Jump to content

Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)


Simon

Recommended Posts

Kari Lake Still Expects God To Make Her Arizona Governor

 

From the editorial--

 

"I am not an expert in the ways of the Almighty, but it seems likely that her prayers already have been answered. Just not with the reply she’d hoped to receive."

 

Reminds me of the M*A*S*H episode where a pilot claiming to be Jesus was asked by Dr. Sidney Freedman, "Does God answer all prayers?"

 

The man replies, "Yes.  Sometimes he answers no."

 

Please take the hint, Ms. Lake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...  Last week, Trump told everybody he'd be arrested Tuesday.  I waited all day, and dang it, it didn't happen.  In retrospect, I should have realized that would be the case.  After all, he lies like most people breathe.  Still, I was hopeful this would be the one time he told the truth.  Ah, well, I guess I can still hope...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BoloOfEarth said:

So...  Last week, Trump told everybody he'd be arrested Tuesday.  I waited all day, and dang it, it didn't happen.  In retrospect, I should have realized that would be the case.  After all, he lies like most people breathe.  Still, I was hopeful this would be the one time he told the truth.  Ah, well, I guess I can still hope...

 

NYT story suggests, he *wants* to do the perp walk.

 

Quote

Behind closed doors at Mar-a-Lago, the former president has told friends and associates that he welcomes the idea of being paraded by the authorities before a throng of reporters and news cameras. He has even mused openly about whether he should smile for the assembled media, and he has pondered how the public would react and is said to have described the potential spectacle as a fun experience.

 

They also point out, tho...that's very unlikely.  He still has Secret Service protection, and I can't offhand think of a notably worse security scenario.  Plus, the DA *darn* sure doesn't want to hand Trump that kind of platform on a silver platter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, wcw43921 said:

Kari Lake Still Expects God To Make Her Arizona Governor

 

From the editorial--

 

"I am not an expert in the ways of the Almighty, but it seems likely that her prayers already have been answered. Just not with the reply she’d hoped to receive."

 

Reminds me of the M*A*S*H episode where a pilot claiming to be Jesus was asked by Dr. Sidney Freedman, "Does God answer all prayers?"

 

The man replies, "Yes.  Sometimes he answers no."

 

Please take the hint, Ms. Lake.

 

Throughout history, the most reprehensible people have justified and excused themselves by daring to claim that God is on their side. I follow no religion, but people like this sometimes make me hope Hell is real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Throughout history, the most reprehensible people have justified and excused themselves by daring to claim that God is on their side. I follow no religion, but people like this sometimes make me hope Hell is real.

 

The combination of egotism and fanaticism is often toxic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, wcw43921 said:

Does the Florida bill Actually propose to ban breast augmentation?  Seems that way to me, and I can't see the medical lobby going for that.

 

I'm pretty sure the medical lobby is against all of this.  Sucks to be them.

 

I reckon the breast augmentation restriction is there for the sake of cruelty to transitioning people.  But one hallmark of GOP culture-war legislation is that it tends to be extremely poorly written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Old Man said:

 

I'm pretty sure the medical lobby is against all of this.  Sucks to be them.

 

I reckon the breast augmentation restriction is there for the sake of cruelty to transitioning people.  But one hallmark of GOP culture-war legislation is that it tends to be extremely poorly written.

 

Because typically it's written to absolutely prevent the target, and secondary consequences are irrelevant.  Let's also note that these are the same people who refuse to allow abortion in cases of rape or incest, and are challenging even the life/health of the mother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

Because typically it's written to absolutely prevent the target, and secondary consequences are irrelevant.  Let's also note that these are the same people who refuse to allow abortion in cases of rape or incest, and are challenging even the life/health of the mother.

and going after abortion pill access across the US.

 

This is going to have knock on consequences probably worse than the alcohol ban 😕

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm terrified of this being exported to Ohio.  I take various meds with hormones to treat chronic adult acne.  And I've already raged about how I can't find a doctor who'll tie my tubes or grant me a hysterectomy because eventhough I'm 48, I'm still "too young!"  And I'm cis/straight-passing and married to a guy.  Imagine how harder it'll be for others...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cygnia said:

I'm terrified of this being exported to Ohio.  I take various meds with hormones to treat chronic adult acne.  And I've already raged about how I can't find a doctor who'll tie my tubes or grant me a hysterectomy because eventhough I'm 48, I'm still "too young!"  And I'm cis/straight-passing and married to a guy.  Imagine how harder it'll be for others...

 

A friend in AZ can't get the treatments they need for chronic pain because insurance won't cover it.  These aren't trans meds, just things for their long and painful medical history that doctors refused to analyze and insurance refuses even now to cover.  because that requires analysis using expensive methods not covered by insurance.

 

The system already mistreats women by refusing coverage for all sorts of conditions and just expects them to suffer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrickstaPriest said:

 

A friend in AZ can't get the treatments they need for chronic pain because insurance won't cover it.  These aren't trans meds, just things for their long and painful medical history that doctors refused to analyze and insurance refuses even now to cover.  because that requires analysis using expensive methods not covered by insurance.

 

The system already mistreats women by refusing coverage for all sorts of conditions and just expects them to suffer.

 

I'll object only in this sense:  the system mistreats everyone they can't make money from.  It isn't limited to women.

 

Diabetes is one of the most prevalent medical issues, affecting almost 30 million people in the US.  Yet, for years, the insurance companies wouldn't cover the cost of blood glucose test strips for those diagnosed as pre-diabetic.  (The distinction is made based, basically, on your blood sugar levels.)  Test strips weren't cheap;  the nice ones I used listed for about $2 per strip, before insurance or a manufacturer rebate.  Prediabetic should probably test a couple times a day (before breakfast, after dinner), 2-3 times a week.  And more, if their numbers are erratic.  That's $10-12 a week, in a good case.  Hey, that's not cheap for many.  (More recently, there are high-quality strips that are MUCH less.)  For Type 1 diabetics...their bodies can't produce insulin...the cost of that insulin *skyrocketed* to truly obscene levels.  In this case, the blame is shared...big pharm charged an arm and a leg, but the big pharmacy benefit managers (read:  health insurance) who play both sides and pocket the money.  The insulin analogs sell for about *30* times their cost to produce. 

 

Secondhand, another problem I heard about was for epinephrine...the emergency treatment to counter an allergic reaction.  The stuff is also pretty cheap to produce...but the EpiPens were jacked up to about $600 for 2 injectors.  These are single-use, disposable shots...but they have a relatively short shelf life...18 months.  From:
https://www.rn.com/featured-stories/the-soaring-price-of-epipen/

 

Quote

One solution to the problem of rising prices would be to produce generic alternatives. Unfortunately, production of generic EpiPen is complicated by the difficulty in replicating the administration technique of the correct dose via the auto-injector system. Mylan has agreed to produce a generic form of the auto-injector, at a projected list price of about $300 for a kit of two pens. 

 

Again...the epinephrine itself isn't a problem.  And while redeveloping the tech for the auto-injector might be tricky...it's a done deal.  It can't be costing a ton to make them.

 

There are plenty of others.  A fairly common trick of Big Pharma has been to tweak a formulation that's about to have its patent expire...then get a new patent for the 'modified' drug, thus preventing any generic equivalent from entering the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't necessarily about Big Pharma.  The person in question is being denied insurance coverage without adhering to a strict set of conditions that they either had 'close enough' or 'was not reasonable' to perform.  In one requirement they literally need to have uninsured exploratory surgery to confirm a condition that can only be confirmed via exploratory surgery.  It's a costly catch22.  This is a condition that's in 1/10 women, so believe me if they wanted to make exceptions to monetize it they could try to.

 

Sometimes they make the wall to get the treatment is too high to begin with, and they don't care that they don't treat the women that can't afford the cost of a 20k surgery or a 1k a week medicine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Cygnia said:

 

 

Dr Eric Feigl-Ding is deliberately making false claims about the bill in order inflame the public.

 

Here is that section of bill when not edited to deny the reader context:

Quote

45        6.52 Prohibition on gender clinical interventions for

44        minors; physician requirements.—

45           (1) For the purposes of this section, "gender clinical

46           interventions" means procedures or therapies that alter internal

47           or external physical traits.

48               (a) The term includes, but is not limited to:

49 1.           Sex reassignment surgeries or any other surgical

50               procedures that alter primary or secondary sexual

51                characteristics.

52            2. Puberty blocking, hormone, and hormone antagonistic

53             therapies.

 

Notice the main heading of the section, which Dr Feigl-Ding left out, specifies that medical interventions it is prohibiting apply only to minors.

 

Personally, I feel that puberty blockers should be available trans kids, and believe that this bill is wrong headed.  However, I still can't support deliberate lying about the bill to further inflame the public.

 

People, please, stop getting your news from twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dr.Device said:

He isn't lying.

 

The health insurance provisions are not limited to minors. They refer to the definitions in the prohibitions for care of minor sections as to what constitute "gender clinical interventions," but say nothing about being limited to health insurance coverage for minors.

 

Thank you for the clarification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dr.Device said:

He isn't lying.

 

The health insurance provisions are not limited to minors. They refer to the definitions in the prohibitions for care of minor sections as to what constitute "gender clinical interventions," but say nothing about being limited to health insurance coverage for minors.

 

The bill text:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://m.flsenate.gov/session/bill/2023/1421/amendment/695881/pdf

lines 151-2

Quote

 627.6411  Coverage of certain treatment.—A health insurance policy may not provide coverage for gender clinical interventions as defined in s. 456.52(1).  

 

As noted, there is no restriction on the age of the patient...and basic logic says, if it's illegal to do this to a minor, then insurance cannot cover it.  Ergo, this provision must apply to a non-minor.

There are other aspects that show the intent of the bill slightly further along.  Bold mine.
 

Quote

 (2)  An individual who receives a gender clinical  intervention from a physician may bring a civil action against such practitioner in a court of competent jurisdiction for:

(a)  Declaratory or injunctive relief 

(b)  Economic damages.

(c)  Noneconomic damages.

(d)  Punitive damages.

(e)  Attorney fees and costs.

(3)  In an action brought under this section, the limitations on punitive damages in s. 768.73, or any other provision of law that seeks to limit punitive damages, do not apply.

 

And further down, the statute of limitations is set, for these, to 30 years, for a living patient, or 5 years after the death, for the civil case.  In most cases in Florida, the limit is 20 years.

 

And scan down to line 162, and read the statements...if the patient has second thoughts, the physician is still liable for any psychological or emotional damage as a consequence.  They can sue for the quoted section above, too.  Basically:  what they're doing is making it impossible for an *adult* to have this done by a Florida physician, because the physician cannot risk doing it.  Any liability insurance he has, will refuse to cover these procedures...because the physician can do his job perfectly, but still get sued to infinity and beyond.  Oh, and this is *after* the physician has to go through some fairly onerous, ongoing consent procedures.  But the patient can still have second thoughts 2 years later, and clean the physician's clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wcw43921 said:

"He Has A Battle Rifle"

 

So--does this refute the assertion that there is "no such thing" as an assault rifle or an assault weapon?

 

The entire "assault rifle" debate is a red herring designed to give 2a types an out by letting them turn the debate into a semantic argument and blow off the opposition because they "don't know what they're talking about".  It's a trap.  Just don't use the term and focus on firearm features like detachable magazines, semiautomatic fire, sound suppression, and folding/telescoping parts that enhance concealability.  Or you could ask them what their solution is for all the dead kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...