Why Hillary will obliterate Drumpf.

LL, in case you lost track of the posts, putting 40 million people on Medicaid was COF's idea not mine. Secondly, you still confuse private insurance sold on the government exchanges with Medicaid. The two are totally different, in your mind you continue to think they are same. The ACA is in year 3 now. LL the private insurance that BCBS and Aetna sell on government exchanges is REAL health insurance. Wake up LL you can't be that SLOW. Originally Posted by flghtr65

So Fluffy, you MORAN, tell us how costs are going down and quality is going up under the ACA.

who is this COF you speak of?


Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Whacko, COF = COG. Before you call someone else gay, go get a P411 ok and then come back and talk to us. AMP experience does not count. LOL.

So Fluffy, you MORAN, tell us how costs are going down and quality is going up under the ACA. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

So Fluffy, you want to debate policy now, instead of being a smartass?

Underwriting and risk is not that difficult to understand (maybe for you). First of all there will only be 20 to 25 million people on the government exchanges. Right now there is about 12 million. The premium price of the policy's sold on the government exchange will stabilize when the RISK POOLS stabilize. More high risk people than low risk people have purchased the private plans sold on government the exchanges.

Right now every policy must have the 10 minimum benefits. To get more low risk people to sign up, they should consider what the CEO of Aetna suggest. For low risk people they need to have a policy that has fewer minimum benefits that they can purchase like 5 or 6 which would be cheaper.

The ACA is not going to replace or compete with group insurance that you get if you work for a large company. The goal of the ACA was to get more people insured and it is doing that. No insurance company can take on all negative risk and keep the price of the insurance cheap.

This is all mere deflection on your part. You still haven't answered my two questions:

1. Are you seriously suggesting those 22 SAP emails found on the hildebeest's private server were erroneously marked UNCLASSIFIED?

2. Let's assume a US Secretary of State receives an email containing satellite photos of a North Korean nuclear weapons site.... do you think a prudent, competent, and security-minded Secretary of State just might be expected to recognize this as extremely sensitive regardless of its classification label?
Originally Posted by lustylad

LAD, there is no deflection. I told you in another post to go to post 376 of the Dead Candidate thread and clink on the links. You didn't do that. One more time.

Classified information was copied from the Classified server to a non classified server by Hillary's staffers. On the non classified server they traded emails amongst themselves and ultimately sent classified data that was labeled unclassified to Hillary's server.

Here is the link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/08/us...mail.html?_r=0

From the FBI Investigation link embedded in the link above.

WASHINGTON — F.B.I. agents investigating Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email server are seeking to determine who at the State Department passed highly classified information from secure networks to Mrs. Clinton’s personal account, according to law enforcement and diplomatic officials and others briefed on the investigation.
To track how the information flowed, agents will try to gain access to the email accounts of many State Department officials who worked there while Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, the officials said. State Department employees apparently circulated the emails on unclassified systems in 2009 and 2011, and some were ultimately forwarded to Mrs. Clinton.
They were not marked as classified, the State Department has said, and it is unclear whether its employees knew the origin of the information.

So Fluffy, you want to debate policy now, instead of being a smartass?

Underwriting and risk is not that difficult to understand (maybe for you). First of all there will only be 20 to 25 million people on the government exchanges. Right now there is about 12 million. The premium price of the policy's sold on the government exchange will stabilize when the RISK POOLS stabilize. More high risk people than low risk people have purchased the private plans sold on government the exchanges.

Right now every policy must have the 10 minimum benefits. To get more low risk people to sign up, they should consider what the CEO of Aetna suggest. For low risk people they need to have a policy that has fewer minimum benefits that they can purchase like 5 or 6 which would be cheaper.

The ACA is not going to replace or compete with group insurance that you get if you work for a large company. The goal of the ACA was to get more people insured and it is doing that. No insurance company can take on all negative risk and keep the price of the insurance cheap. Originally Posted by flghtr65

How much will their premiums go up, and how much will their coverage decrease?

LAD, there is no deflection. I told you in another post to go to post 376 of the Dead Candidate thread and clink on the links. You didn't do that. One more time.... Originally Posted by flghtr65

WOW! Yet another deflection - while claiming there is no deflection!

Listen, idiot - that NYT story is 8 months old. You can't use it to duck and dodge all of the facts that have become public knowledge since then. You've sidestepped and avoided every point I have made.

Here are my questions for the 3rd time.... can you answer them directly? If not, just say so and stop playing games. If you don't know what SAP means, google it! Stop hiding your head in the fucking sand like an ostrich!

You still haven't answered my two questions:

1. Are you seriously suggesting those 22 SAP emails found on the hildebeest's private server were erroneously marked UNCLASSIFIED?

2. Let's assume a US Secretary of State receives an email containing satellite photos of a North Korean nuclear weapons site.... do you think a prudent, competent, and security-minded Secretary of State just might be expected to recognize this as extremely sensitive regardless of its classification label? Originally Posted by lustylad

Whacko, COF = COG. Before you call someone else gay, go get a P411 ok and then come back and talk to us. AMP experience does not count. LOL. Originally Posted by flghtr65

no. COF = COG. NOT. that's just your bullshit way of trying to obfuscate.



i have a p411 account. do you? and what you got against asians, you racist POS?

my amp experiences have been mostly awesome! your experiences with rosy palm and her daughters on the other hand, have been .... sticky. ahaha

i have a p411 account. do you? and what you got against asians, you racist POS?

my amp experiences have been mostly awesome! Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

I wrote "P411 OK", only independents can give those out. I don't have anything against Asian independents like Samantha Thom.

I have "white list referrals" on TER (The Erotic Review) which is the equivalent of a "P411 OK". TER is more popular for large cities other than Dallas.

fuckers...

I wrote "P411 OK", only independents can give those out. I don't have anything against Asian independents like Samantha Thom.

I have "white list referrals" on TER (The Erotic Review) which is the equivalent of a "P411 OK". TER is more popular for large cities other than Dallas. Originally Posted by flghtr65

i've seen her. have you? ahaha i've seen your fantasy asian, you are a loser

you think only asian indy's are the ones to see?

have you seen Hana? have you seen Ashli? have you seen Yoko?

i've seen every asian fantasy girl before you even knew they existed.

my cock has been parked in every one of their pussies before you ever got there.


ahahaha

Id sure like to read your reviews, WWE.

Y'homo!

fuckers...

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

http://www.sheknows.com/living/artic...-trump-cartoon