Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2014/09/05 19:22:23
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
Under Kansas law, you can’t just withdraw after the primary. The statute says you need to give a reason, be it death, illness, or a self-professed inability to fulfill the duties of the office.
He's not dead...
He's not sick...
He haven't stated yet WHY he's unable to "fulfill the duties of the office"...
He’s dropping out because it's expected that he's going to split the Democratic vote with the independent candidate... that's all.
None of which is "embarrassing" though.
2014/09/05 19:29:54
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
Under Kansas law, you can’t just withdraw after the primary. The statute says you need to give a reason, be it death, illness, or a self-professed inability to fulfill the duties of the office.
He's not dead...
He's not sick...
He haven't stated yet WHY he's unable to "fulfill the duties of the office"...
He’s dropping out because it's expected that he's going to split the Democratic vote with the independent candidate... that's all.
None of which is "embarrassing" though.
eh... disagree.
It says, "we can't win here, but we're going to try damned hard that you don't either!".
Not sure why everyone thinks Roberts is vulnerable... then, KS folks will pull the (R) lever.
Automatically Appended Next Post: EDIT:
heh...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/05 20:56:16
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/10 03:03:54
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
That site makes it sound like it'll cost women more, and the companies aren't even pushing for it. Just a bunch of blokes in Washington. I fail to see how that is a 'ZOMG they be Dems! Caught them!'. To me it seems more 'that seems like an awful idea by the republicans, if the Washington Examiner can't even make it sound good.
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
2014/09/09 04:33:28
Subject: Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
motyak wrote: That site makes it sound like it'll cost women more, and the companies aren't even pushing for it. Just a bunch of blokes in Washington. I fail to see how that is a 'ZOMG they be Dems! Caught them!'. To me it seems more 'that seems like an awful idea by the republicans, if the Washington Examiner can't even make it sound good.
PP claims it is a neutral advocacy organization focused on advancing the needs of women and safeguarding their interests.
They're opposed to this idea only because some Republicans have come out in favor of them and that the public (not the state) would have to pay for it.
Shoot... I remember even as far back during the Clinton era that the Democrats advocated this.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/09 04:50:28
Subject: Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
motyak wrote: That site makes it sound like it'll cost women more, and the companies aren't even pushing for it. Just a bunch of blokes in Washington. I fail to see how that is a 'ZOMG they be Dems! Caught them!'. To me it seems more 'that seems like an awful idea by the republicans, if the Washington Examiner can't even make it sound good.
PP claims it is a neutral advocacy organization focused on advancing the needs of women and safeguarding their interests.
They're opposed to this idea only because some Republicans have come out in favor of them and that the public (not the state) would have to pay for it.
Shoot... I remember even as far back during the Clinton era that the Democrats advocated this.
So if democrats have advocated it for ages, why on earth do they sound like a democratic group for going against it? To someone not caught up in the politics over there it seems like they want the state to pay for it, not individual women. That's it. No ulterior motives, hidden party agendas, etc.
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
2014/09/09 04:57:58
Subject: Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
motyak wrote: That site makes it sound like it'll cost women more, and the companies aren't even pushing for it. Just a bunch of blokes in Washington. I fail to see how that is a 'ZOMG they be Dems! Caught them!'. To me it seems more 'that seems like an awful idea by the republicans, if the Washington Examiner can't even make it sound good.
PP claims it is a neutral advocacy organization focused on advancing the needs of women and safeguarding their interests.
They're opposed to this idea only because some Republicans have come out in favor of them and that the public (not the state) would have to pay for it.
Shoot... I remember even as far back during the Clinton era that the Democrats advocated this.
So if democrats have advocated it for ages, why on earth do they sound like a democratic group for going against it? To someone not caught up in the politics over there it seems like they want the state to pay for it, not individual women. That's it. No ulterior motives, hidden party agendas, etc.
Nope.
They definitely have Republican-itis.
They're definitely allergic to them...
Of course that want the state to pay for it. They like that gravvy train.
It is perfectly fine to have a debate over whether the taxpayer should be forced to subsidize birth control.
Make that proposal clear, debate the pluses and minuses, and let the public offer their opinion on the matter at the polls.(fyi, it's included in the public exechange by virtue of Executive fiat. It's not legislated...)
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/09 06:21:57
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
What's interesting to me is that it still isn't a slamdunk for the Republicans. I mean, these are the 2006 senate seats up for grabs here, and we all know the sentiment then was so strongly against the Republicans that lots of conservative states ended up with Democratic senators. If you add in the economic situation and the president's approval rating, then we should be expecting lots of Republican gains. And yet that isn't the case, 538 is predicting Republicans will win enough to retake the senate, but it isn't a certainty, and it isn't predicting a massive win either.
So what exactly is going on? Are the polls misleading (predicting too high a Democratic turnout perhaps?) Or is there some other reason Republicans just aren't gaining traction, some underlying issue with the GOP that might cause them to underachieve in 2014?
*side-note: I'm in favor of making most of them OTC... in the clinical/medication world, BC has a stronger health-safety record than other OTC meds.
I think you're missing what making it over the counter means - it means that while you don't need a prescription, you also don't get insurance coverage for it anymore. That a group who is concerned with making contraception more affordable would oppose a bill that will make contraception more expensive really shouldn't be too hard to figure out.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 06:28:03
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2014/09/09 14:30:09
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
What's interesting to me is that it still isn't a slamdunk for the Republicans. I mean, these are the 2006 senate seats up for grabs here, and we all know the sentiment then was so strongly against the Republicans that lots of conservative states ended up with Democratic senators. If you add in the economic situation and the president's approval rating, then we should be expecting lots of Republican gains. And yet that isn't the case, 538 is predicting Republicans will win enough to retake the senate, but it isn't a certainty, and it isn't predicting a massive win either.
Eh... 538 is also being conservative with their assessments because polling data across the board is still pretty gakky... and it's waaaaaaaay too early.
So what exactly is going on? Are the polls misleading (predicting too high a Democratic turnout perhaps?) Or is there some other reason Republicans just aren't gaining traction, some underlying issue with the GOP that might cause them to underachieve in 2014?
Who knows really... depends which squirrel has the attention of the low-information voters.
Honestly, Republicans just need to regain 51 seats to "win". They don't need a landslide to make a point. I'd be just happy when Senator Reid because Minority Leader.
*side-note: I'm in favor of making most of them OTC... in the clinical/medication world, BC has a stronger health-safety record than other OTC meds.
I think you're missing what making it over the counter means - it means that while you don't need a prescription, you also don't get insurance coverage for it anymore. That a group who is concerned with making contraception more affordable would oppose a bill that will make contraception more expensive really shouldn't be too hard to figure out.
Nah... most BC pills cost about the same as a large bottle of Excedrine or Tylenol.
And most insurances cover OTC stuff as well... so really, the fact that it's OTC doesn't necessarily spell the end of insurance coverages.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/09 16:03:31
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
*side-note: I'm in favor of making most of them OTC... in the clinical/medication world, BC has a stronger health-safety record than other OTC meds.
So the NRA is an activist arm for the republican party?
These days... yeah as Democrats has no interest in protecting 2nd Amendment.
BTW, what insurance do you have? AFAIK my health insurance does not cover otc.
Cigna... and, it depends on what's your need for your health regimen. For instance, if you have gluten-allergy, my insurance will cover a portion of the food/meds.
My CPAP machine is OTC and Cigna covers that.
You need to dissassociate the idea that just because it's OTC, insurance won't cover it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Heh...
Who knew? (just watch it):
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 17:38:23
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/09 18:09:33
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
Democrats: We must do something about money in politics! Here... let's submit a Constitutional Amendment to appease our base! Republicans: Okay... let's debate this. This is good as we'll phrase this as an attack against the 1st amendment. Democrats: WHY ARE WE DEBATING THIS IF YOU KNOW IT DOESN'T HAVE A CHANCE IN HELL IN PASSING!?!?!?! YOU'RE WASTING VALUABLE SENATE FLOOR TIMES! Republicans: ...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 20:54:27
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/09 20:57:20
Subject: Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
d-usa wrote: Just looked at Cruz's op-ed on how to win against ISIL. Did he have a "crap I have to say to survive the 2016 primary" list when we wrote that thing?
The highest priority in fighting ISIL? Border security! Automatic citizenship removal! Etc etc.
Yeah... not a fan of that op-ed.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/11 14:59:24
Subject: Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
Nah... most BC pills cost about the same as a large bottle of Excedrine or Tylenol.
First, I doubt you're going through a 200 count bottle of painkillers every month. Hell, I regularly use Ibuprofen therapy to control swelling in my knees, and a 200 count bottle will last me 2-3 months.
Second, that's entirely wrong. Many forms of birth control cost significantly more than ~15 USD per month, in fact the mean national cost is ~35 USD per month; with certain areas and pharmacies having mean costs that are much higher. And before you say "Buy the cheapest one!" birth control doesn't work that way, certain form of BC invariably work better for some women than they do for others.
And most insurances cover OTC stuff as well... so really, the fact that it's OTC doesn't necessarily spell the end of insurance coverages.
No, no they don't. In fact I've never heard of an insurance policy covering any form of OTC drug purchase.
Its also worth noting that simply because a particular medication can legally be sold over the counter does not mean the manufacturer will actually allow it to be sold that way*, meaning that certain forms of birth control may still require a prescription even if one is not legally required. This is a large part of why Planned Parenthood is calling the GOP push for OTC birth control a publicity stunt.
*Since insurance companies generally don't cover OTC drug purchases, selling what is a rather expensive product OTC will necessarily cut into sales; not to mention the obvious liability concerns.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2014/09/13 22:18:57
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
Nah... most BC pills cost about the same as a large bottle of Excedrine or Tylenol.
First, I doubt you're going through a 200 count bottle of painkillers every month. Hell, I regularly use Ibuprofen therapy to control swelling in my knees, and a 200 count bottle will last me 2-3 months.
Depends on the disease/symptoms for the regimen. One bottle of excedrin for migrane can go faster than 1 bottle/month. And they're over $20 per.
My hearing aid batteries (medical cost) is over $50 / month.
Second, that's entirely wrong. Many forms of birth control cost significantly more than ~15 USD per month, in fact the mean national cost is ~35 USD per month; with certain areas and pharmacies having mean costs that are much higher. And before you say "Buy the cheapest one!" birth control doesn't work that way, certain form of BC invariably work better for some women than they do for others.
And most insurances cover OTC stuff as well... so really, the fact that it's OTC doesn't necessarily spell the end of insurance coverages.
No, no they don't. In fact I've never heard of an insurance policy covering any form of OTC drug purchase.
Its also worth noting that simply because a particular medication can legally be sold over the counter does not mean the manufacturer will actually allow it to be sold that way*, meaning that certain forms of birth control may still require a prescription even if one is not legally required. This is a large part of why Planned Parenthood is calling the GOP push for OTC birth control a publicity stunt.
*Since insurance companies generally don't cover OTC drug purchases, selling what is a rather expensive product OTC will necessarily cut into sales; not to mention the obvious liability concerns.
Insurance DOES cover OTC drugs / supplies. The difference is that you much have medical reason to "claim" coverage which would by necessity need to come from your doctor (via prescription).
At most BC pills should be permitted OTC, perhaps after the first visit to make sure the patient is a candidate and gets proper instructions in how to use it. After that, OTC. After that first time, except in the rarest of cases, nothing is discussed in those subsequent years that is going to change whether the patient can have the pill. Unfortunately, this is just a means to hold the method hostage to get a woman to come in for primary gyn care.
This is about helping people in difficult financial times, not finding ways to make women spend more for something they can already get for (potentially) nine bucks a month.
Both the Democrats & Republicans have advocated this for years... but, because it's tangently related to the subject of abortion and womens health... it's unfortunately highly political and populist narratives takes over.
Hence PP's knee-jerk reaction is explained & laughable.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/13 22:22:27
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/13 22:39:31
Subject: Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
At the moment I have one person saying "They don't cover over the counter" and one saying "They totally do" and have no idea which of you to believe. It's incredibly frustrating.
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
2014/09/13 22:53:37
Subject: Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
motyak wrote: At the moment I have one person saying "They don't cover over the counter" and one saying "They totally do" and have no idea which of you to believe. It's incredibly frustrating.
By general rule, things OTC are cheaper and in a vacuum, insurance won't cover it because "you want them to".
If you have an ailment, that your doc is treating you... insurance can cover those things used for your regimen. The insurance company would ask for documentation (doc's prescription) to justify covering drugs/supplies/consultations.
For instance... my fiancée has Celiac disease (Gluten Allergy).
She keeps her receipt when she buys "gluten free" grocery products and her insurance reimburse her a percentage (plus, she can claim medical-tax exemption too!).
Those food ain't behind the Pharmacy counter.
**EDIT: Let me add though... that it's a pain to directly deal with the insurance company to do this... which, is why it's not used often.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/13 22:55:09
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/09/13 22:58:36
Subject: Re:Midterms are coming... Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war.
Depends on the disease/symptoms for the regimen. One bottle of excedrin for migrane can go faster than 1 bottle/month. And they're over $20 per.
Very true. But, in the same vein, many birth control pills cost a great deal more than 15 USD per month, and the sort of birth control pill a woman takes is contingent upon how it affects their body.
Additionally, if you're burning through a 200 count bottle of Excedrine Migraine in a month, you need to see a doctor; badly. Rounding down, that would require you to take 6 pills a day.
Nope, one of the more common BC can be had for as low as $9 /month.
Possibility is not the same thing as probability, which is what I was discussing by using the term "mean". Please take the time to learn the difference.
You do realize that birth control pills, even those sold under the same brand, vary greatly with respect to dosage and content, right (even when marketed as a generic)? And that this is a major factor in how much those pills cost?
Insurance DOES cover OTC drugs / supplies. The difference is that you much have medical reason to "claim" coverage which would by necessity need to come from your doctor (via prescription).
Meaning those purchases are, effectively, not over the counter. Or, if we're being generous, they exist in a state of limbo between OTC and prescription.
Both the Democrats & Republicans have advocated this for years... but, because it's tangently related to the subject of abortion and womens health... it's unfortunately highly political and populist narratives takes over.
The GOP push to brand themselves as a party interested in women's health is a very recent thing, and far from universal. I'm sure you remember Todd Akin.
