Jump to content

Captainant

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    14600
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by Captainant

  1. 1 minute ago, Poe It Up said:

    I love my Mexican brothers. Hell, my best friend grew up in Mexico City. He absolutely loves Trump and I don’t, so it has caused some friction here recently. 

    Love them, as long as they know their place and don't come to America? Your post has big "I have a black friend" vibes lol

     

    Also, your insistence on acting like trump is singular instance of fascism that can be dismissed is a problem. He's a symptom. Desantis is too. Just because you disavow one fascist doesn't wash your hands of that shame and hate. You just wish he wouldn't say the quiet part so loudly

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. 17 minutes ago, Poe It Up said:

    Prior to the pandemic middle class incomes were growing and and more Americans were working than ever before.

    When gains are transient and fueled by short sighted economic policy that won't last, most people would place blame on the person who put that policy in place. Not the person who inherited the unstable and untenable system.

    But I do appreciate your honesty about liking taking away citizens rights via the supreme court and joy at treating Mexicans like a plague to be feared. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
  3. 1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

    it just sits there for me. but I'm guessing you have an iphone. it's not a big deal either way. 

    On Android (using Google keyboard) I use "paste as plain text" and that normally makes links autoembed

  4. On 8/18/2022 at 10:34 PM, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

    Yeah, that pretty much sucked. Sorry to be the contrarian.

     

    On 8/18/2022 at 10:47 PM, billfromlaketravis said:

    Yeah I’m not sure who wants this. Tatiana and Jamil have been great on separate and very different shows. I guess this the only way Disney could bring them together. Superhero shit is going to get a better number than a quirky comedy series. 

    Eh my wife, mom, and sister have all really enjoyed She Hulk so far. I've enjoyed it, but not every show is gonna hit every demographic ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  5. 1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

    That her "friend" who was comforting her and calming her down then starts to talk shit on her after she's hauled off is fairly amazing.

    I feel like everyone has that one sloppy hot mess friend that you've known forever so you feel obligated to include them in some stuff, but don't really like who they've become. I'd bet her relationship with her friend fits that bill lol

  6. 54 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

    It’s funny that you said “you’re not Christian” because even the most fundamentalist nutbag Christian would know Numbers is an Old Testament book, which means Jews know this shit. And judging by your asinine response, they’d know it a hell of a lot better than you do.

    I always get a kick out of fundies twisting themselves up trying to pick out pieces of the old testament and enshrine them, while completely ignoring and wildly misinterpreting other parts. Like how the south used parts of levitican law to justify slavery, but looooooooved to browbeat you with the new testament gospel that mooted the old testament theologically. 

    Also seedy boi I got both barrels of southern baptist indoctrination growing up. There's a variety of reasons that I don't consider myself a Christian today, but I'd bet ya a failed GoFundMe that I know my Sunday school better than you. 

  7. 1 hour ago, workswithseed said:

    Stick to saying that an induced abortion is the same as an miscarriage. 

    The Bible tells me so! From Numbers 5:11-31

    Quote

     

    11 Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah[a] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.

    16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

    “‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

    23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorialc]" style="font-size: 0.625em; line-height: normal; position: relative; vertical-align: text-top; top: auto; display: inline;">[c] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.

    29 “‘This, then, is the law of jealousy when a woman goes astray and makes herself impure while married to her husband, 30 or when feelings of jealousy come over a man because he suspects his wife. The priest is to have her stand before the Lord and is to apply this entire law to her. 31 The husband will be innocent of any wrongdoing, but the woman will bear the consequences of her sin.’”

     

    I guess God himself telling Moses how to induce a miscarriage is abortion, but that couldn't be because the Bible says no abortion?

  8. 38 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

    You can toss so,e of the blame at Texas football.   I still think the chaos on the board directly ties into how well Texas football is doing.

    That and our slow and steady descent into christofascism. Losing to Kansas twice definitely sped things up though 

  9. 4 hours ago, HRSchenker said:

    California manufacturing their own insulin is one hell of a market disruption and a much better alternative to a copay cap. The $35/mo cap looks good on paper but it's nothing more than a cost shift to the plan sponsor. The PBM is not going to willingly eat that cost even though they get kickbacks on the list price from Sanofi, Eli Lilly, and the other manufacturers. Plan sponsors already pay below acquisition for brand name drugs and it's one of the reasons why we're dropping TRICARE at the end of the year. My patients love the dirt cheap copays but I can't subsidize them at the same time they use a health plan funded by the government that refuses to tell the pharmacy the source of their price tables on the basis that it's proprietary. 

    Here's an example I can use to relate what I'm talking about. Let's say you own a home and you have a major foundation issue. Your home insurance company says they'll cover it but completed repairs can only be authorized at their contractor negotiated price of $2,000. You talk to every contractor in your zip code and the ones around it and they're all telling you that this repair is minimum $15,000. You call the insurance company to ask them where you can find this contractor who will do it for $2,000 and they tell you "Sorry, that's proprietary information. You'll just have to keep searching for that contractor we negotiated with. He's out there somewhere!". Health plans won't even give us the names of wholesalers where they contracted with to get medication prices. They don't have to give us their contract terms but they won't even give us the name of the companies where they derived this price list from. It's one of the reasons why I love the Cost Plus/Blueberry Pharmacy model. The price at the point of sale is the price of the drug. No kickbacks, no negotiated rebates, none of that stuff. If California ends up doing something like that, there will be people begging to get involved whether as a patient or a provider.

    See all of what you're describing just sounds like a reason to NOT treat healthcare as a profit center and some risk to hedge against. An insulin patient buying insurance for a thing they KNOW is going to happen (buying insulin) isn't buying insurance. It's buying a cost subsidy subscription, and making room for nice tidy profit margins on the basic necessities for life for these patients.

    To revisit your metaphor, it's not at all like a foundation issue on a house. This isn't some possibility - it's a reality and recurring cost that isn't negotiable. Charging so much to ensure a healthy return on investment is just pure fucking exploitation for private shareholder benefit

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 1
  10. 2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    Remove the Roe decision from the timeline, remove the abortion issue as a political tool at the national level, and I think that the timeline plays out quite differently, and further that the modern GOP looks meaningfully different.  

    Yeah if we had fewer sanctimonious religious extremists insisting on interjecting their sky daddy into doctor/patient medical decisions, it would no longer be a political issue. You should get to work on that, champ. 

  11. 1 hour ago, Dnaguy said:

    Yes and no.

    Abortion worked / works bc it can be packaged so well.

    It’s the perfect wedge issue really.

    Well, that and evangelicals aren't known for their critical thinking skills. Just look at Annie, he's got to lie to defend his fabricated position that Roe was some galvanizing moment. There's some good write-ups that have good sourcing to explain the change over time:

    Quote

    Support for abortion

    Early on, many evangelicals, including Southern Baptists, saw opposition to legal abortion as a “Catholic issue.”

    A 1970 poll by the Baptist Sunday School board found that a majority of Southern Baptist pastors supported abortion in a number of instances, including when the woman’s mental or physical health was at risk or in the case of rape or fetal deformity.

    The SBC passed its first resolution on abortion two years before the Roe decision. While the Convention never supported the right of a woman to have an abortion at her request for any reason, the resolution did acknowledge the need for legislation that would allow for some exceptions.

    In fact, many Southern Baptists saw the Roe decision as drawing a needed line between church and state on matters of morality and state regulation. A Baptist Press article just days after the decision called it an advancement of religious liberty, human equality and justice.

    The Convention affirmed this resolution in 1974 after Roe was decided. A 1976 resolution condemned abortion as “a means of birth control” but still insisted the decision ultimately remained between a woman and her doctor.

    A 1977 resolution clarified the Convention’s position, reaffirming its “strong opposition to abortion on demand.” However, it also reaffirmed the Convention’s views about the limited role of government and the right of pregnant women to medical services and counseling. This resolution was affirmed again in 1979.

    Fetus as a person

    Later that year, however, as an ultra-conservative faction within the denomination acquired power from more moderate leaders, things began to change.

    Starting in 1980, Convention resolutions took a hard turn against abortion access. A “Resolution on Abortion” declared “that abortion ends the life of a developing human being” and called for legal measures “prohibiting abortion except to save the life of the mother.”

    Another interesting shift happened in that resolution. Instead of referring to “fetal life,” as did earlier resolutions, the 1980 resolution called fetuses “unborn” or “pre-born” human life or “persons.” This shift in language made a significant change to the status of the fetus. It was no longer a developing organism dependent on a woman’s body, but rather it was a full human being with the same status and human rights as the women. A 1984 resolution named a fetus “a living individual human being.”

    They were so upset, they passed and incorporated several resolutions clarifying their nuanced position in support of abortion. Until the 80s came along and they got co-opted by extremists that changed the script from a concern of government intrusion into a healthcare decision alllll the way to controlling women as if they were chattel. 

    Really strong stuff from annie, I'm sure he's convincing his peers sack and poe and other folks with an abusers mindset that it's all those damn women's fault for being such sluts

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 1
  12. 4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

    While this is clearly correct, I would like to say that it doesn't take much effort (or even intelligence) to be able to suss out the bullshit.  This approach works best with lazy people, which we have a fuck ton of.  Listen to NPR or watch network news and you'll get actual truth, or at least a lot closer to it.  It's the dipshits that live their lives on social media soundbites and obvious bullshit "news" like Fox that are the most susceptible to this tactic.

    Eh, it's worse than just the dipshits. I know a number of incredibly intelligent people that are only smart when they turn on their brains. When it comes to politics, they just turn off their brains and stop thinking about things because "it's all just so unpleasant with the lying". Sure, when you press them on a specific issue they're usually reasonable, but they'll happily and mindlessly repeat whatever the fox news talking point is - even though they'll swear up and down they NEVER watch fox

    My point being - people who fall for this are no longer willing to engage on facts as the first step in a discussion. They just assume ALL facts are bullshit because they were able to find an instance of #bothsides being wrong, and start to decide things based on "what people are saying".

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 2
  13. 7 minutes ago, GenXer said:

    I still believe Dems could be creative and allow for everyone to purchase prescription meds from international online sources. That’s my critique of Dems. There are international providers that do that now. But, customs might snatch it. Or, is the online provider a good faith actor. I’d like the FDA to approve them before I inject the stuff in my body.

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/2181?r=31&s=1

    Damn those democrats for proposing legislatively what you're asking for!!! Damn them for failing to get republican votes!

    11 minutes ago, GenXer said:

    I don’t know if this would even require a change in legislation. 

    It would. Individuals are statutorily prohibited from importing, with some waiver-based exceptions

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/384

    12 minutes ago, GenXer said:

    You’re correct that I didn’t know the details of the bill. I don’t read legislation for a hobby, and I’m not an attorney. This community is full of attorneys. That’s why I posted questions. You’re just conditioned to see a question as a trolling effort.

    I'm not an attorney, I'm a tech bro. Use google. I searched for "US legislation international prescriptions" and the top two links are the ones I spent a minute reading and posting here for you. When "jUsT aSkInG qUeStIoNs" is a classic refrain from trolls, and when the questions you're posing take less than 5 minutes to look up for yourself.... Yeah you're gonna take some flak. Be better.

    I'm conditioned to see that sort of shit as a trolling effort, because when you're a brand new low post and rep poster coming in and framing a discussion completely incorrectly and counterfactually, nine times out of ten you're a sock puppet troll.

    • Like 1
  14. 26 minutes ago, GenXer said:

    I’ve taken a lot of vitriol in this thread. Js1 immediately labeled me a troll and has clung to that. Penelope gave my OP a “fuck you” then retracted it. Someone else called me a concern troll as well. All this for pointing out how the bill that passed doesn’t help many less-fortunate people.

    I called you a concern troll, because your post read exactly like a concern troll post of someone who's either completely not been paying attention - or someone who's trolling in bad faith. You're right the bill doesn't help many less-fortunate people - those provisions got stripped from the bill BY THE REPUBLICANS. And you led with blaming the democrats for that? Yeah. Kind of off kilter.

    26 minutes ago, GenXer said:

    Even though I recently joined surly, I’ve lurked for a long time and have a lot of respect for many posters. I’m a ledge guy. The reaction I’ve gotten for my critique of the bill leads me to believe us progressives also lack empathy as the examples of vulnerable people I’ve described have been disregarded in favor of a touchdown dance for the bill.

    You got heat because you had an uninformed and weak-ass take on the bill. Folks aren't 100% thrilled and happy with the bill, but they're glad something got passed to do make some progress. Your position is apparently that the dems only have so many shots to take, so since this wasn't perfect, they shouldn't have wasted the shot and sat on their hands passing nothing? Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

    But it's not the dems limiting legislation. They're trying to get fucking something, anything, passed. You're goddamn right that we shouldn't be resting on our laurels - and the democrats aren't! There's narrow legislation to address insulin prices RIGHT NOW - are you going to blame the senate dems for only having 36 sponsors for the bill and blame them for not getting any GQP support? 

    It's not that we lack empathy, it's that you're being a pollyanna to think that the republicans would even want such legislation to advance.

    edit: like literally everything you're saying you want is in this bill. Blame the republicans for roadblocking it, not the dems for being forced to take a piecemeal approach.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  15. 9 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

    The idea that we are overpopulated is nonsense. Now do you think the above advances are worth 1 degree Celsius of temperature rise over the last 100 years or whatever? I guess that’s up to the individual. 

    It's been more than 1 degree C over the last 100 years, we're closing in on 2.5 degrees. Which is generally agreed upon to cause a significant loss of biodiversity. 

    https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/whats-difference-between-15c-2c-global-warming-2021-11-07/

    It's not up to the individual. They aren't contributing the majority of the temp increase. It's the private, for profit entities that are making money hand over fist ignoring the negative externalities of their industry. The costs are socialized, and the profits are privatized. Just as free market Jesus teaches us

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Create New...