**OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Brazen331 » Tue Oct 16, 2018 1:43 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Brazen331 wrote:
Regardless, you have him. No one else has been on CNN and MSNBC promoting the agenda of your party more than Avenatti.

We should smoke sometime.


I suppose I would be espousing the merits of Das Kapital by the end of our session.
Brazen331
 
Posts: 3000
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:25 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 44 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby mdb1958 » Tue Oct 16, 2018 2:28 am

uscbucsfan wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:How you figure? We don't want him.

But you have him.

Biden 33%
Sanders 13%
Harris 9%
Warren 8%
Booker 5%
Kerry 5%
Bloomberg 4%
O’Rourke 4%
Holder 3%
Garcetti 2%
Avenatti 1%
Gillibrand 1%
Klobuchar 1%
Patrick 1%
Bullock <1%
Delaney <1%



Ocasio-Cortez??? MB wants to chow on some Shitzu.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 10181
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 165 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Brazen331 » Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:36 am

mdb1958 wrote:
uscbucsfan wrote:But you have him.

Biden 33%
Sanders 13%
Harris 9%
Warren 8%
Booker 5%
Kerry 5%
Bloomberg 4%
O’Rourke 4%
Holder 3%
Garcetti 2%
Avenatti 1%
Gillibrand 1%
Klobuchar 1%
Patrick 1%
Bullock <1%
Delaney <1%



Ocasio-Cortez??? MB wants to chow on some Shitzu.


West Virginians eat bears and squirrels and possums and turtles and frogs and all sorts of things mdb, but I think you’ll be hard pressed to find one that eats dogs.

Got to go to China for that.
Brazen331
 
Posts: 3000
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:25 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 44 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Buc2 » Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:03 am

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Another homosexual judge with ties to a LGBT legal group is among President Donald Trump’s latest batch of judicial nominees, this time to the influential Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The White House announced a handful of federal appointees Wednesday, including assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick Bumatay. A member of the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Tax Forces Section in the Southern District of California, Bumatay currently advises Attorney General Jeff Sessions on issues including opioids and organized crime.

National Review adds that he worked on the confirmations for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, and Justice Neil Gorsuch, as well as Bush administration Attorney General Michael Mukasey.

Bumatay would also be the nation’s second openly homosexual federal appeals court judge and the first on the Ninth Circuit, the San Francisco Chronicle notes. The White House’s press release also notes that he’s a member of the Tom Homann LGBT Law Association, an organization dedicated to the “advancement of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues throughout California and the nation.”

The Homann Association has staked out a number of left-wing positions, including disappointment that the Supreme Court upheld Christian baker Jack Phillips’ right to refuse to make a cake for a same-sex “wedding,” and “unequivocally denounc[ing]” the Trump administration’s ban on transgender military service.

Pro-family advocates agree that Trump’s judicial nominees are one of the highlights of his presidency, potentially shifting the federal judiciary to the right for generations to come. But Bumatay follows Judge Mary Rowland, an open homosexual who has ties to the left-wing Lesbian & Gay Bar Association of Chicago and Lambda Legal Defense & Education Fund, as the second appointee whose background raises doubts as to whether he would separate his homosexuality from his jurisprudence.

Conservatives see trustworthy nominees as particularly critical on the Ninth Circuit, a notoriously liberal court whose record includes blocking the administration’s transgender troop ban, a string of decisions favorable to Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against David Daleiden and other pro-life undercover investigators, and banning prayer at local school board meetings.

“At this point, it’s virtually impossible in the 9th Circuit to draw a panel with two Republican-appointed judges. It’s possible, but it’s tough,” South Texas College of Law professor Josh Blackman explained in March. “This might make it more possible to draw a panel [of two Republican appointed judges] every now and then."

Trump’s pro-life record has largely pleased conservatives, but his record on LGBT issues is more mixed. In addition to the transgender troop ban, he has supported religious liberty, rejected “pride month,” and staffed his administration with pro-family leaders such as Mike Pompeo and Howard Nielson, Jr.

On the other hand, Trump has nominated a variety of pro-homosexual officials to various government posts and continued a number of Obama-era pro-LGBT policies, such as an executive order on “gender identity nondiscrimination” and U.S. support for international recognition of homosexual relations at the United Nations Human Rights Council.

He publicly praised the pro-LGBT group Log Cabin Republicans in January, and declared after the election that the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling forcing all fifty states to recognize same-sex “marriage” was “settled law.”

The conservative Federalist Society plays a significant advisory role in the administration’s selection of judicial nominees, a relationship started during Trump’s campaign to reassure skeptical Republicans about the formerly liberal businessman’s reliability.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12014
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 985 times
Been thanked: 417 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Buc2 » Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:13 am

mdb1958 wrote:Ocasio-Cortez??? MB wants to chow on some Shitzu.


Speaking of Cortez...

Image
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12014
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 985 times
Been thanked: 417 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:01 am

Okay, that one is funny.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 14427
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 160 times
Been thanked: 667 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:57 am

Image
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 14427
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 160 times
Been thanked: 667 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby RedLeader » Tue Oct 16, 2018 11:29 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:Image


Strong, independant woman.


Progressive approved.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2926
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 110 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby RedLeader » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:11 pm

TV ads to include drug prices

Drugmakers will be forced to reveal many of their products’ list prices in television ads, thanks to a proposed rule unveiled by the Trump administration Monday. The rule requires companies to show the price of any drug costing more than $35 a month at the end of advertisements in “a legible manner.” Experts say the rule will likely result in months and — possibly — years of legal battles before it’s implemented, reports NPR. Additionally, critics point out that the list price of drugs is rarely what a person pays at the pharmacy counter.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2926
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 110 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby bucfanclw » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:19 pm

RedLeader wrote:TV ads to include drug prices

Drugmakers will be forced to reveal many of their products’ list prices in television ads, thanks to a proposed rule unveiled by the Trump administration Monday. The rule requires companies to show the price of any drug costing more than $35 a month at the end of advertisements in “a legible manner.” Experts say the rule will likely result in months and — possibly — years of legal battles before it’s implemented, reports NPR. Additionally, critics point out that the list price of drugs is rarely what a person pays at the pharmacy counter.

I'm really not sure what the benefit of this would be to the people that need the drug... hell, I'm not really sure if anyone sees a benefit from this, but congrats I guess.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 4030
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 163 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:23 pm

They'll get the insurance industry to create a policy that no one will want, but gives Pharma the legal leeway to say Drug X is only $35 a month.

"Your coverage may vary"
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 14427
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 160 times
Been thanked: 667 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Zarniwoop » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:30 pm

drug pricing transparency is good.


i'm not sure how anyone can quibble over this.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6717
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 352 times
Been thanked: 293 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby bucfanclw » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:34 pm

Zarniwoop wrote:drug pricing transparency is good.

When it doesn't reflect the price consumers are paying, and the drug company has a monopoly on the drug, what exactly is the point of drug price transparency? Who actually benefits?
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 4030
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 163 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Zarniwoop » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:38 pm

bucfanclw wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:drug pricing transparency is good.

When it doesn't reflect the price consumers are paying, and the drug company has a monopoly on the drug, what exactly is the point of drug price transparency? Who actually benefits?



if i know what a drug costs...and i know my insurance coverage...i know my out of pocket costs.

and not all drugs are under exclusive patents...there is often competition both within a family of drugs and between families of drugs that can have similar effects.


this gives us all more information to use when we discuss treatment options with our doctors.


it will benefit some more than others, but i can't see it hurting anyone.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6717
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 352 times
Been thanked: 293 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby bucfanclw » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:52 pm

Zarniwoop wrote:
bucfanclw wrote:When it doesn't reflect the price consumers are paying, and the drug company has a monopoly on the drug, what exactly is the point of drug price transparency? Who actually benefits?



if i know what a drug costs...and i know my insurance coverage...i know my out of pocket costs.

and not all drugs are under exclusive patents...there is often competition both within a family of drugs and between families of drugs that can have similar effects.


this gives us all more information to use when we discuss treatment options with our doctors.


it will benefit some more than others, but i can't see it hurting anyone.

Never said it was hurting, just seemed worthless. If I want to know the price of a drug, I look it up on my insurance's website. I really don't care what they pay for it, that's what my premiums are for. Never once can I say I based my healthcare decisions on the list price of a drug and I really don't know anyone that has.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 4030
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 163 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Zarniwoop » Tue Oct 16, 2018 1:08 pm

bucfanclw wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:

if i know what a drug costs...and i know my insurance coverage...i know my out of pocket costs.

and not all drugs are under exclusive patents...there is often competition both within a family of drugs and between families of drugs that can have similar effects.


this gives us all more information to use when we discuss treatment options with our doctors.


it will benefit some more than others, but i can't see it hurting anyone.

Never said it was hurting, just seemed worthless. If I want to know the price of a drug, I look it up on my insurance's website. I really don't care what they pay for it, that's what my premiums are for. Never once can I say I based my healthcare decisions on the list price of a drug and I really don't know anyone that has.



for your insurance it might work like that but not for everyone's. some people will absolutely benefit at no harm to anyone else. that doesn't seem worthless to me.

don't get me wrong, i'm not out dancing in the street about this...but it's a good thing IMO

but to each their own
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6717
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 352 times
Been thanked: 293 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby RedLeader » Tue Oct 16, 2018 1:16 pm

"Patients deserve to know what a given drug could cost when they're being told about the benefits and risks it may have," Azar said in prepared remarks... "They deserve to know if the drug company has pushed their prices to abusive levels. And they deserve to know this every time they see a drug advertised to them on TV."

Most Americans don't pay the full price for prescriptions — one reason drugmakers have opposed disclosing the list prices, arguing that would just confuse the public. But insurance plans base their copayments on the list price set by drugmakers. And patients with high-deductibles plans or no insurance sometimes pay full price.

President Trump has long promised to bring down drug prices, and in May, his administration released a "blueprint" with vague proposals for doing so, including exploring listing prices in TV commercials.



It's a start...
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2926
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 110 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Ken Carson » Tue Oct 16, 2018 1:40 pm

It has the potential to lower healthcare costs, no? If so, how could anyone be against this? Or is the only thing we can do to help lower costs give control of the whole system to the government?
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3673
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 191 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Oct 16, 2018 1:57 pm

Ken Carson wrote:It has the potential to lower healthcare costs, no? If so, how could anyone be against this? Or is the only thing we can do to help lower costs give control of the whole system to the government?

It's not the only thing we can do.

But it's exactly the right thing to do.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 14427
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 160 times
Been thanked: 667 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby bucfanclw » Tue Oct 16, 2018 2:33 pm

The 45th President of the United States paid $130,000 to have sex with a porn star that he said reminded him of his daughter and then went on Twitter today to call her a horseface while the wife he cheated on is running a "#BEBEST" program to discourage online bullying.

I never thought I could type out something that ridiculous and have it be true.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 4030
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 163 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Ken Carson » Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:18 pm

bucfanclw wrote:The 45th President of the United States paid $130,000 to have sex with a porn star that he said reminded him of his daughter and then went on Twitter today to call her a horseface while the wife he cheated on is running a "#BEBEST" program to discourage online bullying.

I never thought I could type out something that ridiculous and have it be true.

We are definitely living in Idiocracy.

Just remember... he won an election. And it wasn’t because his opposition was too smart to beat him. Remember that Hilary ran a campaign called Love Trumps Hate.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3673
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 191 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby uscbucsfan » Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:11 pm

Image
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 5234
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 115 times
Been thanked: 144 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Zarniwoop » Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:32 pm

I assume before the announcement he would buy a whole lot of Gatorade stock
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6717
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 352 times
Been thanked: 293 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Oct 16, 2018 7:29 pm

uscbucsfan wrote:Image


#BelieveMe
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 13593
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 550 times
Been thanked: 590 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby RedLeader » Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:42 pm

bucfanclw wrote:The 45th President of the United States paid $130,000 to have sex with a porn star that he said reminded him of his daughter and then went on Twitter today to call her a horseface while the wife he cheated on is running a "#BEBEST" program to discourage online bullying.

I never thought I could type out something that ridiculous and have it be true.


Good grief, man... you gotta pull your head out of the tabloids and Trumps Twitter page once in a while.

There’s all kinds of real news out there if you’re not easily distracted.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2926
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 110 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby MJW » Wed Oct 17, 2018 5:59 am

Image

Not sure what the best part is.

That he misspelled "Daniels?"
The burn that would be lame from a ten year old?
That he's gloating about the legal implications of a porn star signing his NDA?
That he thinks we're excited for him that he can now sue her?
The way he phrases that final sentence.

In case we lost sight, this...thing...is the President Of The United States Of America.

Also worth noting that this is the face of a man who thinks insulting appearances is a good idea.

Image
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 9052
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 212 times
Been thanked: 406 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Buc2 » Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:12 am

Imagine the news coverage if the Obama administration had helped to orchestrate this...

https://twitter.com/XHNews/status/1041874015772712960

Spoiler:
Image
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12014
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 985 times
Been thanked: 417 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby bucfanclw » Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:56 am

Buc2 wrote:Imagine the news coverage if the Obama administration had helped to orchestrate this...

https://twitter.com/XHNews/status/1041874015772712960

Spoiler:
Image

You're right. Fox News would have crucified him for it.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 4030
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 163 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby Buc2 » Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:54 am

:lol: :roll:
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12014
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 985 times
Been thanked: 417 times

Re: **OFFICIAL 'FORTY-FIVE' DISCUSSION THREAD**

Postby RedLeader » Wed Oct 17, 2018 2:06 pm

President Trump has requested each of his Cabinet secretaries trim 5% from their respective budgets, as part of a pledge Wednesday to slash spending and rein in the soaring U.S. budget deficit. Trump’s proposal follows his administration’s disclosure this week of a $779 billion budget deficit for the 2018 fiscal year, marking a 17% increase from the period prior, according to CNBC.

Cutting spending is “not as tough as you think,” Trump told Fox Business news. :lol:
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2926
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 110 times
Been thanked: 104 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests