WillowTree
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2008
- 84,532
- 16,091
- 2,180
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Well, since OASI funds have been used to prop up the socialistic welfare state, it now only follows....
Are these idiots really that tyranical or are they just stupid? I think both. And is anyone in the media going after him for suggesting that the money should go to anything but aid for the oil spill vicitims? What a greedy backstabbing little FUCK!!
Then, let's say that monkeys fly out his butt and he needs even more therapy?Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.): "I think we had to have someone say this is where you can go without limiting your criminal liability or civil liability. For instance, the question is brought up, pay for all of the health care for the people in the Gulf. No, but I think those who lost their job, then lost their health care would be legitimate."
hmmm....say an oysterman loses his business because of the oil spill and can no longer afford health care. Then he has a heart attack and needs immediate attention and therapy.
pay for all of the health care for the people in the Gulf. No, but I think those who lost their job, then lost their health care would be legitimate."
You really are an asshole.No, they only lose the ability for someone else to pay for services rendered.
But it's no surprise that such relatively elementary distinctions need to be 'splained to you.
Then, let's say that monkeys fly out his butt and he needs even more therapy?Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.): "I think we had to have someone say this is where you can go without limiting your criminal liability or civil liability. For instance, the question is brought up, pay for all of the health care for the people in the Gulf. No, but I think those who lost their job, then lost their health care would be legitimate."
hmmm....say an oysterman loses his business because of the oil spill and can no longer afford health care. Then he has a heart attack and needs immediate attention and therapy.
BTW, nobody ever loses their "health care", per se...They only make a choice as to whether they'll keep up the payments to the third party to pay for any health services that they may receive.
But who ever expects honest semantics form socialist do-gooders?
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.): "I think we had to have someone say this is where you can go without limiting your criminal liability or civil liability. For instance, the question is brought up, pay for all of the health care for the people in the Gulf. No, but I think those who lost their job, then lost their health care would be legitimate."
hmmm....say an oysterman loses his business because of the oil spill and can no longer afford health care. Then he has a heart attack and needs immediate attention and therapy.
Why would that not be a legitimate claim against BP?
Your headline is misleading, Willow...but it is no surprise that none of the other "conservatives" called you on it.
Coming from you? No.^^^^
Yet another one who purposefully supplants a third party payer in the guise of "healthy care".
Is there no end to this intellectual dishonesty?
Bullshit...In this case, it's called "mooching".Then, let's say that monkeys fly out his butt and he needs even more therapy?Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.): "I think we had to have someone say this is where you can go without limiting your criminal liability or civil liability. For instance, the question is brought up, pay for all of the health care for the people in the Gulf. No, but I think those who lost their job, then lost their health care would be legitimate."
hmmm....say an oysterman loses his business because of the oil spill and can no longer afford health care. Then he has a heart attack and needs immediate attention and therapy.
BTW, nobody ever loses their "health care", per se...They only make a choice as to whether they'll keep up the payments to the third party to pay for any health services that they may receive.
But who ever expects honest semantics form socialist do-gooders?
Since a large portion of health care payments are in fact provided by employers as part of employee compensation, that loss of said compensation is the same as any other loss of compensation, like wages.
So, yes, people do "lose their health care", or at least the portion that was formerly paid by the employer.
And it's not "Socialism" to seek repayment for losses, it's called "Justice".
Life's tough...Shit happens...Wear a helmet.You really are an asshole.No, they only lose the ability for someone else to pay for services rendered.
But it's no surprise that such relatively elementary distinctions need to be 'splained to you.
If they don't have the money to pay for health care insurance and they don't have the money to pay for health care because of BP's fuck up...how is that an illegitimate claim?
That was somewhat amusing but is it your opinion that there are no legitimate claims against BP?Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.): "I think we had to have someone say this is where you can go without limiting your criminal liability or civil liability. For instance, the question is brought up, pay for all of the health care for the people in the Gulf. No, but I think those who lost their job, then lost their health care would be legitimate."
hmmm....say an oysterman loses his business because of the oil spill and can no longer afford health care. Then he has a heart attack and needs immediate attention and therapy.
Why would that not be a legitimate claim against BP?
Your headline is misleading, Willow...but it is no surprise that none of the other "conservatives" called you on it.
I totally agree....But I think we need to take this a step further.
Let's say Oysterman can't work and because of this he starts to feel depressed so he starts to drink again,then he feels lonely and unloved so he calls a few buddies and goes to a strip club that he normally would not visit.He ends up closing the place down and leaves with one of the strippers called Joe.Well he thought this lady was the cutest thing and who can blame him since he drank 13 beers and a few shots.Well as it turns out Joe was really not short for Josephine it was short for....well it was short for Joe.So he ends up in divorce court and becomes the talk of the town...Well BP is responsible right.
Or how bout this. I am starting to feel out of sorts because of all this and will start to look for a lib lawyer to represent me...I wonder what John Edwards is up to...
Stay tuned I have a bunch of What if's for Oysterman.
Typical libs always looking for ways to spend other peoples money.