Anonymous Aristotle

J. is an alcoholic. Actually, more of a wino than anything else of imbibing preference. If you go to YT you'll see him recorded live at Glastonbury festival saying these horrible things. One such video is titled, " Johnny Depp at Glastonbury 2017: "When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?" He's trashed there. He sways because he's drunk. There's a condition that effects chronic alcoholics known as alcoholic dementia. What is it with these celebrities? For so long they've been above the law when they break the law in the City of Angels. If they're sent to jail low and behold in a few short moments they're released due to, "overcrowding". Which if that were a real stipulation for early release, one would think the inmate who had served their term the longest would be set free. So that the new arrival newly sentenced could take their place and serve their own sentence. I think it is that god complex that causes Johnny to say these things. Along with his inebriated condition. It's the same thing that caused Kathy Griffin to imitate ISIS with her behavior. God forbid president Trump does suffer what these people hope for. However, if he did, would they be contrite after? Or would they be so brazen then as to celebrate publicly? The death-left in this country think their behavior is free speech. I believe they're showing us their Satanic insides and true heart no matter what guise they show to the world. Be they one that says he "lies for a living", or a hate filled woman who pretends her screeds against all people living or dead is comedy, or others who's words speak more of their spiritual and character deficit than their hate speech does of our president.

Copied and pasted here invoking "Fair Use" . For information purposes to expand on this discussion and repeal the identity of personal attacks and deflection from said facts. L.A TIMES A side-by-side comparison of Obamacare and the GOP’s replacement plans By NOAM N. LEVEY AND KYLE KIM MARCH 8, 2017 Updated JUNE 22, 2017 Medicaid Cuts to Medicaid spending in the House version totaled $834 billion; the Senate version would likely cut the funding more dramatically, which will affect low- and moderate-income Americans. Expanded Medicaid coverage would cease and the funding structure would change. Under the Affordable Care Act The federal government and states share the cost of insuring the poor. The amount of money that Washington gives each state varies depending on how much medical care that state's Medicaid patients receive The federal government is picking up almost the entire cost of expanding Medicaid coverage to low-income adults without children in the 30 states (and the District of Columbia) that have chosen to expand their programs Under the GOP proposal Senate version Will replace current Medicaid with a fixed per capita cap or a block grant. Each state would have a fixed amount of money every year. That amount would increase annually by a percentage linked to the inflation rate, though the rate would be lower than in the House bill, meaning deeper cuts. The expansion of Medicaid benefits currently offered under Obamacare would be phased out beginning in 2020 and shut down completely by 2024 House version A fixed per capita cap or a block grant would replace the decades-old current system. Each state would have a fixed amount of money every year. That amount would increase annually by a percentage linked to the inflation rate The additional federal funding that covered expanding Medicaid would be eliminated by 2020 States that adopted Medicaid expansion (SEE LINK FOR MAPS) Changes in insurance costs Average premiums under the House version for health plans will be cheaper after 2020 than under Obamacare, but on average, those plans will cover less and have higher out-of-pocket expenses, the budget office projected. The Senate measure would likely also result in less comprehensive plans. According to a Kaiser Family Foundation study, an American who is older, has lower income and lives in an area with higher premiums like Alaska or Arizona will lose out if the Affordable Care Act is replaced. An American who is younger, has higher income and lives in an area with lower premiums like Massachusetts or Washington may receive additional assistance under the replacement plan. Detailed analysis for the Senate version has not been made. Change in assistance between Obamacare and the House Republican plan* 27Age$20,000$30,000-$3,000+$3,000-$2,000+$2,000-$1,000+$1,000No change$40,000$50,000$75,000$100,000Annual income4060 *Older consumers who would pay more under the revised GOP plan may get additional assistance, though how much is unclear. Under the Affordable Care Act People using healthcare marketplaces and making less than $48,000 a year receive subsidies to help them buy insurance The amount of the subsidy is tied to a person's income and to the cost of insurance in the person's area The subsidies are automatically applied to the consumers’ monthly insurance bills rather than having to wait for a rebate Under the GOP proposal Senate version Would still link aid to consumers’ income, though it would stop at 350% of poverty level, compared with 400% under the current law A new formula for setting the amount of subsidies would tie them to the cost of less comprehensive health plans. That means many consumers would get substantially less assistance than under Obamacare House version Tax credit proposal AgeCredit0500100015002000250030003500400060+50-5940-4930-3920-29$2,000$2,500$3,000$3,500$4,000 People would still receive subsidies, which would phase out at incomes of $75,000 per year The amount would be tied to a person's age, not income, so younger low-income people would get less help. The subsidies would not vary with the cost of insurance, so people in high-cost areas would also not get as much help, proportionally Insurance mandate Obamacare, for the first time, required Americans to have health insurance. That would no longer be the case. Under the Affordable Care Act A person is required to purchase health insurance or pay a tax penalty Under the GOP proposal Senate version The Senate bill would eliminate the mandate Unlike the House bill, the Senate version does not include any penalties for people who do not mantain coverage House version The tax penalty for not having health insurance would be dropped. But consumers would face a different sort of penalty: Anyone who goes without insurance for more than two months would face a 30% premium surcharge when they try to buy a new plan Guaranteed coverage People with preexisting conditions could see substantial changes in what kind of coverage they could receive. Under the Affordable Care Act Americans are able to get health insurance even if they’re sick. This put an end to insurers denying coverage to people who have preexisting medical conditions Insurers are barred from charging sick consumers more for coverage Insurers cannot impose annual or lifetime limits on coverage Insurers must offer a basic set of benefits, including mental health, prescription drugs and maternity care Insurers cannot charge older consumers more than three times more than younger consumers Under the GOP proposal Senate version Would not explicitly eliminate guaranteed coverage, but would allow states to seek waivers from several consumer protections States would be allowed to scale back conditions that they require insurers to cover. Because of the way the law is structured, that could allow insurers to reimpose annual and lifetime limits on some coverage Unlike the House bill, the Senate bill would not allow insurers to charge sick people more Insurers would be able to charge older consumers five times more than younger consumers House version Would not explicitly eliminate guaranteed coverage, but would allow states to seek waivers from several consumer protections States would be allowed to scale back conditions that insurers must cover. Because of the way the law is structured, that could allow insurers to reimpose annual and lifetime limits on some coverage. States would also be able to allow insurers to charge sick people more, potentially making coverage unaffordable for some Insurers would be able to charge older consumers five times more than younger consumers Insurance marketplaces The insurance marketplace would be intact, but would change dramatically. Under the Affordable Care Act The Obamacare marketplaces, such as HealthCare.gov, enable people who don't get health benefits at work to compare plans, just as they might compare hotel rooms or airline tickets online All plans on the marketplaces must offer a basic set of benefits, such as hospital care, mental health services and prescription drugs Under the GOP proposal Under both the House and Senate bills, it is unclear how the marketplaces would work because insurers might potentially offer health plans that do not offer the same set of benefits Women's health Both House and Senate Republican plans would impose new restrictions on health plans with abortion coverage, and would defund Planned Parenthood. Low-income women would be among the most seriously affected. Under the Affordable Care Act Insurance companies cannot charge women more than men for the same health plan Insurers are required to provide a basic set of benefits including maternity care, pediatric care and contraception Planned Parenthood receives federal funding for family planning and other medical services used by Medicaid recipients. Abortion cannot be funded with federal dollars Under the GOP proposal Insurance companies would still be banned from charging women more States could seek waivers to allow insurers to drop some basic benefits, such as maternity care and contraceptives Medicaid would no longer have to offer these benefits, which would more deeply affect low-income women. Nearly 80% of Planned Parenthood patients have incomes at or below 150% of the federal poverty level Medicaid would be barred from providing funding for any health clinics that provide abortion services, including Planned Parenthood Abortion services make up a small share of Planned Parenthood's overall health services, according to its most recent annual report 13%Pregnancy/prenatal45%STD testing/treatment1%Other7%Cancerscreening/prevention31%Contraception3%Abortionprocedures Federal subsidies make up the majority of Planned Parenthood's revenue 43%27%Privatecontributions6%OtherGovernment grants/reimbursements24%Non-government Impact on deficit The House version of the bill is estimated to cut the federal deficit by a total of $118.7 billion by 2026, largely by cutting Medicaid and reducing subsidies that help people pay for health insurance, the CBO found. The reduction in the deficit is considerably less than the $337 billion assessment for the earlier version of the bill. Taxes Most of the taxes set up under Obamacare to pay for subsidizing insurance would be scrapped. The House and Senate GOP proposals do not include any new tax to offset the loss of revenue. Under the Affordable Care Act Insurance companies and medical device makers, which benefit from new customers under the law, pay more taxes Taxpayers with incomes over $250,000 are also taxed more Under the GOP proposal Medical device makers, insurance companies and wealthy Americans would all receive a big tax cut as these taxes are eliminated The tax cuts total about $663 billion over the next decade. Sources: Census, Medicaid.gov, Kaiser Family Foundation, Congressional Budget Office, Planned Parenthood, Times reporting Credits: Additional reporting and production contributions by Joe Fox

How so? Please be specific.

Deflection. No, you're wrong. Lockstep is a Nazi reference. The Hitler youth brigades were made to march in lockstep.Auburn Prison camp in a photo from 1910 shows this. False allegations, my being an expert, doesn't work. You've asked if these four men maybe had a good reason for opposing the new health care bill. Senator Paul was on the Today show this morning. He as much as admitted he and his three compatriots are obstructing this bill because it takes but two of them to pass it. If you spent as much time reading the bill as you shall goading this thread forward so that president Trump requires people to pray for him to protect him against the dedicated obstructionist left that seeks to assail him with false news, slander, defamation, scurrilous attacks, sarcasm, and hatred, while some dare to say they pray for him and his family in the process of committing to those evils that require prayer for protection from that, you would be able to contribute something to this discussion besides deflection and animus. I never claimed to be an expert. That's a false statement. It is a false allusion also. However, I have read the bill and that is something if you had done would not have you deflecting from the details of the bill, so as to proceed with personal attacks against our president, per usual, and also his supporters. Whom you assail with Nazi references. I believe you need our prayers. Because we are to love even our enemies. We're not to insult God with prayers for someone who our behavior demonstrates needs others to pray we stop!

Why do you have a dialog with yourself and then grow cranky with your own answers? Using Nazi references (lock step) so as to revoke any credibility of that self-dialog, being Godwin's Law is stale, short sighted, and lame.

So you don't know what you're talking about when you posed your prior question to me? "Did it occur to you that maybe it is a really bad bill that does not keep their promises and does not make things better?" Did it occur to you to read the bill before presuming these 4 representatives know what they're doing when they object to the language in the bill you haven't read in its entirety?

Now if only reform would include rescinding investigations of those faculty and students that don't use the "proper pronoun" to refer to trans-diagnosed students, like the other article posted here talks about, that would be a healthy start to bettering education in America. Along with repealing Common Core and No Child Left Behind. And returning music programs to all public schools.

Yeah, those spells are working like a charm. Was that a pun? Yes, yes it was.

First Liberty Institute was contacted about this. Too bad the student complied. They should have gone on with their speech and literally read behind the lines that crossed out the references to God. Too bad officials in these kind of school reports demonstrate they need to be educated about the first amendment. It is not against the law for God to be mentioned in this commencement speech. But if the young people graduating school today think it is, it will effect their sense of security to freely express their faith when they're in the world tomorrow. Maybe that's what these type policies are hoping to instill. If we surrender our rights soon we won't have any.

What exactly are those particulars in this bill that you see that way? Please be specific so that we can all follow along with your line of thought. Thanks in advance.

Thank you. I was just wondering if an obstructionist faction in Congress can suspend the repeal and replace plans of president Trump for four long years without somehow being overcome in that agenda.

I think we all grow in our spirituality as Christians. Learning to walk in the word while walking away from the mannerisms of the world takes time. Also, as far as Internet community is concerned, there's no way to first know if those we meet with on the Net truly are in the faith. That can be reason also why there is conflict. Because if someone out there is of a mind to try and fake it entering a religious form of any kind, when it isn't sincerely held in their heart, they're going to act in the wrong way. And when people don't immediately leap to that conclusion that this person isn't sincere in the identity they've claimed they have spiritually , their actions will seem confusing to those who are.

Ah, I see. I'm not surprised. Politics. There should be a hyphen . -Dirty Business.

The four horsemen of obstructionism against their own party's president aligning together. This is not a surprise. It should be to their eternal shame, but I actually don't think these four men are able to feel that. I wonder if an EO can be signed to push this through?

Russia openly accused Ukraine of sabotaging Trump.

True. Hillary can be bought as we know. And no, I don't believe Russia changed any votes. The voting machines aren't accessible to hackers as we know. But those that hope to report hacking of the election might hope people don't realize that. And yes, we can always benefit from more security in the election process. While a great solution to corrupt politicians would have been to have investigated Hillary to the Nth degree, after investigation of Bill Clinton for his actions in meeting with AG Lynch during that investigation. And when evidence was found that made Hillary and her boss, because she wouldn't open a server in her home as Secretary of State without his knowledge, everyone involved is arrested and prosecuted. And if found guilty, sent to prison. All this talk of Russia, Russia, Russia! In their country I'm pretty sure they don't coddle their politicians that put their nations security at risk. So while there's all this speculation about Russia's hackers, Hillary and BH Obama should be glad America's criminal justice system as pertains to treason or espionage or sedition, doesn't operate like Russia's. Hillary made a career of being a dirty politician . It is amazing that the whole purpose of The Resistance that she's announced herself part of is acting out because the members preferred her in our White house. A travesty for sure in that they'd rather have her in the White house than their country to be safe from her when she'd have more power than any woman on earth. There's a visual huh?

Did you forget what you posted? It is an enormous stretch to refer to the 2013 Miss Universe pageant as if that was a direct or indirect inroad for Trump to meet Putin. Especially when Putin was not at the Miss Universe pageant. And there is no evidence Trump ever met with Putin while there for the pageant. While this 21 states investigation into Russian hackers in the 2016 election has behind it, in matters of who has deeper ties to Russia as a candidate in the 2016 election this investigation is about, is Hillary R. Clinton. Not Donald Trump. "2 hours ago, Running Gator said: Before the election there was one candidate that was determined to have regime change in Syria, something Russia would not let happen. Before the election there was one candidate that was determined not to let Russia keep the Ukraine and one that said he would not do anything about it. Before the election there was one candidate that said he would not necessarily come to the aid of a NATO nation if they were attacked. Before the election one of the candidates said this..."As far as the Ukraine is concerned … if Putin wants to go in -- and I got to know him very well because we were both on 60 Minutes. We were stablemates, and we did very well that night and this So what I would do—as an example, I own Miss Universe, I was in Russia, I was in Moscow recently and I spoke, indirectly and directly, with President Putin, who could not have been nicer, and we had a tremendous success. The show was live from Moscow, and we had tremendous success there and it was amazing, but to do well, you have to get the other side to respect you, and he does not respect our president, which is very sad."

I think it irresponsible that law makers would excuse any cause to pass such an extensive bill as Obamacare having not read it first. They didn't pass a bill that was in files in different commissions file cabinets. They passed a bill that was hundreds of pages long that likely was compiled from input by different commissions. I've read no similar reports with regard to the new bill that is being drafted to overturn or change any part of Obamacare in this current Congress. Do you have any sources that support what you're saying in that regard?

Miss Universe Moscow edition was filmed in 2013 and when Donald Trump was a co-owner. Well before he thought to run for highest office. Meanwhile, right before the election of 2016, a woman who when appointed by BH Obama to the office of Secretary of State, and was investigated for having installed an illegal server in her home, and had tampered with evidence when she had destroyed thousands of emails generated on that illegal computer, was running for highest office against the former owner of Miss Universe pageant holdings. The billionaire had no relationship with Putin. Putin did not attend Miss Universe Moscow. The Clinton's did have a relationship with Putin that spans years. Because the Clinton's were in the White house for eight years and met with Putin personally, as is evidenced on the record. LINK As Secretary of State Hillary met with Putin for the first time in that post in 2010. Russia, Suspected in Hacking, Has Uneasy History With Hillary Clinton By MARK LANDLERJULY 28, 2016 Cash flowed to Clinton Foundation as Russians gained U.S. uranium assets - Originally published April 23, 2015

Yes, if America stopped pandering to law breaker foreign trespassers, there would be a great deal of change in that area of concern. If America, ICE, would arrest the minors that continually cross our border unaccompanied, and fly them back into Mexico, south, or central America and offload them at that airport, it would also send a message. You're an unaccompanied minor. Go home to your parents. Illegals can't obtain lawful employment without a SSN. I remember during a debate some years ago, Romney claimed he had spoken with an illegal who had worked here for 20 years and paid taxes. It didn't concern Romney that in 2 decades that supposed individual hadn't bothered to become a legal citizen. Instead, he decided to trumpet the man's "honor" by claiming the man in all those years also paid income tax. Nonsense of course. Something that Newt Gingrich, whom was there debating too as he was a candidate hopeful for highest office, pointedly stated that if that story were true, Mr.Romney had spoken to an illegal who had also stolen someone's identity in order to have that SSN. I think the faction in America that defend illegals obtaining all manner of benefits at tax payer citizen expense should illegally enter Mexico and try there what they defend here. Mexico's immigrations laws are superior to America's. If that isn't concerning, D.C. hasn't been paying attention. Maybe that would get that attention. The way America looks now, with news broadcasting states harboring illegally and violating federal law daily, illegals in sanctuary cities, it appears as if the government in those states is helping to sabotage America itself. By publicizing American cities of that nature welcome illegals in. And of course, illegals will hear that and begin their trek in higher number. I didn't think in my lifetime I would see the powers that be, and the electorate as well, working so hard from the inside to destroy America. And give her to our enemies and illegals. It's a type of sedition in my view that is as sickeningly public as it is prolific.

In the case of this thread, if you've posted Trump materials, you're derailing an Obama thread. I'd appreciate it if you would stop doing that. It isn't polite to derail a thread away from the Obama topic just because a derailer doesn't think that's worth being discussed. If that's their opinion so be it. But to disrupt a thread where others may want to discuss the actual topic is selfish and unfair to everyone else. The only victim in this thread is the actual topic of Obama's speeches concerning Populism being undermined by Anti-Trumpers.

Of course it is sketchy.It's going off the parry that was interjected when the campaign started. The evil Russians are intruding! I think this is something that was slapped together in order to ready for this moment. The dark left, or death-left, are working hard to impugn this president. I've never seen such an offense. He must be doing something right when he's scaring all the right people. Who in return are showing the public they're in power for all the wrong reasons. In that way, it kind of works out in the exposure realm.

Many have known this for years. The LGBTQS group GLSEN operates in public schools and has for years.