• angelatc's Avatar
    Today, 02:02 PM
    So once medicine is socialized, it will be ok for the government to mandate it. More anti-capitalist stuff from DonnaY.
    37 replies | 698 view(s)
  • LibertyEagle's Avatar
    Today, 05:27 AM
    Isn't it wonderful that Rand doesn't act like a petulant child, like so many others, and instead capitalizes on opportunities to get the President's ear to provide constructive input that is already changing policy.
    18 replies | 161 view(s)
  • LibertyEagle's Avatar
    Today, 05:04 AM
    I'm not the one who bumped a year old thread. That would be you.
    396 replies | 6374 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:25 PM
    Courtney Love 2003 Interviewer asks if she has any words of advice for young starlets entering the business. Love responded to avoid private meetings in the 4 Seasons with Harvey Weinstein. VIdeo at link: http://www.tmz.com/videos/0_ka2jzxot
    46 replies | 1454 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:55 AM
    It "only" bans pet stores from selling non-rescue pets. I wonder how quickly they'll adopt a creative definition of rescue.
    15 replies | 378 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:20 AM
    He's actually a communist, as he is Antifa.
    18 replies | 414 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 10:30 PM
    Granny Warriors. Wow - its been a long time.... eta: Linda passed in 2014. RIP Liberty Granny.
    25 replies | 2697 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 06:00 PM
    I can't find the tweets now, but Kevin Spacey's name came up last night, and not as a victim. A Hollywood person was accusing him of molesting one of her kin. She seems to have taken the post down now. She didn't name names, she said because she didn't have permission from the victim.
    8 replies | 344 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:54 PM
    Nailed it.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:52 PM
    And because I am not a lawyer, a little more Googling brought me to the McCarran–Ferguson Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarran%E2%80%93Ferguson_Act#Significance_to_U.S._health_care_reform_in_the_21st_century Apparently it overturned at least a portion of Paul-v-Virginia giving Congress "the right" to enforce anti-trust actions against insurers in the states. According to Wiki:
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:42 PM
    What did he know about Hillary???
    4 replies | 244 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:38 PM
    Here's a SCOTUS decision that indicates I'm more right than you. In before "SCOTUS IS WRONG TOO." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_v._Virginia So now you're arguing against the 10th AMendment and 150 years of legal decisions. Maybe SCOTUS was wrong. But as it stands, their rulings are considered the determination of what's constitutional. At this point, we should be amending the constitution.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:29 PM
    Oh FFS. If they were violating the Constitution, SCOTUS would be doing something, not the legislature. Congress can't write constitutional law without amending the Constitution.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:21 PM
    It isn't science. It's law. The law allows the states to regulate insurers who sell policies to the residents of their state. If it didn't, the FedGov wouldn't be trying to erase those boundaries. IF you were right, insurers woule already be crossing state lines, so we wouldn't be having this conversation.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:13 PM
    Do you think part of that might be related to gay marriage though?
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 02:12 PM
    angelatc No, the service (medical care) takes place in your home state. Your state currently has laws regulating the insurers who sell insurance to residents in your state. They also regulate payments to the providers in your state.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 12:09 PM
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/14/alex-jones-claims-hollywood-producers-grabbed-him-/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/14/alex-jones-claims-hollywood-producers-grabbed-him-/
    8 replies | 344 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 12:02 PM
    There are already certain plants that can't be sold in certain states. California regulates safety and emission standards for automobiles that can be sold within its boundaries. Some states allow 18 year olds to buy cigarettes but they can't legally buy them on the internet and have them delivered into their home. Auto insurance varies from state to state. But if I go to Ohio and try to buy car insurance because it's cheaper there, they won't let me because I live in Michigan. If I lie and say I live in Ohio, they won't be obligated to pay because I purchased the policy fraudulently. The reason ours costs more is because we have a particular potentially expensive mandatory benefit - unlimited lifetime medical for accident-related injuries. There is a push to reform our auto insurance. We have 49 other states we can look at to see what works. What the state should and shouldn't do is a different conversation than what the constitution allows them to do.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 11:06 AM
    I would bet money that Harvey and Bill liked to drink together.
    21 replies | 424 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 11:04 AM
    Every time he does something I don't like, I end up remembering what Hillary would have done. Sometimes it's the exact same thing but sometimes the differences are stark. The Judicial appointments are the latter.
    5 replies | 147 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 10:58 AM
    I trust Rand's judgement, and I've never been a political purist. I don't think it's the end of the world - I just think it's another constitutional paper cut.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 10:53 AM
    That's possible, but I bear in mind that's exactly what they said when they erased the banking lines between states. It would lessen the administrative burdens and consumers would see lower costs. I believed it then. Instead we got a massive amount of industry consolidation which created those now legendary too big to fail behemoths. I feel like this is that same scenario being played out. It's just another power grab by the Fed. And here's the bigger point. If it's better for the Feds to run it then amend the constitution. I'm more irritated about that than I am the insurance thing. If they bring back the cheap catastrophic coverage only policies, then I'm happier than I am now.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 10:44 AM
    The states have (had) the right to regulate insurers who sold insurance products to the residents of that state. Before Obamacare, it meant that states like Illinois required well baby checks and vaccines in all policies, while Arkansas allowed policies that only kicked in when your expenses went over $10k a year. (Guess which state had cheaper insurance?) It also means that the state government had the authority to get involved in disputes. It means that the insurer has to prove over and over and over that it has enough cash to cover the claims the state expects its insured patients to file. It meant the person who sold the policy has taken tests to confirm they understand the insurance laws in said state. It also meant that insurance cost less in (using the example above) Arkansas than Illinois. Partly because the mandated coverages were lessened in Arkansas, although Obamacare already erased that right. But it was also partly because costs were simply less in Arkansas. Taxes are lower, demand is lower, etc.... Allowing someone in Chicago to buy a policy at the rates the Arkansas residents paid will only serve to drive the prices in Arkansas up.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 10:32 AM
    The constitution specifically forbids the states from taxing interstate commerce. This is exactly what I mean when I say people who don't understand insurance shouldn't try to argue for this. The regulations are ridiculously different from state to state. And more critically, each state demands that insurers maintain certain reserve levels. It's a financially complex product. It isn't as simple as "I send them money and then they send it to my doctor." They have to maintain a certain level of cash reserves in each state in order to guarantee that they will indeed be able to pay the bills. They're not allowed to just use the money they take in from premiums and use it to pay claims. That's a pyramid scam. And this next part is scary to me as a numbers person - I have no idea how they're maintaining those reserves. Their investment options are limited, and interest rates are still depressed far below market value. No math I can do makes any sense. Taking this away from the states and giving it to the Feds is probably the insurers getting ready for the inevitable crash. And instead of a couple of states being affected, millions of people across the whole country will suddenly have no insurance, and a huge stack of bills their hospital forwarded when the insurer went bankrupt. It's the next too big to fail, brought to you by John McCain who has aggressively working on this for 15 years.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • angelatc's Avatar
    10-14-2017, 10:15 AM
    You literally fabricating an alternate reality to avoid the uncomfortable current reality. You are right. You will be contracting with an agency in another state. You cannot do that now because of states' rights. The 10th Amendment says that the state has the right to regulate the products sold to the residents of the state. This legislation erases those lines and hands the regulations to the feds. Constitutionally this is a loss. Freedom-wise, this is a loss.
    89 replies | 1237 view(s)
More Activity

9 Visitor Messages

  1. No Ed here.
  2. View Conversation
  3. View Conversation
    Ha ha! It's good to see another Pixies fan.

    All this time I've been in these forums and haven't seen you
  4. View Conversation
    Hi Mr. Grieves... how does it go?
    Hope all is well. I assume the people on GMF forums dont talk much about the bailout. heh
  5. That didn't take long.
  6. Well, today the $700 billion bailout steal just got voted down in the house and I feel like Doc Brown jumping and yelling in the street, circa 1955 at the end of Back to the Future having just sent Marty back to 1985.

    I know there will be a sequel where the bailout will come back, and I will shout "No, we defeated you! I saw it," and it will tell me we have to defeat it again, but for next 30 seconds, I'm basking in the glory.
  7. View Conversation
    Mr. Grieves,

    Thank you for making me one of your friends. I don't think I am one of the most popular posters so I was quiet surprised and delighted that you would want to be one of my friends.

    So, drop my a line from time to time, I look forward to having a friend, it gets lonely out here in "take no prisoners" land.

  8. Keep fighting the good fight.
  9. View Conversation
    I appreciate that, I really do.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 9 of 9
About Mister Grieves

Basic Information

About Mister Grieves


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
Most Recent Message
03-05-2012 03:23 PM
General Information
Last Activity
09-14-2012 06:45 AM
Join Date

25 Friends

  1. AbolishTheGovt AbolishTheGovt is offline


  2. angelatc angelatc is offline


  3. aspiringconstitutionalist
  4. cheapseats cheapseats is offline


  5. Chester Copperpot
  6. DFF DFF is offline


  7. enjerth enjerth is offline


  8. fedup100 fedup100 is offline




  10. JoshLowry JoshLowry is offline

    Seņor Manuel

Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 25
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...