three-page hand-written letter form her.”
Will One Senator Stand Up for Women?
Commented Dec 21, 2009 at 19:35:13 in Politics
“Francis, they have stood up for men by standing against women. All though you are right that we all have been forsaken when it comes to banking, housing, healthcare, or any number of other truly important things, at least you have never experienced legislation or legisltaive proposals that were designed precisely to switch control over your personal healthcare decisions from yourself and your doctor to total strangers - many of whom have a lower IQ than you do and are of a completely different lifestyle philosophy. They may base their decisions of your medical care on religious beliefs that you do not share.
Men have control over what we do - obviously. Can you provide an example of women legally having control over what men can do with their bodies?
It's time to stand up for more than half the population. I'm pissed off that we even have to ask.”
Men have control over what we do - obviously. Can you provide an example of women legally having control over what men can do with their bodies?
It's time to stand up for more than half the population. I'm pissed off that we even have to ask.”
Will One Senator Stand Up for Women?
Commented Dec 21, 2009 at 19:30:21 in Politics
“We're not talking about allowing federal funds for abortion.
No one is talking about allowing federal funds to cover abortion.
The Hyde Amendment, still in force, has prohibited the use of federal funds for abortion since 1976. Just how old are you, anyway? If you were born in 1976n or later, it's been illegal to use federal fund for abortion your entire life.
Please try to keep up. It helps if you read a bit.”
No one is talking about allowing federal funds to cover abortion.
The Hyde Amendment, still in force, has prohibited the use of federal funds for abortion since 1976. Just how old are you, anyway? If you were born in 1976n or later, it's been illegal to use federal fund for abortion your entire life.
Please try to keep up. It helps if you read a bit.”
1 - 25 of 591
