And when have we ever not had troops in harm’s way? Maybe, just maybe, Bannon has heard of Benghazi. Embassy guards are always in harm’s way, and we always have embassy guards in many places around the world.
They’ve upgraded. You used to have to be on foreign soil to get in dutch (no pun intended) with shittin’ on a sittin’ prez. Remember the Dixie Chicks?
One reason large businesses can maintain such healthy insurance pools is that you have to be healthy enough to work full time in order to get insurance. Once you get too sick to work full time you can stay on for a year under COBRA ( as long as you self-pay), then you’re off the plan and on your own.
And the insurance companies know this. When I worked for a small business they were always auditing our payroll to make sure we weren’t selling insurance to anyone not currently working for us (or on COBRA). Once my insurance was cancelled without notice because they changed their policy on contract workers, literally I came back from vacation only to be told my insurance had been cancelled -no notice, no grace period, no “effective at the start of next month”. The irony was that I was the healthiest person at that company and had never made a claim under that policy.
Maintaining this control was harder with association plans. While I always had to prove self-employment to JOIN an association plan ( something Rand Paul either doesn’t know or is ignoring) - it was difficult for them to enforce the rule requiring continuing employment. Insurers aren’t going to offer the same plan they sell to AT&T to a bunch of randomly pooled individuals of unknown health status.
For those who want to see lots of Republican stupidity on a single page, review the latest Quinnipiac University National Poll. Here are just two of many questions the GOPsters got wrong:
33. Who do you trust more to tell you the truth about important issues:
President Trump or the news media?
Rep Dem
Trump 78% 3%
News media 12 89
DK/NA 10 8
48. Would you support or oppose a preemptive strike on North Korea?
Rep Dem
Support 46% 16%
Oppose 41 77
DK/NA 12 7
This is a bit old, and it’s not strictly republican, but it involves the US military. If it’s in the wrong thread, please move it. I get so confused by all the threads. USA på vei til indre Troms | Klassekampen (Link in Norwegian)
The US military is gonna set up permanent bases in the north of Norway… so not that far from the Russian border. I’m not very happy about that, as I think it could really piss them off. The Norwegian government has called it an “open secret”, one that has been in development for years. Norway and Russia has managed to keep things relatively calm all on our own, with neighbors around for support. Even though Russia likes to cross the line now and then.
Nazi leader Richard Spencer has a lot of “interesting” ideas about democracy.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/women-shouldn-apos-t-vote-170354663.html
His mother’s family owned cotton plantations in Louisiana, so we know where he’s coming from.
“Nazi”? Our there in the snarling void, don’t they have a spectrum? Like, ordinary Trumpneck, white nationalist, white supremacist, Waffen SS? A series of pointless distinctions, perhaps, but this specimen identifies itself as “nationalist”. To be the best of my revulsion.
He put out a straight arm salute and led cheers of “Heil Trump.” You decide.
I’d go with “wanna-be nazi”, because if the nazis ever did take over, he’d be one of he first they’d kill.
People like to come up with arbitrary distinctions about when it is and isn’t OK to criticize the president, or the country, or the flag… ie, Obama not only criticized the USA, he did so ON FOREIGN SOIL. As if, that’s a well known rule and he violated it.
I mean, there’s definitely a difference, in one’s personal life, between complaining about your spouse to your sibling, vs complaining about your spouse to a total stranger. And you can kind of see a parallel to that in international relations and speech-making. But the analogy breaks down pretty quickly if you actually think about it at all.
If a president gives a public speech, everyone in the world (who cares) finds out what he says. Who cares if he gave the speech in DC or in London or in Moscow? If you’re going to get upset about your spouse discussing your interpersonal issues, you might get upset about who ended up learning private information, but you’d never get upset because your spouse told their sibling, which would be OK, except they told their sibling AT THEIR SIBLING’S HOUSE, not at your house, and somehow that makes it not OK.
1-Can you please explain when this happened and what he said?
and
2-What does this have to do with the matter you quoted?
It’s not a very direct connection… but “he insulted the president while troops are in harm’s way” (with the implication that the insult wouldn’t be as bad if troops weren’t in harms way) reminds me an awful lot of “he criticized/apologized for the USA while on foreign soil”. In both cases, there’s this weird insinuation that some well-known rule about appropriate contexts for criticism was violated. Which, of course, just happens to allow the speaker to attack the actions of whoever they feel like attacking, and make them seem extra-bad.
Say, didn’t Donald Trump appear on Russian television criticizing both Obama specifically and America in general?
(Cite)
Cutting the corporate tax rate will result in over $500 billion in additional income for corporations, which they will pass on to workers as salary? I love this idea. I mean, it’s typical for corporations to unilaterally increase what they’re paying for supplies. In addition to volunteering to pay their workers more, I’d expect these corporations will also use their windfall to increase the amounts they’re paying for raw materials like steel and plastic, and will similarly offer to pay more for rent on their buildings. That’s just how capitalism works. It’s amazing that shareholders even bother to hold stock at all, what with increases in corporate income going to suppliers like that. What altruism!
ETA: I also understand that this will cause stock prices to rise, which will offset the national debt. So, win-win-win!
In Trump’s eyes, the average family has enough Fortune 500 stock to yield 4,000 in increased dividends.
The other losers aren’t worth worrying about. Serfs should be happy to get moldy crust.
Fun with statistics - I’d love to see the median number (assuming that these values aren’t just pulled out of the administration’s ass).
And of course, a lot of people scanning the article will read it as “the average household will get a $4,000 tax cut”.
The federal government doesn’t require you to wear clothing or attend school. State laws do, and the authority to pass such laws is derived from state constitutions. It’s called plenary power or police power. Generally speaking, the federal constitution says what the federal government (and to an extent, state governments) can do. State constitutions say what state governments can’t do.
I don’t know if this qualifies, but it pissed me the fuck off. FB postfrom the Governor of Missouri:
Fucking troll post. Nice.