Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

Full story: Newsday 70,102
Safety pins and screws are still lodged in 15-year-old Ami Ortiz's body three months after he opened a booby-trapped gift basket sent to his family. Full Story

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#60507 Oct 15, 2013
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking from experience, I have never seen a major website rollout that wasn't riddled with bugs. This happens with corporations too, not just governments.
Short-term (1-2 weeks), expect "quick fixes" to get the site functioning at a minimally accepted standard. This may involve minor tweaks to the software, or, more likely, throwing more hardware at the problem to mask the performance and scalability issues.
mid-term (4 - 8 weeks), expect a redress of the architectural issues with both the hardware and software.
Whats gets me is that the red states HAD the opportunity to develop their own. They passed. As a result they shouldnt have the right to critique.

Volunteerist has no right to gripe. Our CT site works fine.

I do agree with the pundits it was a stupid idea to set up login accounts first. You dont have to do that with our CT site, and it takes about 10 seconds to get a quote.

I certainly can understand why Obama chose not to acknowledge the flaws beforehand, in light of the political theatre. If these were normal times, he could of simply delayed roll out.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60508 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true, you have failed to prove that.
Objection assumes facts not in evidence.
Exactly what facts are not in evidence?

Are you denying that your or my ancestors were paid for their services, and that this money came from tax revenues? Don't know about you, but my ancestors weren't slaves.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#60509 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Urban dictionary lol wow you are old.
And being homophobic and bigoted towards Arabs doesnt show your age?

Joel can be excused for missing the reference. Its American and probably before his time.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60510 Oct 15, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you call those flat areas on the bridge where you drive over?
Dont be a maroon.
You're asking too much of him.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60511 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha that proves nothing, try again.
Moron,

it proves that tax revenues from gas excise taxes aren't enough to cover the expenses of road and bridge maintenance, hence, additional federal funds are needed - funds that you don't contribute too. Moocher!
Voluntarist

United States

#60512 Oct 15, 2013
growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside
the government, have figured out a principal reason
why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored
insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces
you to create an account and enter detailed personal
information before you can start shopping. This, in
turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the
government verifies your information and decides
whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS
bureaucrats knew this would make the website run
more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting
people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s
insurance plans would scare people away.
HHS didn’t want users to see Obamacare’s true
costs
“Healthcare.gov was initially going to include an
option to browse before registering,” report
Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky in the Wall Street Journal .“But that tool was delayed,
people familiar with the situation said.” Why was it delayed?“An HHS spokeswoman said the
agency wanted to ensure that users were aware of their eligibility for subsidies that could help pay
for coverage, before they started seeing the prices of policies .”(Emphasis added.)
As you know if you’ve been following this space, Obamacare’s
bevy of mandates, regulations, taxes, and fees drives up the cost of
the insurance plans that are offered under the law’s public
exchanges. A Manhattan Institute analysis I helped conduct found
that, on average, the cheapest plan offered in a given state, under
Obamacare, will be 99 percent more expensive for men, and 62
percent more expensive for women, than the cheapest plan offered
under the old system. And those disparities are even wider for
healthy people.
That raises an obvious question. If 50 million people are
uninsured today, mainly because insurance is too expensive, why
is it better to make coverage even costlier?
Political objectives trumped operational objectives
The answer is that Obamacare wasn’t designed to help healthy
people with average incomes get health insurance. It was designed
to force those people to pay more for coverage, in order to
subsidize insurance for people with incomes near the poverty line,
and those with chronic or costly medical conditions.
But the laws’ supporters and enforcers don’t want you to know
that, because it would violate the President’s incessantly repeated
promise that nothing would change for the people that Obamacare
doesn’t directly help. If you shop for Obamacare-based coverage
without knowing if you qualify for subsidies, you might be
discouraged by the law’s steep costs.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/201...
Voluntarist

United States

#60513 Oct 15, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
And being homophobic and bigoted towards Arabs doesnt show your age?
Joel can be excused for missing the reference. Its American and probably before his time.
I don't have any negative attitudes or feelings towards queens like you or arabs.

Just pointing out the obvious, don't get your panties bunched up.
Voluntarist

United States

#60514 Oct 15, 2013
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly what facts are not in evidence?
Are you denying that your or my ancestors were paid for their services, and that this money came from tax revenues? Don't know about you, but my ancestors weren't slaves.
That isnt the point, the point is that the federal government wasn't responsible for the building of the local roads.

They are responsible though for making sure a transgender like you is able to go into the girls room because you think that you are a girl just because you dress like one and take it in the tookus.

Now you are mooching on your employees time.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60515 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside
the government, have figured out a principal reason
why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored
insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces
you to create an account and enter detailed personal
information before you can start shopping. This, in
turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the
government verifies your information and decides
whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS
bureaucrats knew this would make the website run
more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting
people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s
insurance plans would scare people away.
HHS didn’t want users to see Obamacare’s true
costs
“Healthcare.gov was initially going to include an
option to browse before registering,” report
Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky in the Wall Street Journal .“But that tool was delayed,
people familiar with the situation said.” Why was it delayed?“An HHS spokeswoman said the
agency wanted to ensure that users were aware of their eligibility for subsidies that could help pay
for coverage, before they started seeing the prices of policies .”(Emphasis added.)
As you know if you’ve been following this space, Obamacare’s
bevy of mandates, regulations, taxes, and fees drives up the cost of
the insurance plans that are offered under the law’s public
exchanges. A Manhattan Institute analysis I helped conduct found
that, on average, the cheapest plan offered in a given state, under
Obamacare, will be 99 percent more expensive for men, and 62
percent more expensive for women, than the cheapest plan offered
under the old system. And those disparities are even wider for
healthy people.
That raises an obvious question. If 50 million people are
uninsured today, mainly because insurance is too expensive, why
is it better to make coverage even costlier?
Political objectives trumped operational objectives
The answer is that Obamacare wasn’t designed to help healthy
people with average incomes get health insurance. It was designed
to force those people to pay more for coverage, in order to
subsidize insurance for people with incomes near the poverty line,
and those with chronic or costly medical conditions.
But the laws’ supporters and enforcers don’t want you to know
that, because it would violate the President’s incessantly repeated
promise that nothing would change for the people that Obamacare
doesn’t directly help. If you shop for Obamacare-based coverage
without knowing if you qualify for subsidies, you might be
discouraged by the law’s steep costs.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/201...
An opinion "puff" piece by a writer with a known disdain for the ACA.*yawn*

The comments are very entertaining, though.

Dave Ryan 1 day ago
Endless hyperbole without one specific example. No wonder people lose trust. I am a 55 year old male in Arizona paying $406 in AFTERTAX $ for my individual plan through a broker. Can you cite examples where people similar to me are signing up for ACA coverage costs for comparable plans that are greater than what they pay currently?

Dave Noland 22 hours ago
So I guess the young people who are getting sick, then going to the emergency room, passing those costs on to me, are physically responsible? Quit crying and trying to pretend that we don’t know this is political.

Michael 22 hours ago
Oh Avik, calm down. Aren’t you getting tired from all your “outrage” over ACA. It’s the law. Deal with it.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#60516 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside
the government, have figured out a principal reason
why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored
insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces
you to create an account and enter detailed personal
information before you can start shopping. This, in
turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the
government verifies your information and decides
whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS
bureaucrats knew this would make the website run
more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting
people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s
insurance plans would scare people away.
HHS didn’t want users to see Obamacare’s true
costs
“Healthcare.gov was initially going to include an
option to browse before registering,” report
Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky in the Wall Street Journal .“But that tool was delayed,
people familiar with the situation said.” Why was it delayed?“An HHS spokeswoman said the
agency wanted to ensure that users were aware of their eligibility for subsidies that could help pay
for coverage, before they started seeing the prices of policies .”(Emphasis added.)
As you know if you’ve been following this space, Obamacare’s
bevy of mandates, regulations, taxes, and fees drives up the cost of
the insurance plans that are offered under the law’s public
exchanges. A Manhattan Institute analysis I helped conduct found
that, on average, the cheapest plan offered in a given state, under
Obamacare, will be 99 percent more expensive for men, and 62
percent more expensive for women, than the cheapest plan offered
under the old system. And those disparities are even wider for
healthy people.
That raises an obvious question. If 50 million people are
uninsured today, mainly because insurance is too expensive, why
is it better to make coverage even costlier?
Political objectives trumped operational objectives
The answer is that Obamacare wasn’t designed to help healthy
people with average incomes get health insurance. It was designed
to force those people to pay more for coverage, in order to
subsidize insurance for people with incomes near the poverty line,
and those with chronic or costly medical conditions.
But the laws’ supporters and enforcers don’t want you to know
that, because it would violate the President’s incessantly repeated
promise that nothing would change for the people that Obamacare
doesn’t directly help. If you shop for Obamacare-based coverage
without knowing if you qualify for subsidies, you might be
discouraged by the law’s steep costs.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/201...
At the end this doesnt even matter

The question is whether one NEEDS insurance or not. If they need it, they will go for a quote. If they feel they dont need it, they will pay the lesser fine.

Its not that complicated. You make it more complicated than it really is.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60517 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
That isnt the point, the point is that the federal government wasn't responsible for the building of the local roads.
They are responsible though for making sure a transgender like you is able to go into the girls room because you think that you are a girl just because you dress like one and take it in the tookus.
Now you are mooching on your employees time.
So you only drive on local, non-federally funded roads?

Fact is, if you drive on federally funded roads (there are more than you may realize), then you are a hypocrite and a moocher. Tell me, how does it feel to be in the moocher class?

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#60518 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have any negative attitudes or feelings towards queens like you or arabs.
Just pointing out the obvious, don't get your panties bunched up.
Digging your hole deeper and deeper

(I am not a racist - I merely HATE black people)

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60520 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
That isnt the point, the point is that the federal government wasn't responsible for the building of the local roads.
They are responsible though for making sure a transgender like you is able to go into the girls room because you think that you are a girl just because you dress like one and take it in the tookus.
Now you are mooching on your employees time.
City of Stamford
Projects Funded by the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

http://www.stamfordct.gov/sites/stamfordct/fi...

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#60521 Oct 15, 2013
Hugh,

Where're you?

Please come online.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60522 Oct 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
That isnt the point, the point is that the federal government wasn't responsible for the building of the local roads.
They are responsible though for making sure a transgender like you is able to go into the girls room because you think that you are a girl just because you dress like one and take it in the tookus.
Now you are mooching on your employees time.
Stamford Downtown Development

Downtown development[edit]
By the mid-1950s downtown Stamford had fallen prey to severe urban blight. A once vibrant downtown became littered with vacant storefronts, empty lots, weak economy, unsafe and unsanitary housing. The town leaders at the time sought FEDERAL and STATE funding to launch a revitalization effort that would restore the core of the city to a vital urban center. On January 27, 1960 the City of Stamford and its redevelopment arm, the Urban Redevelopment Commission, entered into a contract with the Stamford New Urban Corporation, a subsidiary of the locally based and nationally active construction contractor the F. D. Rich Company that would lead to a dramatic altering of the face of downtown Stamford. The Rich Company, led by Frank D. Rich Jr., Robert N. Rich and Chief Legal Counsel Lawrence Gochberg, actively building in 25 of the 50 United States at the time, was selected out of a field of 10 developers vying for the opportunity to become the city's sole redeveloper of the 130-acre (0.53 km2) section of the central downtown area known as the Southeast Quadrant. More than $100 million in Federal, State and city funds were invested in a massive property acquisition, relocation, demolition and infrastructure creation program that paved the way for one of the most sweeping urban renewal efforts ever successfully carried out in the United States.[citation needed] The plan, which involved eminent domain takings, the relocation of 1,100 families and 400 businesses, was implemented amidst much controversy and several lawsuits that delayed the start of the project until 1968 when construction commenced on the three round apartment towers, St. John's Towers. These buildings still contain 360 apartments and originally served as relocation housing for some of the displaced residents. Much of the deteriorated downtown was razed to make way for the new downtown, resulting in a lack of historic buildings and a downtown that looks more contemporary and modern as compared to some its New England counterparts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Stamf...
Voluntarist

United States

#60523 Oct 15, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
<quoted text>
What is the difference between FACTS and EVIDENCE?
Give examples.
Evidence is something submitted in a court of law usually by a competent first hand fact witness, otherwise hearsay is not admissible unless it falls under some kind of exception, like a business record.
Judicial notice can be used to point to common known facts, like the federal governments track record on wasteful spending.
The most famous case on judicial notice being by Abraham Lincoln.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#60524 Oct 15, 2013
HARTFORD -- Gov. Dannel P. Malloy on Friday announced a $1 billion initiative to repave and improve 250 miles of state roads and fix more than 40 bridges.

The upgrades include reconstructing Exits 5 and 6 on Interstate 84 and Route 37 in Danbury and resurfacing the Merritt Parkway in Stratford and Milford.

Already-promised funding for Stamford's new transportation center will be allocated, as well.

The State Bond Commission on Friday approved $537 million for transportation-related projects across the state, leveraging $600 million in FEDERAL funding.

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/1-billion...
Voluntarist

United States

#60525 Oct 15, 2013
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
So you only drive on local, non-federally funded roads?
Fact is, if you drive on federally funded roads (there are more than you may realize), then you are a hypocrite and a moocher. Tell me, how does it feel to be in the moocher class?
Fact I pay federal gas tax.
Voluntarist

United States

#60526 Oct 15, 2013
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Moron,
it proves that tax revenues from gas excise taxes aren't enough to cover the expenses of road and bridge maintenance, hence, additional federal funds are needed - funds that you don't contribute too. Moocher!
You didn't prove that, you pointed to a 2006 wiki page which proves nothing.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#60528 Oct 15, 2013
Cult of Reason wrote:
HARTFORD -- Gov. Dannel P. Malloy on Friday announced a $1 billion initiative to repave and improve 250 miles of state roads and fix more than 40 bridges.
The upgrades include reconstructing Exits 5 and 6 on Interstate 84 and Route 37 in Danbury and resurfacing the Merritt Parkway in Stratford and Milford.
Already-promised funding for Stamford's new transportation center will be allocated, as well.
The State Bond Commission on Friday approved $537 million for transportation-related projects across the state, leveraging $600 million in FEDERAL funding.
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/1-billion...
On my side of town, in the city itself, they have, or are in the process of, replacing 3 bridges and realligned 2 roadways. Each project had federal money - I know because I saw the bid specs for vendor support for several of them.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 min wojar 179,428
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 27 min Hamburg 50,642
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr NTRPRNR1 1,127,005
very cute unuasual pix 1 hr ALL GOOD 1
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr Mandela 68,666
omnipods boxes for sale 2 hr thanxlord 1
Amy 10-24 2 hr Mister Tonka 12
Abby 10-24 10 hr edogxxx 23
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

Chicago Jobs

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]