Um, so is the Senator.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Printable View
Um, so is the Senator.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Yes. Rich white people really have it tough in America.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Them tax bracket blues! Can only afford one trip to Europe this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen
I never argued they did I merely argued the dems would like fewer of them in this country b/c they "tend" to vote for the GOP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen
Biebs is a Canadian citizen. Don't they are worried about him voting for the GOP. He did enter the country legally which obviously has the Democrats confused as you are not supposed to call illegal aliens, "illegals" because that would mean they were breaking a law or something. So entering the country legally is not even definable by Democratic language as it is beyond their comprehension.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Well yeah but you gotta deport the rich white Canadians now before the GOP tries to counter "comprehensive democrat voter reform" with the white rich Canadians voting rights actQuote:
Originally Posted by bdoughty
His plane needs to just crash and then the world will be saved from that shit plague.
Speaking of his plane:Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
Justin Bieber and his father were “extremely abusive” to a flight attendant as their private jet flew from Canada to New Jersey on Friday, forcing her to take refuge in the cockpit, according to an official report obtained exclusively by NBC News.
According to multiple law enforcement sources, the leased, luxurious Gulfstream IV on which the 19-year-old Canadian pop star, his father and an entourage of 10 friends traveled was so full of marijuana smoke that the pilots were forced to wear oxygen masks.
“The captain of the flight stated that he warned the passengers, including Bieber, on several occasions to stop smoking marijuana,” says the official report of the incident. “The captain also stated he needed to request that the passengers stop their harassing behavior toward the flight attendant and after several warnings asked the flight attendant to stay with him near the cockpit to avoid any further abuse.”
According to multiple sources, the attendant was forced to spend much of the flight near the pilots as the plane travelled from Canada to Teterboro, N.J.
“The flight attendant stated the passengers, including Bieber and his father, Jeremy Bieber,” stated the report, “were extremely abusive verbally and she would not work another flight with them.”
Where is Suge Knight to hold this twerp over a balcony when we need him?
He's up for re-election, so cue the BS. He has as much desire to deport Biebs as he does to go back home and join the private sector with a real job.Quote:
Originally Posted by bdoughty
I would absolutely love to see that f'n douche serve hard time.
If they are smoking weed on the plane, why not just have them arrested for possession when you land in NJ?
No. He is Democrat. He genuinely wants rich, white, 19 year old Canadians out of this country because they tend to vote for the GOP.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdj
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
:D Thanks, writing that down :D
IIRC, they did search the plane (with dogs) but didn't find anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdj
This is why I hate child musicians, performers, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdj
They have all this fame as little kids, make a bunch of money (not sure if they don't get access until 18 or if it just depends on each individual situation), they get all these groupies following them and going on and on online about them (the groupies are almost as bad, having read stories about some Bieber fans saying they'll murder someone because that someone said something negative about Bieber), and then by the time they turn 18, they've turned into entitled shits who think they can do anything they want to with no consequences. Case in point, your story about the plane ride to New Jersey.
That flight attendant should have sued him for verbal and emotional harassment, and I would have stood up and applauded her and hoped she took him for millions.
Restaurant adds 3% surcharge to every customer's bill for Obamacare. :nod:
http://eater.com/archives/2014/02/18...-surcharge.php
It should be obvious that only the wealthy "eat out" and should pay their share ;). The real questions.....when will all restaurants and businesses go to this and will they do it by choice or be forced? Shouldn't the fat and obese pay more since they burden the "collective" health system more? This is coming very soon and if so... what about known homosexuals or drug users, their behaviors increase health costs right? While we are at it all the sun bunnies at the beach, tanning salons and let us throw in bathing suit manufacturers and buyers because skin cancer costs us all more. Seems so much easier when people have freedom and its accompanying responsibility. Currently responsibility for many is being forced on the few.......this will not end well....Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Ok, so total :fp: on me for even asking, but...
Y'all don't think it's tacky that the owner is telling people to tip 3% less to offset the charge?
The impression I get from the article is that the owner cares much less about his employees and much more about protesting the healthcare law.
That's all it is. He just wants to get his 5 minutes of fame and protest the healthcare law, so what better way than making a big stink of it and hurt his employees in the process, and then conveniently blame it all on Obamacare.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen
Not sure when stating FACTS became "tacky" but if stating basic simple truths (customers can tip whatever they want or not tip at all) so be it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen
I suppose Liberals get upset when their Socialists Utopia "free" healthcare keeps getting dispelled by the fact that nothing in life is free. Going to be worse when/if Obama EVER kicks in the employer mandate. However, I suspect he will keep passing the buck until there is a new POTUS in 2017.
I don't believe Obamacare is meant to make healthcare "free." I believe it's purpose is to make sure people have access to healthcare (getting rid of pre-existing conditions) and make it so insurance companies can't say, "Nah, we ain't paying for that" when you need your insurance company to come through in your time of need.
I'm not in favor of government run healthcare but I'm also not in favor of the insurance companies running it either like it was before. Insurance companies only gave a damn about their bottom line and allowed plenty of people to go bankrupt or even die leaving people hanging.
Thankfully for me, no change was necessary.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
I think the point is more that someone has to pay for your healthcare and insurance.....and it is not going to be him and I don't blame him.......dickish way to go about it, maybe but perhaps if our government instructors taught basic economics we would not be in this mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen
Do you think the auto insurance industry should be forced to eliminate pre-existing conditions?Quote:
Originally Posted by souljahbill
What does that even mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
Drunk Person "X" has a car accident w/o any auto insurance coverage injuring people (A B C). A, B and C sue X. Under Obamacare's logic X has a "right" to force an insurance company to immediately defend them in the lawsuit and pay for the damages X has caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by souljahbill
Its far right wing logic, don't try to understand it just say okay.Quote:
Originally Posted by souljahbill
You were correct in your first assumption about the rationale behind the law if you guys have ever sold insurance you would know the BS insurance companies were doing to people; guys like CLW take everything to the extreme politically, when as 99% of things in life the truth falls somewhere in the middle.
Are we really comparing someone who drove drunk and killed people to someone who was born with a condition or someone who is in cancer remission and can't get coverage from anyone because of their pre-existing condition?Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
NOOOOO!!!!! they are sucking into an argument !!!! Don't help the post count! :0Quote:
Originally Posted by souljahbill
LOL! I won't say anymore. I posted before I saw your other post. I'm done.Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
No, I was discussing insurance, what it means as a business etc. I think you and oweb are discussing an entitlement and obligating some to pay for the responsibilities of others. Carry on and do elaborate on how I should take care of strangers just because I can.....also explain how those being taken care of will continue (in the future) to have the liberty to make choices contrary to what those (the ones paying the bill) think is good for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by souljahbill
Bs? Do you go to work for fun? Helping others? Why should insurers? :fp:Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
I am going to say one thing on the matter, I agree 100% with what Soulja said about why the government got into it in the first place but I also don't think the government should be in the insurance business. The entire industry needed an overhaul not another provider.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
Case in point isn't that the point of paying insurance to get help when you need it? So yes helping others is kinda there thing, that's why they get paid.
The reason medical services and insurance (which is not about "help" btw) cost so much for those of us actually paying is that so many receive its benefits for FREE. Insurance is about protecting against a possible future issue or loss. If something is pre-existing then you are not insuring against anything. No this is just more "entitlement" etc.........the responsible in society carrying more of the burden........it will collapse one way or another.......Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
OkayQuote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk
Glad you came to your senses :DQuote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
Lol well playedQuote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk
I think you and I are on the same page with this specific story. I would rather see this guy go the traditional route - raising prices to customers - rather than encouraging those customers to pay less for the service of his staff. I think it would be just as effective to protest by adding a note on receipts that say 'you paid $x.xx more today so we could comply with Obamacare', the same way grocery stories and gas stations show savings earned with loyalty programs.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
The point is, who pays? This guy is having his costs of labor go up artificially by the government and it is for his employees. In essence he is telling his customers that his cost and their cost has gone up due to government mandate.....the so called benefit goes to the employees....well let them pay for their stuff and that is his point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen
Out there on the far left apparently the Government CAN prohibit you from wearing a U.S. Flag T-Shirt b/c apparently we live in Mexico now. Who knew?
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...7/11-17858.pdf