
Advertisement

by The Southern Dictators » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:01 am
| PT Factbook Under Construction | PMT Factbook Under Heavy Construction | FT Factbook Under Heavy Construction |
Volnotova wrote:Oh ffs, if there is one thing I can't stand it is this plethora of weeping and depressed people in this thread that will not hesitate to use every opportunity available to exlcaim how something like this made them lose (all) faith in humanity(including themselves).
:palm: x 3

by Maxen von Bismarck » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:02 am

by Sharfghotten » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:04 am

by Tropicarno » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:08 am

by Farnhamia » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:11 am

by Farnhamia » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:14 am
Kayliea wrote:america is pretty backward.

by Sharfghotten » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:15 am
Farnhamia wrote:Over here? We don't have that, all that bill did was make it mandatory for Americans to have health insurance and impose life sentences or death for people who refuse to buy it from private insurance companies. Of course, it will probably be struck down by the strict-constructionist Justices on the Supreme Court, because health insurance did not exist in the late 18th century, so it's unconstitutional. Don't you have any news services in you workers' paradise.

by Farnhamia » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:17 am
Sharfghotten wrote:Farnhamia wrote:Over here? We don't have that, all that bill did was make it mandatory for Americans to have health insurance and impose life sentences or death for people who refuse to buy it from private insurance companies. Of course, it will probably be struck down by the strict-constructionist Justices on the Supreme Court, because health insurance did not exist in the late 18th century, so it's unconstitutional. Don't you have any news services in you workers' paradise.
Do you be an American?
Edit: Nevermind, read above.


by Doitzel » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:35 am
HC Eredivisie wrote:They can actually do that?

by Ashmoria » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:43 am
The Southern Dictators wrote:Lunatic Goofballs wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/15/hospital.gay.visitation/index.html?hpt=C1
Barack Obama is ordering the Dept of Health and Human Services to require that all hospitals that receive federal money must allow broader visitation rules that would allow patients to choose who can visit.
So the question I'm wondering is this: Which public talking head is going to attack this first?
Hospital I went to, WE got to choose who gets to come visit us. If we get any visitors, we can just tell them we don't want to have visitors today.

by Greed and Death » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:46 am
Lunatic Goofballs wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/15/hospital.gay.visitation/index.html?hpt=C1
Barack Obama is ordering the Dept of Health and Human Services to require that all hospitals that receive federal money must allow broader visitation rules that would allow patients to choose who can visit.
So the question I'm wondering is this: Which public talking head is going to attack this first?

by Quadrimmina » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:53 am
Maxen von Bismarck wrote:The situation is already like Obama wants it. My uncle has been a doctor for almost 40 years (Left as you can be) and he says it already is like this. Obama is just pretending to fix something that doesn't need fixing so he doesn't have to answer any actual questions about gays in American society. Pathetic, but also a little crafty.

by Meroivinge » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:26 am
Maxen von Bismarck wrote:The situation is already like Obama wants it. My uncle has been a doctor for almost 40 years (Left as you can be) and he says it already is like this. Obama is just pretending to fix something that doesn't need fixing so he doesn't have to answer any actual questions about gays in American society. Pathetic, but also a little crafty.

by Juristonia » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:46 am
Liriena wrote:Say what you will about fascists: they are remarkably consistent even after several decades of failing spectacularly elsewhere.
Ifreann wrote:Indeed, as far as I can recall only one poster has ever supported legalising bestiality, and he was fucking his cat and isn't welcome here any more, in no small part, I imagine, because he kept going on about how he was fucking his cat.
Cannot think of a name wrote:Anyway, I'm from gold country, we grow up knowing that when people jump up and down shouting "GOLD GOLD GOLD" the gold is gone and the only money to be made is in selling shovels.
And it seems to me that cryptocurrency and NFTs and such suddenly have a whooooole lot of shovel salespeople.

by Tekania » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:49 am
Juristonia wrote:Yahoo article on this is already filling up with baggers whining about how Obama is yet again interfering with something he's not allowed to interfere in.
You know, despite being president and the system depending on federal funding and all.
It would be hilarious if these people weren't actually real and allowed to vote.

by Ermarian » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:08 am
Maxen von Bismarck wrote:I think MSNBC will complain first, or at least get some crackpot to say "burn gays, yea" and then declare him a "Tea Partier."

by Dyakovo » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:12 am

by Skaladora » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:16 am
Meroivinge wrote:
I think it's great that your uncle's hospital allows patients to chose who will stay with them when they are ill. There are plenty of hospitals that don't.
http://blog.mattalgren.com/2009/09/hosp ... die-alone/

by Atnae » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:18 am
Tekania wrote:If we start letting patients choose who may visit them, next thing you know we'll be allowing them to make informed decisions on their own medical care. (And not some actuary at the insurance agency as God intended it)
by Escargothia » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:18 am

by Imsogone » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:31 am

by Tekania » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:35 am
Atnae wrote:Tekania wrote:If we start letting patients choose who may visit them, next thing you know we'll be allowing them to make informed decisions on their own medical care. (And not some actuary at the insurance agency as God intended it)
that's known as a slippery slope argument. The conclusion is incredibly overdrawn and this hardly qualifies as an argument.

by Skaladora » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:41 am
Imsogone wrote:On the right, Phred Phelps will complain first - probably by harassing a dead soldier's family (he doesn't have the balls to actually harass a gay person - Rosie O'Donnell might bite him)
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Albertstadt, Bawkie
Advertisement