FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

If GOP does away with the filibuster, what laws could they pass that Democrats couldn't repeal as soon as they take charge?
Keep the filibuster

---

that is the countervailing argument. But it has flaws as well - chiefly that we accomplish little, then Dems dump it and add 2 states (4 Dem Senate seats) pack the court, etc.....and rule forever.

---

If there is no filibuster the Dems can do all of that the next time they are in power. At that time they could undo (repeal ) all of the good government laws Reps may pass when/if they do away with the filibuster.

---

that is not debatable. The issue is, are they going to do it anyway? There is is a lot of evidence that they will, and not much beyond wishful thinking that they wont. At whatever point one concludes a high percentage chance they are going to do it no matter what, it becomes incumbent on us doing it first. to get our stuff done. Yes, they CAN undo it all, but that will take time and political capital. Why would we do nothing and just let them go first?......let them put all their stuff in place, requiring us to use our political capital to undo it all.

That is the question. Do you think they will do it? If not, upon what do you base that assumption?

---

Based on history, no I don't think they will do away with the filibuster. The filibuster has been around for close to 200 years.

---

The sunk cost aspect does not help your argument, but you might be right. But if you're wrong, the problem becomes existential. Dems will pack the whole system to ensure they never lose another election.

Or, we can stack up a long list of stuff that will take them a couple of years to undo, giving us a chance to stop it the mid-terms.


The weak point in my argument, of course, is that it would require Republicans to actually pass their platform into law.

---

The weak point in your argument is that you are assuming the worst possible election results and the worst post election actions, things that have never happened. Dems had 60 votes in the senate in Obama's first term. They left the filibuster alone.
If Repubs scuttle the filibuster and pass an aggressive agenda it gives the Dems cover for undoing everything in that agenda and then all of the bad stuff you fear.

Leave the filibuster alone. Repubs will need it some day.

---

Assuming Democrats leave it in place next time they own the Senate.
That is not an assumption one should accept lightly.

Dems broke all kinds of "norms" to get Trump over the last 10 years, escalating it to outright illegal activity. How can you be so sure they wouldn't "tweak the rules" to game the system? It's not like they didn't game the system on illegal immigration, leading to gaming the system on apportionment for Congress and the Electoral College. It's not like they haven't gamed the system on prosecutorial discretion. It's not like they didn't game the system with Covid. It's not like they didn't game the system with Obamacare (a couple of times), etc.....

You need to explain how you can safely presume the Dems have any respect for the filibuster at all.

---

Funny, you keep saying that. Yet, when it keeps going to the Courts it is not playing out that way. Don't tell me it is Democrat Judges, Trump has done his share of packing the Judiciary.

Now, it may be that the GOP is just bad at procedure, like Comey. He is going to walk because the GOP f-ed up the case royally. How many Dems have been prosecuted? When Nixon did Watergate, people went to jail. All we here is bluster and nothing ends up sticking even holding all three levers of power and a stacked SCOUS.

Sort of hard for you to have credibility on these issues.

---

Hate to break it to you, but the courts have no jurisdiction over Senate rules like the filibuster.

---

Trying to tie those two together, huh? You keep saying how the Dems broke all sorts of norms, illegal activity, tweaked the rules of the game, gamed the system for prosecutional discretion. You have no credibility on ANY of that because not one case has held up in court. Comey is the latest example of the Dems and I will throw in Deep State not having legs as Trump's team screwed up the case. You keep saying how illegal everything is, yet nothing has held up... Please name one item that has held up in court???

You mix various areas, throw in a bunch of generalized statements and then pick and choose how to respond. Get it...

Now, the filibuster. There is no gaming the filibuster. Either the Senate does away with it or not, it is a Senate rule as you know. Senate has changed procedures numerous times. So, if it is done away with it is like other changes since 1789, but like the others there are unintended consequences. Reid never thought his changes would result in the most Conservative Supreme Court ever, it was an unintended consequence. I say don't do away with it because of the potential to allow for vicious swings in US law and the Senate is supposed to be the place to calm down law and reach compromise, not expeditiously move items like the House. There is nothing illegal in changing the Senate rules.

---

One example today - they're daily. Democrats care only about power not norms.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-urge-military-members-refuse-illegal-orders-viral-video-hegseth-responds

---

Florida lives in a make believe world. He constantly pretends that Repubs are causing the sky to fall while putting his head in the sand regarding who the democrats really are.
Guy is constantly wrong on just about everything. Smart dude, just not savvy.

---

When one blames Republicans for the failure of OBAMACARE ... you know you have lost all sanity.

---

You keep making stuff up. I never said it was the Republicans fault, just asked what do you have to replace it for the 23 million who use it? But as usual, you have nothing.

Nothing but *****ing and complaining about Democrats. Let's face it, you have no idea how the real world works. You have never been responsible for providing any service to people. And, you are not capable of critically thinking about future ramifications.

But, keep telling us how the free market is the answer... The one solution that has absolutely NO CHANCE of going forward and will leave millions without health care. Great job...

---

I think that speaks for itself. Without a hint of self-awareness you literally typed "you have nothing" and also "criticize my proposal." I think you proved my point. That's exactly how one without a hint of self-awareness can blame Republicans for the Democrat failure, Obamacare and otherwise.

---

You really think that is a solution? A sophomoric phrase of "free market"? That is your solution to the extension deadline for 23 million people that is 40 days away???? Really, you seriously think that is in any way, shape or form an actionable path forward?

So, let's put this in perspective. Coming into mid-terms, you are recommending not extending ACA subsidies, raising the premiums of 23 million people. AND when they ask what do we do, here it comes, let the free market figure it out. Truly, insightful. I am surprised Johnson doesn't have you on the phone asking permission to use it. That is the answer... Should we tell them to watch "Capitalism and Freedom"?

You are more out of touch than I thought. Even Trump is talking of extending ACA for 2 years because he knows there is no choice. There is no choice, anyone in any position of responsibility or reality knows they can't let it expire. Mid-terms are going to be tough enough. There is a good chance the GOP is going to lose the House and Trump is going to spend two years fighting impeachments. Follow your path and it is a lock. Living in the real world enough for you? Geez, talk about living is some dream world.

---

Says the guy blaming Republicans for the failure of Obamacare.

---

You are on repeat. Not worth discussing, you are out of ideas and responses. Expected more.

---

That's just the sound of defeat.

You cannot explain why Obamacare requires a $62K / year / person kickback to Big Insurance when the average spending / person / year on health care is $14.5K. It's all emotion and ignoring the numbers. Obamacare is a thing - there is no extending it. It was a terrible, destructive policy when it was passed, and the same people you ignore today were telling you that then.

The reality is that one reason every Democrat policy is a disaster is because at the core Democrat policies are really just kickbacks to constituents with zero interest in improving outcomes. It is all about funneling taxpayer dollars to Democrat special interests. That's why they lost their mind over DOGE more than anything else. That is what Obamacare is - just kickbacks to Big Corporations.

The socialist definitely will oppose a raise and put his and the city council's salary and minimum wage right?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nyc-council-welcomes-new-mayor-bill-dramatically-raise-salaries-city-officials

I mean, there is no way that communists steal all the economic value and tell people to do what they say not what they do rigtht?

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The socialist definitely will oppose a raise and put his and the city council's salary and minimum wage right?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nyc-council-welcomes-new-mayor-bill-dramatically-raise-salaries-city-officials

I mean, there is no way that communists steal all the economic value and tell people to do what they say not what they do rigtht?

---

Throughout the 180 years communism has been around there have and continue to be two constants:

(1) The elite political leaders at the top live like royalty.

(2) The masses at best scrape by with the barest of necessities, and it can be much worse. Standing in long lines for things like shoes and toilet paper is common, and there is no real hope or opportunity to prosper economically.

It's one of the ultimate real life examples of "rules for thee, but not for me".

Socialism and communism are set up so that a select few elite get most of everything and the rest of society is equally miserable in poverty and oppression.

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

So, now you are moving on to tariffs? Lost ACA, huh? Trump going to extend it, you bet. It is the only adult move. You wouldn't know much about that.

GrowlTowel said:

---

Socialism and communism are set up so that a select few elite get most of everything and the rest of society is equally miserable in poverty and oppression.

---

Geez, no one is saying it is the preferred system or disagreeing with the downsides. This Board or Markwayne shouting how bad Socialized Medicine is doesn't do squat if you lose power over it. Health care is BIG enough for the GOP to lose power over. All the other stuff, doesn't get done. No border, no defense, no economy, no AI investments. All over killing people's health insurance.

You guys gotta think about the game you are playing and not the one you want. ACA is something Trump will have to give on to get the rest. It is as simple as that. Someone said my arguments were self-serving, when it comes to health insurance and access to health care, IT IS ALL SELF SERVING. You don't price out 23 million people from the Health system and then win elections in that year. It is as simple as that. Why would you want to risk that?

Politics is about getting things done, otherwise it is just a debate society.

FLBear pretending to win again, I see

No one else in the office so he gets to do a victory lap.

Have fun, kid!

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear pretending to win again, I see

No one else in the office so he gets to do a victory lap.

Have fun, kid!

---

I send you a PM and let you know what winning feels like. It is a time to share.

FLBear5630 said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Socialism and communism are set up so that a select few elite get most of everything and the rest of society is equally miserable in poverty and oppression.

---

Geez, no one is saying it is the preferred system or disagreeing with the downsides. This Board or Markwayne shouting how bad Socialized Medicine is doesn't do squat if you lose power over it. Health care is BIG enough for the GOP to lose power over. All the other stuff, doesn't get done. No border, no defense, no economy, no AI investments. All over killing people's health insurance.

You guys gotta think about the game you are playing and not the one you want. ACA is something Trump will have to give on to get the rest. It is as simple as that. Someone said my arguments were self-serving, when it comes to health insurance and access to health care, IT IS ALL SELF SERVING. You don't price out 23 million people from the Health system and then win elections in that year. It is as simple as that. Why would you want to risk that?

Politics is about getting things done, otherwise it is just a debate society.

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

So, now you are moving on to tariffs? Lost ACA, huh? Trump going to extend it, you bet. It is the only adult move. You wouldn't know much about that.

---

Since I have posted nothing about ObamaCare, you are the one reaching. Disagree? Link to any post I made. Will wait for your apology.

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

So, now you are moving on to tariffs? Lost ACA, huh? Trump going to extend it, you bet. It is the only adult move. You wouldn't know much about that.

---

Since I have posted nothing about ObamaCare, you are the one reaching. Disagree? Link to any post I made. Will wait for your apology.

---

I am sure I will regret this but - Then why are you commenting on tariffs in a thread that was discussing ACA? You don't find that peculiar?

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

TLDR version:
Democrats pass a law without a single GOP amendment or a single GOP vote.
The law fails to do what it promised to do.
It is the GOP's fault for not fixing it before it failed.

whiterock said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

TLDR version:
Democrats pass a law without a single GOP amendment or a single GOP vote.
The law fails to do what it promised to do.
It is the GOP's fault for not fixing it before it failed.

---

Serious question and I ask you because I know I won't get an Alpha Male, juvenile response.

Why are you caught up in fault? I get it, ACA is not the preferred method. I get it is too expensive. So, everyone pretty much agrees on that. This is NOW a pretty bi-partisan item.

Health Care is an item that is not a Blue or Red thing. If your Oncologist is Blue, you don't care as long as they are the best. A liberal Doctor isn't going to not treat a MAGA guy. It is truly a bi-partisan issue we all deal with every day.

The current system in the US is a health care, secondary payer system. We can only change that incrementally. The number I have heard is about 1% at a time, which sounds small but is a massive number.

So, how do we do that without leaving millions of people in the wilderness looking in? We are not doing it by December 31st. No matter how idealistic AND correct the fiscal conservatives are, we are not changing the system by December 31st. Trump has pushed the Dems to the point they are willing to deal on it, all for it.

Now, it is time to cut a deal and build in the first incremental step.

So, why are we just going to keep hashing over how much ACA costs? We are all in agreement, it is too expensive. It covered a lot of people, but at too much cost. Got it. Are we just going to stop there????

Ok, I will piss on the spark plug if it will help, Obamacare was the worst idea ever, it totally ruined the Nation and we should put those people in prison. Now, how do we fix it in real terms, not just throwing out the term "Free Market". You know that is useless and not an actionable plan.

I see the problem leading to the following essential questions:

1. Is a single national plan for universal medical care and insurance the best choice, given the outcomes from ACA?

2. If yes, should government be trusted to run that plan, or should it be run by medical professional groups?

3. If no, and seeing the myriad unethical adventures by insurance corporations they clearly cannot be trusted to run American health care, how should our nation's healthcare resources be organized and funded?


We've all had fun with name-calling and righteous dudgeon. Can we start a real discussion on solutions now?

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

TLDR version:
Democrats pass a law without a single GOP amendment or a single GOP vote.
The law fails to do what it promised to do.
It is the GOP's fault for not fixing it before it failed.

---

Serious question and I ask you because I know I won't get an Alpha Male, juvenile response.

Why are you caught up in fault? I get it, ACA is not the preferred method. I get it is too expensive. So, everyone pretty much agrees on that. This is NOW a pretty bi-partisan item.

Health Care is an item that is not a Blue or Red thing. If your Oncologist is Blue, you don't care as long as they are the best. A liberal Doctor isn't going to not treat a MAGA guy. It is truly a bi-partisan issue we all deal with every day.

The current system in the US is a health care, secondary payer system. We can only change that incrementally. The number I have heard is about 1% at a time, which sounds small but is a massive number.

So, how do we do that without leaving millions of people in the wilderness looking in? We are not doing it by December 31st. No matter how idealistic AND correct the fiscal conservatives are, we are not changing the system by December 31st. Trump has pushed the Dems to the point they are willing to deal on it, all for it.

Now, it is time to cut a deal and build in the first incremental step.

So, why are we just going to keep hashing over how much ACA costs? We are all in agreement, it is too expensive. It covered a lot of people, but at too much cost. Got it. Are we just going to stop there????

Ok, I will piss on the spark plug if it will help, Obamacare was the worst idea ever, it totally ruined the Nation and we should put those people in prison. Now, how do we fix it in real terms, not just throwing out the term "Free Market". You know that is useless and not an actionable plan.

---

Because the Democrats shut down the government for 40 days and cut off benefits for the poor to try and force a $1.5T kickbacks to Big Insurance.

ACA is the Dodd Frank of healthcare. Labeled as consumer friendly legislation, in fact it is nothing more than a money redirect to D donors.

Want to bring costs down?

1) allow insurers to be licensed nationally. States with only two or three insurers is disastrous.
2) kill subsidies.
3) kill copays.
4) use tax rate incentives to shape employer and insurer behavior.
5) dirt stomp medical schools into the ground until they stop artificially limiting class size. the fact that kids can travel to the Caribbean for med school, incur a half million dollars in debt, and be certain it is a sound plan screams how insane the supply and demand tampering has become. If it (artificially limiting supply) happened in any other setting people would be in jail.
6) absolute disclosure of every billing line item. absolute disclosure of every line item for coverage payment.
Daylight cures many ills.
7) no obligation to provide any medical care to illegals. Any. For any reason.
8) mandatory work in prisons to offset healthcare and related costs.
9) mandatory health insurance coverage to receive a USA visa.
10) one time supplemental tax on insurers to fund nursing education. Take all of those Whatever Studies majors and get them a real education for real work. Require all universities to offer the education at set rates to be allowed to participate in any federal funding for next decade.
11) student loan forgiveness and tax rate reduction for doctors and nurses to work in understaffed areas.
12) mandatory health clinic system. People visiting physician offices and hospitals is insanely inefficient. Online appointment blocking. Online information exchange. Conveyor belt approach to service.
13) mandatory medical scanning system/locations. Like minor care, a conveyor belt approach would save huge $.
14) end pharmaceutical advertisements.
15) government funded swift dispute resolution. Insane level of fines for bad faith denials. End nonsensical patient advocacy.
16) high risk insurance pools. When it is far far far far cheaper to buy one employee a stand alone policy than include them in your office coverage, something is amiss.
17) insurers required to publicly disclose every aspect of their finances. Every single part.

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

TLDR version:
Democrats pass a law without a single GOP amendment or a single GOP vote.
The law fails to do what it promised to do.
It is the GOP's fault for not fixing it before it failed.

---

Serious question and I ask you because I know I won't get an Alpha Male, juvenile response.

Why are you caught up in fault?
Does accountability matter or not?
I get it, ACA is not the preferred method. I get it is too expensive. So, everyone pretty much agrees on that. This is NOW a pretty bi-partisan item.
The ACA is anything but bi-partisan. I was passed without a single GOP amendment, or a single GOP vote in either house of Congress.

Health Care is an item that is not a Blue or Red thing. If your Oncologist is Blue, you don't care as long as they are the best. A liberal Doctor isn't going to not treat a MAGA guy. It is truly a bi-partisan issue we all deal with every day.
Fallacious construction. Health care may be "bi-partisan" in the sense that it affacts us all, but the problems and the solutions are manifestly not bi-partisan. Indeed the problem we have today is a bad Democrat policy solution failing (predictably).

The current system in the US is a health care, secondary payer system. We can only change that incrementally. The number I have heard is about 1% at a time, which sounds small but is a massive number.
ACA was not intended to fix anything. It was intended to facilitate the transition to single payer.

So, how do we do that without leaving millions of people in the wilderness looking in? We are not doing it by December 31st. No matter how idealistic AND correct the fiscal conservatives are, we are not changing the system by December 31st. Trump has pushed the Dems to the point they are willing to deal on it, all for it.
Democrats could have proposed something OTHER than funding of failure.
Democrats could have proposed something other than shutting down government to force funding of failure.

Now, it is time to cut a deal and build in the first incremental step.
Some kind of deal will happen, in time. Holidays are not a good time to do such.

So, why are we just going to keep hashing over how much ACA costs? We are all in agreement, it is too expensive. It covered a lot of people, but at too much cost. Got it. Are we just going to stop there????

Ok, I will piss on the spark plug if it will help, Obamacare was the worst idea ever, it totally ruined the Nation and we should put those people in prison. Now, how do we fix it in real terms, not just throwing out the term "Free Market". You know that is useless and not an actionable plan.
It's the only viable plan.

---

I don't think there is a solution without a national pool structure. Overriding lesson of ACA is that a state-by-state program cannot work.

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

TLDR version:
Democrats pass a law without a single GOP amendment or a single GOP vote.
The law fails to do what it promised to do.
It is the GOP's fault for not fixing it before it failed.

---

Serious question and I ask you because I know I won't get an Alpha Male, juvenile response.

Why are you caught up in fault?
Does accountability matter or not?
I get it, ACA is not the preferred method. I get it is too expensive. So, everyone pretty much agrees on that. This is NOW a pretty bi-partisan item.
The ACA is anything but bi-partisan. I was passed without a single GOP amendment, or a single GOP vote in either house of Congress.

Health Care is an item that is not a Blue or Red thing. If your Oncologist is Blue, you don't care as long as they are the best. A liberal Doctor isn't going to not treat a MAGA guy. It is truly a bi-partisan issue we all deal with every day.
Fallacious construction. Health care may be "bi-partisan" in the sense that it affacts us all, but the problems and the solutions are manifestly not bi-partisan. Indeed the problem we have today is a bad Democrat policy solution failing (predictably).

The current system in the US is a health care, secondary payer system. We can only change that incrementally. The number I have heard is about 1% at a time, which sounds small but is a massive number.
ACA was not intended to fix anything. It was intended to facilitate the transition to single payer.

So, how do we do that without leaving millions of people in the wilderness looking in? We are not doing it by December 31st. No matter how idealistic AND correct the fiscal conservatives are, we are not changing the system by December 31st. Trump has pushed the Dems to the point they are willing to deal on it, all for it.
Democrats could have proposed something OTHER than funding of failure.
Democrats could have proposed something other than shutting down government to force funding of failure.

Now, it is time to cut a deal and build in the first incremental step.
Some kind of deal will happen, in time. Holidays are not a good time to do such.

So, why are we just going to keep hashing over how much ACA costs? We are all in agreement, it is too expensive. It covered a lot of people, but at too much cost. Got it. Are we just going to stop there????

Ok, I will piss on the spark plug if it will help, Obamacare was the worst idea ever, it totally ruined the Nation and we should put those people in prison. Now, how do we fix it in real terms, not just throwing out the term "Free Market". You know that is useless and not an actionable plan.
It's the only viable plan.

---

I don't think there is a solution without a national pool structure. Overriding lesson of ACA is that a state-by-state program cannot work.

---

I actually agree with you. And I agree that ACA is not workable and needs to be totally re-done. All I said was we need to have something to move to before making health coverage unaffordable for millions of people. Hell, approve the extension for one year only for those making less than 250k household and let's move to something that fixes the system. I have no love for ACA, I just don't want to leave millions high and dry while talking heads that will never want for Health Care coverage play political games...

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

TLDR version:
Democrats pass a law without a single GOP amendment or a single GOP vote.
The law fails to do what it promised to do.
It is the GOP's fault for not fixing it before it failed.

---

Serious question and I ask you because I know I won't get an Alpha Male, juvenile response.

Why are you caught up in fault?
Does accountability matter or not?
I get it, ACA is not the preferred method. I get it is too expensive. So, everyone pretty much agrees on that. This is NOW a pretty bi-partisan item.
The ACA is anything but bi-partisan. I was passed without a single GOP amendment, or a single GOP vote in either house of Congress.

Health Care is an item that is not a Blue or Red thing. If your Oncologist is Blue, you don't care as long as they are the best. A liberal Doctor isn't going to not treat a MAGA guy. It is truly a bi-partisan issue we all deal with every day.
Fallacious construction. Health care may be "bi-partisan" in the sense that it affacts us all, but the problems and the solutions are manifestly not bi-partisan. Indeed the problem we have today is a bad Democrat policy solution failing (predictably).

The current system in the US is a health care, secondary payer system. We can only change that incrementally. The number I have heard is about 1% at a time, which sounds small but is a massive number.
ACA was not intended to fix anything. It was intended to facilitate the transition to single payer.

So, how do we do that without leaving millions of people in the wilderness looking in? We are not doing it by December 31st. No matter how idealistic AND correct the fiscal conservatives are, we are not changing the system by December 31st. Trump has pushed the Dems to the point they are willing to deal on it, all for it.
Democrats could have proposed something OTHER than funding of failure.
Democrats could have proposed something other than shutting down government to force funding of failure.

Now, it is time to cut a deal and build in the first incremental step.
Some kind of deal will happen, in time. Holidays are not a good time to do such.

So, why are we just going to keep hashing over how much ACA costs? We are all in agreement, it is too expensive. It covered a lot of people, but at too much cost. Got it. Are we just going to stop there????

Ok, I will piss on the spark plug if it will help, Obamacare was the worst idea ever, it totally ruined the Nation and we should put those people in prison. Now, how do we fix it in real terms, not just throwing out the term "Free Market". You know that is useless and not an actionable plan.
It's the only viable plan.

---

I don't think there is a solution without a national pool structure. Overriding lesson of ACA is that a state-by-state program cannot work.

---

I actually agree with you. And I agree that ACA is not workable and needs to be totally re-done. All I said was we need to have something to move to before making health coverage unaffordable for millions of people. Hell, approve the extension for one year only for those making less than 250k household and let's move to something that fixes the system. I have no love for ACA, I just don't want to leave millions high and dry while talking heads that will never want for Health Care coverage play political games...

---

Not much risk of that happening.....

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

FLBear……..do you ever tire of being an internet blowhard?

Asking for the curious masses.

---

Nah, this is a good practice place. Take a point of view and defend it. Some go well, some don't. But always learn what works in the real world sparring with you guys. It is an educated forum, discussing complex issues, and you guys are passionate so it goes in all sorts of strange ways. So, I find all the conversations on here interesting. I will say, it is impressive how many of you can be so flexible in your positions depending on who is saying it. The mental gymnastics are really a sight to see.

How about you? Why are you a blowhard?

---

To deal with people like you who (1) either can't or won't learn the difference between economic theory and practical reality and (2) think the applicational benefits of a warped system to a handful of businesses trump the negative impact on a much larger group is a solid basis for policy, blowing hard is necessary.

---

Yeah, its rough... Congress set up a no win. So, what are you going to say when Trump extends ACA for 2 years, not just one?


I have a suggestion, it works really well. Pick a subject, learn about the other sides view and why. Then try to defend it. It will give you a whole new perspective and help you understand why the other side digs in just as much as you do. It will broaden your horizons. There is a big world out there and most people don't agree with us. You will find that the practical works better when you are able to understand that aspect.

Give it a try next time your blowing someone.

---

You really are ridiculous. Your solution: Ignore "what" and focus solely on "why".
A third grader can tell you "why"…….they want a better deal for their country.

The only question is "how" to respond when other countries use trade protectionist policies (tariffs/predatory regulations/etc.). Tariffs are a simple and straight forward response.
Canada ignores USMCA to use predatory regulations to keep USA dairy out of Canada, tariff them.

Your arguments are self serving. Your industry wins so F every other industry that loses.
The idea that you might get a small taste of balancing trade infuriates you.
We laugh at you.

---

TLDR version:
Democrats pass a law without a single GOP amendment or a single GOP vote.
The law fails to do what it promised to do.
It is the GOP's fault for not fixing it before it failed.

---

Serious question and I ask you because I know I won't get an Alpha Male, juvenile response.

Why are you caught up in fault?
Does accountability matter or not?
I get it, ACA is not the preferred method. I get it is too expensive. So, everyone pretty much agrees on that. This is NOW a pretty bi-partisan item.
The ACA is anything but bi-partisan. I was passed without a single GOP amendment, or a single GOP vote in either house of Congress.

Health Care is an item that is not a Blue or Red thing. If your Oncologist is Blue, you don't care as long as they are the best. A liberal Doctor isn't going to not treat a MAGA guy. It is truly a bi-partisan issue we all deal with every day.
Fallacious construction. Health care may be "bi-partisan" in the sense that it affacts us all, but the problems and the solutions are manifestly not bi-partisan. Indeed the problem we have today is a bad Democrat policy solution failing (predictably).

The current system in the US is a health care, secondary payer system. We can only change that incrementally. The number I have heard is about 1% at a time, which sounds small but is a massive number.
ACA was not intended to fix anything. It was intended to facilitate the transition to single payer.

So, how do we do that without leaving millions of people in the wilderness looking in? We are not doing it by December 31st. No matter how idealistic AND correct the fiscal conservatives are, we are not changing the system by December 31st. Trump has pushed the Dems to the point they are willing to deal on it, all for it.
Democrats could have proposed something OTHER than funding of failure.
Democrats could have proposed something other than shutting down government to force funding of failure.

Now, it is time to cut a deal and build in the first incremental step.
Some kind of deal will happen, in time. Holidays are not a good time to do such.

So, why are we just going to keep hashing over how much ACA costs? We are all in agreement, it is too expensive. It covered a lot of people, but at too much cost. Got it. Are we just going to stop there????

Ok, I will piss on the spark plug if it will help, Obamacare was the worst idea ever, it totally ruined the Nation and we should put those people in prison. Now, how do we fix it in real terms, not just throwing out the term "Free Market". You know that is useless and not an actionable plan.
It's the only viable plan.

---

I don't think there is a solution without a national pool structure. Overriding lesson of ACA is that a state-by-state program cannot work.

---

I actually agree with you. And I agree that ACA is not workable and needs to be totally re-done. All I said was we need to have something to move to before making health coverage unaffordable for millions of people. Hell, approve the extension for one year only for those making less than 250k household and let's move to something that fixes the system. I have no love for ACA, I just don't want to leave millions high and dry while talking heads that will never want for Health Care coverage play political games...

---

Not much risk of that happening.....

---

Not if they transition to a new program. Heard GOP Senator this morning talk of it and had a good plan with a 1 year glide path to full implementation. Hope it gets passed. Without the subsidy, there is no urgency for Congress to act. This Congress needs to be forced to act and without any leverage we will be in same boat 3 years from now.

https://babylonbee.com/news/trumps-strategy-of-hiring-lawyers-based-on-bust-size-not-working-as-well-as-anticipated
Trump's Strategy Of Hiring Lawyers Based On Bust Size Not Working As Well As Anticipated
U.S. Nov 26, 2025 BabylonBee.com

WASHINGTON, D.C. President Trump's seemingly bulletproof strategy of choosing lawyers exclusively based on bust size has not worked out nearly as well as anticipated.
Trump was left befuddled this week as the administration suffered a string of legal setbacks despite all of his lawyers having large bra sizes.
"How could she lose, she's so hot," wondered Trump. "It doesn't make any sense. Our lawyer clearly has a much larger bust than their lawyer. It's not even close. It's embarrassing, frankly, the bust comparison. We should have won easily. Maybe the judge is gay, or blind. There's no other way to explain it."
White House aides reportedly tried suggesting to Trump that perhaps he should consider other factors besides bust size when choosing a lawyer. "That is so dumb," responded Trump. "It could be the dumbest idea I've ever heard. Do you think Sydney Sweeney has lost any arguments lately? Have you ever seen a woman with a large bust lose an argument? No, you haven't. It's ridiculous."
At publishing time, Trump had hired a plastic surgeon to help ensure his lawyers didn't lose any more cases.