CougarCorner

Mars wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:58 am Good health care and good gun laws aren't bad goals to strive for. America has a long way to go in both.

Please define what "good gun laws" we need to finally control gun related crimes in America. We literally have thousands of gun laws and criminal laws on the books (some have estimated up to 20,000 gun related laws) to punish criminal behavior. Instead of posting in general euphemisms (as liberal democrats do), please be specific and define what a "good gun law" would be. Thank you.

Ddawg wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:47 am

BoiseBYU wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:45 am

Ddawg wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 8:30 am

Mars wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:58 am Good health care and good gun laws aren't bad goals to strive for. America has a long way to go in both.

So you supported ObamaCare and the individual mandate with all the penalties and fines then. Obama and his minions used RomneyCare as their blueprint. You're a socialist now?

I have a dream—that one day we can have a civil discussion on this board without you descending to name calling. It is toxic.

Being a socialist is toxic. Agree. Look at Venezuela. Look at Greece. If you support ObamaCare, which is state forced purchasing of healthcare, with penalties and fines affixed - that is socialist.

Pretty straight forward. Either you are a socialist and support the full weight and power of the govt. forcing people to comply, or the govt. uses it's power to penalize. Direct and straight forward. I do not support forced govt. healthcare as ObamaCare was and RomneyCare is.

I understand your view, and while I do not agree that Obamacare is “socialist,” at least as that term is understood in the classical sense, I respect a person’s right to have that point of view. I also respect the view that Obamacare is not the best way forward with regards to health care in our country. At least for me, I know it literally saved the life of a family member. But I think reasonable minds can differ. What I do not respect is your name calling and making everything so personal so quickly. You.Do.It.Every.Single.Time. That is what is toxic.

I think obamacare and any govt involvement is only making the healthcare problem infinitely worse in this country. Practitioners/hospitals can charge downright ridiculous pricing and often the govt will pay it. It's a bubble and it's driven by the govt being involved. Just like student loans and govt involvement. Govt acting as a third party payer in medicare and Medicaid has been downright dreadful. The cost is astronomical.
Example: I have ppl come to my office all the time requesting a service which I feels isn't necessary for the majority of them. They could get the service done elsewhere for far cheaper but why not use medicare? I tell them I'll document the findings but according to medicare guidelines, medicare may reject the claim and the patient would be on the hook for the full bill WITHOUT the ability to negotiate the price. Medicare patients cannot negotiate the price of services for cash pricing with a provider who is contracted with Medicare (another huge beef I have with Medicare).
So I submit the claim and some of these ppl come back in 4 months smirking and wanting the same service because it got covered. However, others get denied and then I get a phone call about how expensive it was. "my old doctor never charged that much". Yup, because your old doctor was likely committing fraud to keep a healthy clientele. It's all a huge game. And it sucks. Get the govt out of it and let seniors and patients price out services through open and transparent billing/pricing. It is the same exact attitude I saw in Ukraine with socialism. Ppl there Loved communism because it offered some free stuff. Never mind that 7 million of their countrymen died starving to death at the hands of the state, couldn't practice their religion of choice, and had to stand in bread lines. You had free apartments and occasionally you got a CAR!

BroncoBot wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:03 am

byufan4ever wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:11 pm Look into his time at MA and then when running for president. Two totally different people with different principles.

Is this a good, or bad thing?

To me it shows that he's just like 99% of the other politicians. He's in it of the power and not to "serve" the people.

byufan4ever wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 10:11 pm

BroncoBot wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:03 am

byufan4ever wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:11 pm Look into his time at MA and then when running for president. Two totally different people with different principles.

Is this a good, or bad thing?

To me it shows that he's just like 99% of the other politicians. He's in it of the power and not to "serve" the people.

I'm afraid you and I agree on brother Romney. He's a man of high moral character I'm sure, but his constantly evolving views to pander to certain audiences make him a run of the mill politician in my book. And for what it's worth I think he's exploiting the Mormon connection in Utah to get elected (which he will, I'm sure). If I was in Utah, I wouldn't be excited about a guy who was a liberal leaning governor in Massachusetts who set in motion universal health care and additional taxes, has been anti 2A, and is now in Utah all of a sudden to run for Senate and so far his big selling point is now to obstruct Trump?

I'm sorry, bit Trump has impressed more than hes let me down in the last year. But I'm not from Utah and will not be voting. Good luck to all.

I don't like carpet baggers anywhere. It will be a shame if Romney wins. This makes him no better than Hillary Clinton running to New York to win an easy election.

Do you guys still caucus for your primaries. That's how Mike Lee beat the other RINO, right? Is there a chance someone who actually believes in freedom can beat Romney?

jvquarterback wrote: ↑Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:25 pmDo you guys still caucus for your primaries. That's how Mike Lee beat the other RINO, right? Is there a chance someone who actually believes in freedom can beat Romney?

Yes, we still caucus, although it has been watered down by a signature-only track to a post-caucus primary ballot.

That said, I don't think anyone is going to stop Mitt. I'm a local precinct chair, and I don't even know the names of any other candidates . . . and we caucus in one month.

Rumored potential opponents are the current state auditor and the guy who made a run at Hatch in 2012. Neither of which would have much of a shot in the caucuses, much less at the primary. Neither has filed to run yet.

The other big rumor floating is that Trump is trying to get Jon Huntsman to make a run for it. That would be a fun battle, but just as mushy a choice as Romney.

snoscythe wrote: ↑Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:46 pm The other big rumor floating is that Trump is trying to get Jon Huntsman to make a run for it. That would be a fun battle, but just as mushy a choice as Romney.

That's almost as bad as a choice between Trump and Clinton.

Good grief. Jon Huntsman. He's squishier than Mitt by quite a bit. Mitt will be a senator representing Utah barring any unforeseen craziness - exempli gratia (ie), being snatched by an invasion of the body snatchers, or Mitt disappearing into the Nevada desert at the next Burning Man.

Donald Trump has endorsed Mitt Romney, so now all you Trump supporters have to support Mitt or you're not making America great.