Pre-existing conditions coverage

[paperview]

it doesn't work like that. you don't have to prove a negative. you have to prove something WAS.

I agree, you can't prove a negative, but there was a lot of evidence of the positive. I just couldn't resist pulling his chain a little in view of his hostility to reason.

No, there wasn't.

It was a myth started 30 years after prohibition ended.

 

[paperview]

During Prohibition, you could legally warehouse and distribute liquor with a license if the booze was sold for "medicinal" or "sacramental" use and the buyer had a legal permit to purchase it.

Kennedy, smart dude that he was, applied and received these medicinal liquor permits - so there was no bootlegging in what liquor he did sell.

With the repeal of Prohibition, he made a killing -- and the profits were perfectly legal.

The bootlegging rumors didn't really take hold until some 30 years after Prohibition ended.

 

[paperview]

"The most familiar legacy of Prohibition might be its own mythology, a body of lore and gossip and Hollywood-induced imagery that comes close enough to the truth to be believable, but not close enough to be… well, to be true.

The Kennedy myth is an outstanding example. The facts of Kennedy’s life (that he was rich; that he was in the liquor business; that he was deeply unpopular and widely distrusted) were rich loam for a rumor that did not begin to blossom until nearly 30 years after Repeal. Three times during the 1930s, Kennedy was appointed to federal positions requiring Senate confirmation (chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, chairman of the U.S. Maritime Commission, Ambassador to Great Britain).

At a time when the memory of Prohibition was vivid and the passions it inflamed still smoldered, no one seemed to think Joe Kennedy had been a bootlegger—not the Republicans, not the anti-Roosevelt Democrats, not remnant Klansmen or anti-Irish Boston Brahmins or cynical newsmen or resentful Dry leaders still seething from the humiliation of Repeal. There’s nothing in the Senate record...

Read the rest here: The Biggest Kennedy Myth - The Daily Beast

 

[jillian]

it doesn't work like that. you don't have to prove a negative. you have to prove something WAS.

I agree, you can't prove a negative, but there was a lot of evidence of the positive. I just couldn't resist pulling his chain a little in view of his hostility to reason.

he wasn't the one who sounded hostile to reason. but whatever floats your boat.

 

[dnsmith35]

it doesn't work like that. you don't have to prove a negative. you have to prove something WAS.

I agree, you can't prove a negative, but there was a lot of evidence of the positive. I just couldn't resist pulling his chain a little in view of his hostility to reason.

No, there wasn't.

It was a myth started 30 years after prohibition ended.

Sorry, but his Mafia partner disagrees with you.

 

[paperview]

I agree, you can't prove a negative, but there was a lot of evidence of the positive. I just couldn't resist pulling his chain a little in view of his hostility to reason.

No, there wasn't.

It was a myth started 30 years after prohibition ended.

Sorry, but his Mafia partner disagrees with you.

Far far better historians and investigative journalists have tried and failed. There is no documented proof. None.

 

[dnsmith35]

it doesn't work like that. you don't have to prove a negative. you have to prove something WAS.

I agree, you can't prove a negative, but there was a lot of evidence of the positive. I just couldn't resist pulling his chain a little in view of his hostility to reason.

he wasn't the one who sounded hostile to reason. but whatever floats your boat.

My boat floats very well. I wasn't the one calling another poster scum. I also was not the one saying that the other had lied when he describes his opinions. He was the one who started calling names and being hostile. Why not read the thread before making silly comments. Join in the discussion if you will, but expect to be treated in the same manner you treat others.

 

[dnsmith35]

No, there wasn't.

It was a myth started 30 years after prohibition ended.

Sorry, but his Mafia partner disagrees with you.

Far far better historians and investigative journalists have tried and failed. There is no documented proof. None.

Obviously there was documentation that his Mafia partner admitted Kennedy was his partner. What more documentation do you need? Most criminals do not have a lot of their activity historically documented unless they were caught and convicted. Historians and investigative journalists tended to be, as the media is, left leaning and forgiving to left wingers.

But believe as you will, I am happy for you.

 

[dnsmith35]

Still waiting to see our resident left winger BFGRN handle the liberal concept of off shoring jobs.

 

[paperview]

Sorry, but his Mafia partner disagrees with you.

Far far better historians and investigative journalists have tried and failed. There is no documented proof. None.

Obviously there was documentation that his Mafia partner admitted Kennedy was his partner. What more documentation do you need? Most criminals do not have a lot of their activity historically documented unless they were caught and convicted. Historians and investigative journalists tended to be, as the media is, left leaning and forgiving to left wingers.

But believe as you will, I am happy for you.

Your logic cell isn't working too good, it appears.

If there was a case to be made against him, or even allegations -- it would have been made.

Many. many, many people hated him..and would have loved to see anything to bring him down. It didn't happen. It never even came up at Senatorial hearings. It was not even considered in the press at the time.

Spend some time munching on that for a bit.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. If you buy into ObamaCare you are buying fake insurance.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[dnsmith35]

Far far better historians and investigative journalists have tried and failed. There is no documented proof. None.

Obviously there was documentation that his Mafia partner admitted Kennedy was his partner. What more documentation do you need? Most criminals do not have a lot of their activity historically documented unless they were caught and convicted. Historians and investigative journalists tended to be, as the media is, left leaning and forgiving to left wingers.

But believe as you will, I am happy for you.

Your logic cell isn't working too good, it appears.

If there was a case to be made against him, or even allegations -- it would have been made.

Many. many, many people hated him..and would have loved to see anything to bring him down. It didn't happen. It never even came up at Senatorial hearings. It was not even considered in the press at the time.

Spend some time munching on that for a bit.

I don't care what came up in senate hearings. I have no reason to disbelieve his admitted partner. Munch on that for a while. The absence of information is not proof of anything.

BTW, I did not hate the man, and I did like JFK. My issue now is with the movement of the democrat party to the extreme left. In spite of that I still am a democrat and vote for democrat candidates.

 

[Bfgrn]

Obviously there was documentation that his Mafia partner admitted Kennedy was his partner. What more documentation do you need? Most criminals do not have a lot of their activity historically documented unless they were caught and convicted. Historians and investigative journalists tended to be, as the media is, left leaning and forgiving to left wingers.

But believe as you will, I am happy for you.

Your logic cell isn't working too good, it appears.

If there was a case to be made against him, or even allegations -- it would have been made.

Many. many, many people hated him..and would have loved to see anything to bring him down. It didn't happen. It never even came up at Senatorial hearings. It was not even considered in the press at the time.

Spend some time munching on that for a bit.

I don't care what came up in senate hearings. I have no reason to disbelieve his admitted partner. Munch on that for a while. The absence of information is not proof of anything.

BTW, I did not hate the man, and I did like JFK. My issue now is with the movement of the democrat party to the extreme left. In spite of that I still am a democrat and vote for democrat candidates.

Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace
Rod Serling

You are an episode of the Twilight Zone. FICTION is your pal.

It seems your only problem is logic is an enemy and truth is a menace...

1) Just like paperview said. Many. many, many people hated him, and hated FDR. They would have loved to have anything to bring him down. If there was ANY evidence or even rumor of bootlegging, Kennedy's and FDR's enemies would have crucified old man Joe in Senate hearings. It didn't happen. But, your logic tells you instead to believe a crook. Why? Because logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.

And BTW, where is your link? I have links in all my posts with 3rd party information.

You claim the Democratic Party has moved to the left. Your evidence...emotes.

I claim the Democratic Party has moved to the right. My evidence...the biggest and most significant piece of legislation in 45 years, the ACA, passed by ONLY Democrats, is a carbon copy of the bill proposed by Republicans and authored by the Heritage Foundation.

Your reply...it is irrelevant...WHY? Because logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.

John F. Kennedy proudly accepted the nomination of the NY Liberal Party in 1960. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic candidate was called the most liberal senator in the Senate. John Kerry's reply?: "it's absolutely the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in my life."

 

[Bfgrn]

You keep stepping on your dick.

Which proves only that I have one.

Let's use your standards....A person who calls someone a hobo is a hobo.

Maybe, but I was there during that period so I watched and experienced many of those people.I always tell the truth. You are so far to the left wing extreme a liberal looks right wing to you. Wow! You are really making things up now. Even most conservatives believe in the basic good in people. I do!

conservatives believe in pushing people down.That is horse manure and shows just how little you really know about people and human behavior in general, whether they are liberal or conservative.

You FAIL on all four.

In fact I doubt that besides you being a left wing fanatic you are a real liberal. Your attitude about jobs going off shore is a tell.

When someone says they are glad someone DIED, it deserves the scorn of everyone. But not a PEEP from right wingers like you.

The history of mankind does not support your claims of human nature. Liberals believe all men are equal. Conservatives believe in an aristocracy.

The history of mankind has been a struggle between those who want to increase freedom, opportunity and rights to all people and those who want to restrict them. The people who have always fought to increase freedom, opportunity and rights are liberals. The people who have fought to restrict them are conservatives.


Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.
James M. Buchanan

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone (1809 – 1898)


You are confused...I did not make any comments about jobs going off shore...

 

[paperview]

Your logic cell isn't working too good, it appears.

If there was a case to be made against him, or even allegations -- it would have been made.

Many. many, many people hated him..and would have loved to see anything to bring him down. It didn't happen. It never even came up at Senatorial hearings. It was not even considered in the press at the time.

Spend some time munching on that for a bit.

I don't care what came up in senate hearings. I have no reason to disbelieve his admitted partner. Munch on that for a while. The absence of information is not proof of anything.

BTW, I did not hate the man, and I did like JFK. My issue now is with the movement of the democrat party to the extreme left. In spite of that I still am a democrat and vote for democrat candidates.

Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace
Rod Serling

You are an episode of the Twilight Zone. FICTION is your pal.

It seems your only problem is logic is an enemy and truth is a menace...

1) Just like paperview said. Many. many, many people hated him, and hated FDR. They would have loved to have anything to bring him down. If there was ANY evidence or even rumor of bootlegging, Kennedy's and FDR's enemies would have crucified old man Joe in Senate hearings. It didn't happen. But, your logic tells you instead to believe a crook. Why? Because logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.

And BTW, where is your link? I have links in all my posts with 3rd party information.

You claim the Democratic Party has moved to the left. Your evidence...emotes.

I claim the Democratic Party has moved to the right. My evidence...the biggest and most significant piece of legislation in 45 years, the ACA, passed by ONLY Democrats, is a carbon copy of the bill proposed by Republicans and authored by the Heritage Foundation.

Your reply...it is irrelevant...WHY? Because logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.

John F. Kennedy proudly accepted the nomination of the NY Liberal Party in 1960. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic candidate was called the most liberal senator in the Senate. John Kerry's reply?: "it's absolutely the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in my life."

You gotta love this one:

"The absence of information is not proof of anything."

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnything is possible in

 

[dnsmith35]

I don't care what came up in senate hearings. I have no reason to disbelieve his admitted partner. Munch on that for a while. The absence of information is not proof of anything.

BTW, I did not hate the man, and I did like JFK. My issue now is with the movement of the democrat party to the extreme left. In spite of that I still am a democrat and vote for democrat candidates.

Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace
Rod Serling

You are an episode of the Twilight Zone. FICTION is your pal.

It seems your only problem is logic is an enemy and truth is a menace...

1) Just like paperview said. Many. many, many people hated him, and hated FDR. They would have loved to have anything to bring him down. If there was ANY evidence or even rumor of bootlegging, Kennedy's and FDR's enemies would have crucified old man Joe in Senate hearings. It didn't happen. But, your logic tells you instead to believe a crook. Why? Because logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.

And BTW, where is your link? I have links in all my posts with 3rd party information.

You claim the Democratic Party has moved to the left. Your evidence...emotes.

I claim the Democratic Party has moved to the right. My evidence...the biggest and most significant piece of legislation in 45 years, the ACA, passed by ONLY Democrats, is a carbon copy of the bill proposed by Republicans and authored by the Heritage Foundation.

Your reply...it is irrelevant...WHY? Because logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.

John F. Kennedy proudly accepted the nomination of the NY Liberal Party in 1960. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic candidate was called the most liberal senator in the Senate. John Kerry's reply?: "it's absolutely the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in my life."

You gotta love this one:

"The absence of information is not proof of anything."

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnything is possible in

So, I have no information that you are a lying cheating asshole. Does that prove you aren't? No, it doesn't, even though I suspect you are. And, the democrat party has moved to the extreme left. Got it smart ass?

 

[dnsmith35]

When someone says they are glad someone DIED, it deserves the scorn of everyone. But not a PEEP from right wingers like you.

I didn't say that I was GLAD he died. I am glad Hitler died, so your premise is wrong, as usual. When you call someone scum, you are scum.

The history of mankind does not support your claims of human nature. Liberals believe all men are equal. Conservatives believe in an aristocracy.

I know many real liberals and conservatives, and again, you are full of crap.

The history of mankind has been a struggle between those who want to increase freedom, opportunity and rights to all people and those who want to restrict them.

Yep! That is what I have done.

The people who have always fought to increase freedom, opportunity and rights are liberals.

Most liberals and most conservatives have done that. Some conservatives and some liberals have not.

The people who have fought to restrict them are conservatives.

Your absolutes are crap.

Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.
James M. Buchanan

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone (1809 – 1898)

You are confused...I did not make any comments about jobs going off shore...

I am confused about nothing. I introduced that into the discussion, so it shows your confusion suggesting I believe you addressed the issue.

I introduced the issue so as to ask your position on offshoring jobs. I doubt you will answer because you know it will betray your pseudo liberal stance.

BTW, your sock puppet is not as convincing as your primary.

 

[dnsmith35]

Classical liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government. It advocates civil liberties with a limited government under the rule of law, private property rights, and belief in laissez-faire economic liberalism. Classical liberalism is built on ideas including those of Adam Smith, John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo. It drew on an understanding of human behavior, individual liberty, natural law, utilitarianism, and a belief in progress.

In America a distinction grew up between classical liberals and social liberals. Classical liberals supported the rights of captains of industry, who they saw as the natural leaders of society and the champions of progress. Social liberals supported the rights of unions, and also supported the rights of minorities Classical liberals favor limited government and social liberals believe government intervention is necessary to provide equal protection and opportunity for all citizens.

Neither liberals nor conservatives full follow classical liberalism, the belief that government exists to protect both social and economic civil liberties, rather than the control of society.

Thomas Jefferson wanted independence for the citizens of our country because he believed dependency cripples, causing many people to fail to think for themselves, are confined to conditions of existence resembling an endless struggle for survival, are incapable of carrying out plans for the future, and will never achieve basic human dignity. The self dependent life is therefore the best life. We have the ability to realize being the masters of our own destiny. It is my opinion that the part of modern liberalism which most harms our society is the tendency to create dependency, and though we should assist those in need, we must always endeavor to do so without creating such dependency. (we have failed miserably in that respect)

The fundamental ideas of liberalism are: Liberal democracy, human rights, constitutionalism, fair and free elections, freedom of religion and free trade. To that end, our founding fathers were right on target by creating a republican form of government maintaining a strong state rights ideology while limiting the federal government to those functions authorized by our constitution. A Republican form of government was created to prevent the tyranny of the majority, a tyranny as despotic as a dictatorship. Without eliminating the "tyranny of the majority" there can be no civil equality. These ideas are commonly accepted widely by those who are considered both liberal and conservative today; whereas, the extremes of both liberalism and conservatism have blurred the lines of reason to one extent or another.

Those are the tenets by which I live my life and function politically.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Oh wait and see how your Cadillac Insurance works out after ObamaCare, it will suck some serious ass too, sure you work for GM and all, but get ready if you get sick, you will be driving a Pontiac when it comes time to settle the Hospital / Doctors/ Lab/ Radiology tab. LOL!!!!
2. At least now you people who are clueless have a clue now.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Listening]

I claim the Democratic Party has moved to the right. My evidence...the biggest and most significant piece of legislation in 45 years, the ACA, passed by ONLY Democrats, is a carbon copy of the bill proposed by Republicans and authored by the Heritage Foundation.

ROTFLMAO

This is PROOF ?

There is no context to any of this and you call this proof.

What was going on in 1993 ? Answer: Hillarycare.

The whole GOP proposed mess was a smoke-screen anyone with a reasonable set of eyes would know it.

The GOP takes the house/seante in 1994 and they pushed for health care....

Oh wait.......

The White house and both chambers for six years and what did you see......NOT A THING.

Besides being an asshole, you are lousy with your "proof.

Good grief.