Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#25465 Sep 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
And here those silly scientists thought it was that little old asteroid that hit off the Yucatan Peninsula.
Those silly scientists, just can't be trusted to know much about anything...

https://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bur...
A new study says the asteroid that struck Earth 65 million years ago and wiped out the dinosaurs was particularly deadly to North America because it hit the Yucatan peninsula from the southeast at a 20- to 30-degree angle, spreading the devastating impact of its energy northwest.

The oblique angle of the asteroid's contact with Earth coupled its impact energy with that of the atmosphere and planetary surface to send waves of ground-hugging, vaporous fireballs onward, the study says. This resulted in an extinction intensity most severe downrange of the impact in North America.

...The researchers suggest that the relatively low angle of the Yucatan impact propelled a ballistic fireball downrange into North America. The fireball carried a two-mile-deep layer of vaporized rock and other material sheared off the Yucatan. The killing zone of matter cascaded through the atmosphere at near orbital speed, across North America and eventually around the globe.

"It was like a nuclear explosion taken north on a jet-powered sleigh ride," Schultz said. "This was indeed the day the Earth shook."

As evidence, the researchers show that the horseshoe-shaped Yucatan crater matches the structure of craters on the moon and Venus that were created when objects struck those heavenly bodies at oblique angles.

...The researchers said that biological evidence appears to support their oblique-impact hypothesis. North America, the first region to experience the fireball, had the most severe extinctions of plants.

After the devastation, ferns dominated the flora of central North America. Ferns accounted for 70 to 100 percent of the spore- or pollen-producing plants in the region after the impact, compared with only 10 to 40 percent before it. At the base of the food chain, plants are considered sensitive indicators of environmental devastation. Because ferns reproduce through the use of hardy spores, the plants are regarded as key flora in colonizing the site of a natural disaster.

Plants in parts of the world not downrange from the impact took a lesser hit from the corridor of incineration. For example, several ancient evergreen trees found in North America before the impact, but not after, still grow in parts of Australia and South America. Modern relatives of these trees, often called "primitive conifers," include the Norfolk Island pine, Chilean monkey puzzle and Wollemi pine.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#25466 Sep 25, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Those silly scientists, just can't be trusted to know much about anything...
https://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bur...
A new study says the asteroid that struck Earth 65 million years ago and wiped out the dinosaurs was particularly deadly to North America because it hit the Yucatan peninsula from the southeast at a 20- to 30-degree angle, spreading the devastating impact of its energy northwest.
....
Does the word "sarcasm" mean anything to you? My response was to the following post by "Now":

'Leading scientists deal in flatulence.
"Did dinosaurs cause climate change? Huge creatures may have contributed to their own demise because they produced so much flatulence, say scientists" '
Now

Toccoa, GA

#25467 Sep 25, 2013

"The alarm over asteroids has even reached the tabloids. "The end of the world?" bellowed the cover of the Weekly World News (see "A Message from God" in the bibliography). "Shell-shocked NASA scientists are scrambling to come to grips with a top-secret radio transmission received from the icy vastness of deep space that appears to be a communication from God Himself." An asteroid detected earlier this year -- its threat since discounted by legit astronomers -- appears destined to impact in January, 2022, the World gushed, with the predictable catastrophic consequences. We don't know about that -- and we'd hate to impeach the veracity of our colleagues in the fiber-media, but.... ""


http://whyfiles.org/106asteroid/index.html
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#25468 Sep 25, 2013
Now wrote:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
If these prices are correct, a lot of poor people will not be able to pay for Obamacare.
A person needs the money up front to get the insurance before getting a credit a year and a half later....
"Prices Set for New Health-Care Exchanges"
Comparisons between now and next year under the ACA law.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270...
Oooops, that chart isn't even comparing similar things...

Notes: Premiums available on the health-insurance exchanges are for the lowest-priced bronze-level plan in 2014. Current lowest rates are for a nonsmoker, for coverage to begin Oct. 1, 2013, and may cover more limited benefits.
Now

Toccoa, GA

#25469 Sep 25, 2013

Before we get to the details, let's jump back in time with our "'we're-paranoid-for-a-re ason"" collision chronology:


http://whyfiles.org/106asteroid/2.html
Now

Toccoa, GA

#25470 Sep 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Does the word "sarcasm" mean anything to you? My response was to the following post by "Now":
'Leading scientists deal in flatulence.
"Did dinosaurs cause climate change? Huge creatures may have contributed to their own demise because they produced so much flatulence, say scientists" '

And a good response it was....

A sarcastic does not recognize sarcasm.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#25471 Sep 25, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
For some reason you feel that everyone must agree with your outrage of the moment, frankly none of this surprises me since Congress writes the laws they have always written themselves favored positions.
My opposition has been with certain characterizations in your comments, not that I support or oppose the actions of Congress, frankly I just accept that it's the way things are and that frankly the cost to the taxpayer hasn't changed, it's simply been shifted from one insurance outlet to another.
If you find all of this sooooo outrageous, then don't ever vote for an incumbent.
Aggie23 stated:
...post25369
What you are either missing or ignoring is that the Obamacare supporters in Congress claimed that they and their staffers would -for a change - be subject to the same laws they are imposing upon the American public. Therefore, their participation in the Federal Healthcare Program would end and they would all go on the exchanges - just like every American who does not have employer offered healthcare.
..........
This whole thing originated with Chuck Grassley and his attempt to box the Democrats into a corner, it came back to bite him in the butt. The Dems accepted his amendment which was included in the ACA, so you are right that ACA supporters support this exception (proposed by a Republican, just the idea of a mandate and exchanges) to the original purpose of the Exchanges.
I was simply pointing out that the whole thing started with Chuck Grassly trying to score some political points, which he failed to do.
....
Aggie23 stated:
...post25369
But that isn't good enough for Congress and their staffers - they will receive the subsidies in the exemption passed REGARDLESS of their income. That could mean they will receive these subsidies IN ADDITION TO the federal govt subsidies open to everyone...
..........
No, this is not true, and when I pointed this out you changed your tune (see above)...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...
...The Obama administration's compromise is to permit the federal government to contribute toward employee insurance on the exchanges, but to render those employees ineligible for any tax credits or subsidies.
Pretty good try at rewriting history, but not factual.

Your post #25347, page 1212 contained this information from the link you provided:
"The answer, the administration decided last week, is no. Lawmakers and their staffs could keep their employer contributions, and apply that money towards the cost of whatever insurance they buy in the exchanges. It's actually true to Grassley's ostensible purpose, which was making sure members of lawmakers and their advisers have a stake in the success of the exchanges."

The argument all along has been that Congress and their staffers are getting a benefit no one else gets - that is undeniable. They get to keep their very nice subsidy regardless of their income. No other American gets a subsidy if their income is over a government set maximum - EXCEPT Congress and their staffers.

The only one changing her tune is you - from denying that they were getting preferential treatment to now saying "so what, that's what Congress does" in essence.

Please note that in my statement you quoted I said "that COULD mean" they receive the normal subsidy as well, I couldn't find anything definitive, glad you cleared that up. But it doesn't change the facts stated above that they are getting preferential treatment through a non-income based subsidy no other
American gets.

I couldn't care less if you "share my outrage" or not. Just don't deny the truth.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#25472 Sep 25, 2013
Now wrote:
Before we get to the details, let's jump back in time with our "'we're-paranoid-for-a-re ason"" collision chronology:
http://whyfiles.org/106asteroid/2.html
I read "World's in Collision" back in my teens, it has all been discredited since I think, but I thought it was fascinating.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#25473 Sep 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
Pretty good try at rewriting history, but not factual.
Your post #25347, page 1212 contained this information from the link you provided:
"The answer, the administration decided last week, is no. Lawmakers and their staffs could keep their employer contributions, and apply that money towards the cost of whatever insurance they buy in the exchanges. It's actually true to Grassley's ostensible purpose, which was making sure members of lawmakers and their advisers have a stake in the success of the exchanges."
The argument all along has been that Congress and their staffers are getting a benefit no one else gets - that is undeniable. They get to keep their very nice subsidy regardless of their income. No other American gets a subsidy if their income is over a government set maximum - EXCEPT Congress and their staffers.
The only one changing her tune is you - from denying that they were getting preferential treatment to now saying "so what, that's what Congress does" in essence.
Please note that in my statement you quoted I said "that COULD mean" they receive the normal subsidy as well, I couldn't find anything definitive, glad you cleared that up. But it doesn't change the facts stated above that they are getting preferential treatment through a non-income based subsidy no other
American gets.
I couldn't care less if you "share my outrage" or not. Just don't deny the truth.
You see what you want in my responses.

Congress had a good deal before ACA, and they've got a good deal now. You want to call it preferential, fine, so what, it was so before. Grassley wanted them in the exchange, the ACA put them there, and the President figured out how to re-establish the employer subsidy, much to the relief of the Congress Critters.

You see this as an outrage, I say so what.
Now

Toccoa, GA

#25474 Sep 25, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
You see what you want in my responses.
Congress had a good deal before ACA, and they've got a good deal now. You want to call it preferential, fine, so what, it was so before. Grassley wanted them in the exchange, the ACA put them there, and the President figured out how to re-establish the employer subsidy, much to the relief of the Congress Critters.
You see this as an outrage, I say so what.

"So what"
You get your panties in a wad, get debunked by Aggie, and now throw a 2 year old tandrum.

So what?
Get your facts straight and you might win one once in a while. well maybe, maybe not,

And all this time I thought IO was the only one who threw temper fits with his Waaaaaaa.




Now

Toccoa, GA

#25475 Sep 25, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Oooops, that chart isn't even comparing similar things...
Notes: Premiums available on the health-insurance exchanges are for the lowest-priced bronze-level plan in 2014. Current lowest rates are for a nonsmoker, for coverage to begin Oct. 1, 2013, and may cover more limited benefits.

Your attempt to nitpick the comparisons in coverage has nothing to do with what I posted....another introduction to the strawman argument, which again fails....
What I posted was about the higher costs of obamacare over prior rates, and the inability of the poor to make those payments over a 1 1/2 year period before getting their credit.

BTW, the Bronze plan only covers 60% of health coverage. A puny amount compared to the cost.
But hey those free loading staffers and congress get their 75% subsidies.


Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#25476 Sep 25, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
You see what you want in my responses.
Congress had a good deal before ACA, and they've got a good deal now. You want to call it preferential, fine, so what, it was so before. Grassley wanted them in the exchange, the ACA put them there, and the President figured out how to re-establish the employer subsidy, much to the relief of the Congress Critters.
You see this as an outrage, I say so what.
I would say that's great except that it makes one wonder why you reacted so strongly to Synergy's post about the exemption in the first place. In your words:

"What it tells me is that Right Wing Wackos believe ever (sic) unsubstantiated rumor that comes down the pipe, read it and weep...."

So I'm not "seeing what I want" - I'm going with what you posted. So no "unsubstantiated rumor" on the part of the Right, just the facts.
Informed Opinion

United States

#25477 Sep 25, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>Oooops, that chart isn't even comparing similar things...

Notes: Premiums available on the health-insurance exchanges are for the lowest-priced bronze-level plan in 2014. Current lowest rates are for a nonsmoker, for coverage to begin Oct. 1, 2013, and may cover more limited benefits.
Stop bothering us with details and facts.

We're Right Wingers and we simply don't pay our own way.

We don't pay for our wars, we don't pay for our government benefits, and we don't pay for our healthcare.

Never have, never will.

Leave those facts to the fancy pants scientists and economist - we don't care, cause we don't pay - ever.

Hope that helps.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#25478 Sep 25, 2013
Now wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
"So what"
You get your panties in a wad, get debunked by Aggie, and now throw a 2 year old tandrum.
So what?
Get your facts straight and you might win one once in a while. well maybe, maybe not,
And all this time I thought IO was the only one who threw temper fits with his Waaaaaaa.
How Now Brown Cow is soooo funny, always declaring who gets their butt kicked while her credibility swirled down the toilet long ago. But up she pops, floating to the surface like some flushed turd escaping the treatment plant.

You Right Wing Whackos are outraged by this or that everyday since January 2009, yeah I say, so what.
Now

Toccoa, GA

#25479 Sep 25, 2013
Will this be the future of healthcare in America?

Going back to the basics makes a lot of sense, and the cost will be cheaper........

If this takes hold, all one would need is hospital insurance.


http://reason.com/archives/2013/03/13/the-oba...
Now

Toccoa, GA

#25480 Sep 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say that's great except that it makes one wonder why you reacted so strongly to Synergy's post about the exemption in the first place. In your words:
"What it tells me is that Right Wing Wackos believe ever (sic) unsubstantiated rumor that comes down the pipe, read it and weep...."
So I'm not "seeing what I want" - I'm going with what you posted. So no "unsubstantiated rumor" on the part of the Right, just the facts.

You keep tying him/her in knots and we're gonna have to call him/her Knothead.

Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#25481 Sep 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
I would say that's great except that it makes one wonder why you reacted so strongly to Synergy's post about the exemption in the first place. In your words:
"What it tells me is that Right Wing Wackos believe ever (sic) unsubstantiated rumor that comes down the pipe, read it and weep...."
So I'm not "seeing what I want" - I'm going with what you posted. So no "unsubstantiated rumor" on the part of the Right, just the facts.
..........
Synergy wrote:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
How about answering the following question. What does it tell you about Obamacare knowing that Congress demanded that they and their staffs be exempted?
In Synergy's post the claim is made "that Congress demanded that they and their staffs be exempted", when in fact they were not.

Now you claim that pointing out the difference between a subsidy and an exemption is a strong reaction on my part, when in fact you're just making another pathetic attempt to bolster your sense of outrage.

The Right has chosen to describe this as an exemption because it sounds worse than describing it as a subsidy, a subsidy that existed before ACA and a subsidy that was restored after ACA. The Right needs their Outrage de Jour and this subsidy fulfills their hunger.
just sayin

Homer, GA

#25482 Sep 25, 2013
Now wrote:
Some things need a little overkill to get across.......
Keep up the good work. The green cabal is lying to create the largest wealth transfer yet.
just sayin

Homer, GA

#25483 Sep 25, 2013
Now wrote:
If these prices are correct, a lot of poor people will not be able to pay for Obamacare.
A person needs the money up front to get the insurance before getting a credit a year and a half later....
"Prices Set for New Health-Care Exchanges"
Comparisons between now and next year under the ACA law.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270...
obamacare was designed to fail to justify the universal health care (single payer) system the authors of this law were really working toward.
Won't that be great? Everything will be free, obama will have saved us all, brought about world peace and cured male pattern baldness.
just sayin

Homer, GA

#25484 Sep 25, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop bothering us with details and facts.
We're Right Wingers and we simply don't pay our own way.
We don't pay for our wars, we don't pay for our government benefits, and we don't pay for our healthcare.
Never have, never will.
Leave those facts to the fancy pants scientists and economist - we don't care, cause we don't pay - ever.
Hope that helps.
And io said to himself, "self" or he just posts to himself. What a joke.
I'm so glad we live in America where you can freely make a complete ass of yourself.
Keep posting, the sane people will get to see the real soul of a progressive, full of pride, hate, envy and without any moral compass whatsoever.

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.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Rupert Blackman has AIDs Dec 17 me2youlol 3
Looking for info on Felisha Ponsell Dec 17 me2youlol 4
Georgia hospital losing $2 million a year in mi... Dec 17 northernboy62 1
Miles Crews Dec 2 just wondering 1
Teacher at MCA Dec 2 just wondering 1
Camden County arrests 14 registered sex offende... Nov 27 LonePalm Sux 8
Trial for (JR) Byron Nail (Aug '09) Nov 25 lynn 35
Brunswick Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Brunswick People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Brunswick News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Brunswick

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:39 pm PST

NBC Sports 1:39PM
Young Jaguars piecing together key building blocks - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 6:53 AM
Julio Jones' availability hinges on pre-game workout, again
Bleacher Report 9:00 AM
Start 'Em, Sit 'Em Week 16: Debating Difficult Fantasy Football Lineup Decisions
Bleacher Report 9:45 AM
Complete Preview for Falcons vs. Saints
Bleacher Report10:16 AM
Complete Preview for Saints vs. Falcons