Democratic House Candidate’s Wife’s OBGYN Practice Doesn’t Accept Medicaid

Eric Holder's wife practices at same Medicaid-shunning clinic

BY: Elizabeth Harrington
July 7, 2014 3:10 pm

The OBGYN practice of Marilyn Jerome, the wife of Democratic congressional candidate John Foust, does not accept Medicaid, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

Foust has repeatedly attacked his Republican opponent Barbara Comstock for opposing the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act in his campaign to represent Virginia’s 10th district.

Dr. Marilyn C. Jerome practices obstetrics and gynecology at Foxhall OB/GYN Associates in Spring Valley, an upper northwest suburb of Washington, D.C. Jerome has practiced there since 1982. Foxhall is also where Attorney General Eric Holder’s wife Dr. Sharon D. Malone practices.

No physician or staff at Foxhall is listed as a Medicaid provider on the D.C. Department of Health Care Finance’s database. A phone call to the office confirmed that the practice does not accept Medicaid.

However, John Foust, a Fairfax County supervisor, has made Medicaid a signature issue of his campaign against Comstock.

“Barbara Comstock would stop Virginians from receiving our own tax dollars back from Washington for the sake of her right-wing agenda—and having balanced seven budgets in Fairfax, I can tell you that just doesn’t make any fiscal sense,” Foust said last month. “But Comstock’s decision to once again go along with extremists in Richmond has real consequences for us: increasing healthcare costs for everyone, costing our state more money, and jeopardizing support for important priorities that we care about like education.”

Foust has said Obamacare is “clearly a good thing” and that not expanding Medicaid to rural hospitals “could be devastating.”

He has also enlisted his wife to campaign on his behalf, with Jerome using her status as an OBGYN to lead “Women for Foust.”

“As an OBGYN, it is essential to me that any politician I vote for know that a politician’s place is not between a woman and her doctor,” Jerome says on her husband’s campaign website. “Lucky for me, I married a good one. I married a man who would never try to interfere with that relationship and make a woman’s choice for her.”

She also authored a post for Foxhall in support of the Affordable Care Act and expanding Medicaid, noting that the government program helps low-income women, though Medicaid is not accepted at her office.

Mark Levin send you? You Republicans have been kinda nervous about this race. With good reason.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mark Levin send you? You Republicans have been
> kinda nervous about this race. With good reason.


Facts suck huh?

Facts? It's stupid and doesn't mean anything. How can you criticize someones wife for not providing services for patients with Medicaid when you're from a party that opposes Medicaid altogether and wishes there wasn't a doctor in the country for the poor.

I mean, you don't really have the moral high ground when it comes to the issue. When it comes to issues like this my initial response is an urge is to vomit all over your kind.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/09/2014 03:16AM by Gerrymanderer2.

Democrats and hypocrisy go hand-in-hand.

But what about the Comstock people walking on my lawn and giving out free flags????? This doesn't even compare to that atrocity.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Facts? It's stupid and doesn't mean anything.
> How can you criticize someones wife for not
> providing services for patients with Medicaid when
> you're from a party that opposes Medicaid
> altogether and wishes there wasn't a doctor in the
> country for the poor.
>
> I mean, you don't really have the moral high
> ground when it comes to the issue. When it comes
> to issues like this my initial response is an urge
> is to vomit all over your kind.

When it's the wife of a candidate who has made expanding Medicaid a central theme of his pitch and her partner is the wife of a promoinent member of the administration which also is pushing the same, neither of which accept Medicaid? lol

A lot of Dem doctors don't accept Medicaid. As candidates they talk all day about expanding Medicaid because of income equality and paying our fair share. But when it comes time to put some skin it the game, suddenly they justify it as not being able to support their business on Medicaid's re-imbursement rates.

Walt Kowalski Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But what about the Comstock people walking on my
> lawn and giving out free flags????? This doesn't
> even compare to that atrocity.


Far more grievous. One might even use the word "infringement".

If they really cared, then they could just donate their services and help those poor people for free.

Bwwahahahahahaha!!! That's funny.

Everyone knows that libs are all hypocrites. Just like the ones who're always demanding tolerance, but are the first to shout down and spit on anyone with an opposing view. Or the ones always crying racism, but who wouldn't dare live in a black neighborhood. Libs are pathetic.

Stop talking to yourself.

Democratic liberalism substitutes the sovereignty of a dictator, or committee of dictators, for the sovereignty of the consumers. Along with the economic sovereignty of the citizens disappears also their political sovereignty. To the unique production plan that annuls any planning on the part of the consumers corresponds in the constitutional sphere the one party principle that deprives the citizens of any opportunity to plan the course of public affairs. Freedom is indivisible. He who has not the faculty to choose among various brands of canned food or soap, is also deprived of the power to choose between various political parties and programs and to elect the office holders. He is no longer a man; he becomes a pawn in the hands of the supreme social engineer. Even his freedom to rear progeny will be taken.

This is why liberalism sucks ass.

Moral high ground? Based on your aesthetics? Who made you the arbiter of the correct moral high ground? One thing anti Obamacare folks got right was that doctors would drop Medicaid patients. Libfucktards are the real reason the US is falling apart.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Facts? It's stupid and doesn't mean anything.
> How can you criticize someones wife for notur
> providing services for patients with Medicaid when
> you're from a party that opposes Medicaid
> altogether and wishes there wasn't a doctor in the
> country for the poor.
>
> I mean, you don't really have the moral high
> ground when it comes to the issue. When it comes
> to issues like this my initial response is an urge
> is to vomit all over your kind.

John Foust
Democrat
Wants to be a Congressman
Vows to force Virginia to expand Medicaid despite overwhelming opposition within the state.
Press reports that his doctor wife refuses to accept Medicaid patients.
Very embarrassing to the candidate.
Voters don't like do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
Sucks for him.

Gerrymanderer2: "It's stupid and doesn't mean anything."

You just keep believing that.

That's not do as I say not as I do. First of all, his wife is an individual with her own profession that makes her own choices as to who to provide services to and what sort of payment to accept.

For you to suggest that he should force his political ideology on his wife's private business practices is not only sexist but flies in the face of everything the Republican Party supposedly stands for.

Second, the Republican has no high ground trying to play the morality card against doctors that don't provide care to Medicaid recipients in this state.

ESPECIALLY BECAUSE REPUBLICANS ARE THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR A VERY LIMITED REIMBURSEMENT PRIVATELY BOUGHT SHITTY MEDICAID SYSTEM IN VIRGINIA.

Did that last point make sense to you dense idiotic piles of shit? You have purposely compromised Virginia's poor into a system limiting their access to doctors. YOU LEGISLATED THAT YOU PIECES OF SHIT.

And then you have the audacity to criticize doctors for not accepting plans that will not pay for their services.

Shame on you, if this is all Barbara Comstock can come up, she's just another lying, cheating, gimmicky too faced obstructionist Republican that needs to be shown the door by Northern Virginia.

Basically the Republicans are criticizing John Foust for not forcing his political ideology on his wifes private profession into accepting a crappy Medicaid plan that was purposely legislated to be crappy by REPUBLICANS to begin with.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's not do as I say not as I do. First of all,
> his wife is an individual with her own profession
> that makes her own choices as to who to provide
> services to and what sort of payment to accept.
>
> For you to suggest that he should force his
> political ideology on his wife's private business
> practices is not only sexist but flies in the face
> of everything the Republican Party supposedly
> stands for.
>
> Second, the Republican has no high ground trying
> to play the morality card against doctors that
> don't provide care to Medicaid recipients in this
> state.
>
> ESPECIALLY BECAUSE REPUBLICANS ARE THE ONES
> RESPONSIBLE FOR A VERY LIMITED REIMBURSEMENT
> PRIVATELY BOUGHT SHITTY MEDICAID SYSTEM IN
> VIRGINIA.
>
> Did that last point make sense to you dense
> idiotic piles of shit? You have purposely
> compromised Virginia's poor into a system limiting
> their access to doctors. YOU LEGISLATED THAT YOU
> PIECES OF SHIT.
>
> And then you have the audacity to criticize
> doctors for not accepting plans that will not pay
> for their services.
>
> Shame on you, if this is all Barbara Comstock can
> come up, she's just another lying, cheating,
> gimmicky too faced obstructionist Republican that
> needs to be shown the door by Northern Virginia.


Pitiful fail. lol

As far as anyone suggesting forcing anything on her, you must have missed this part:

"She also authored a post for Foxhall in support of the Affordable Care Act and expanding Medicaid,"

Sucks when you have to try so hard to defend the hypocrisy huh?

I don't think she supports limited private plans for Medicaid in this state that do not pay doctors like her for services she provides, imposed on the poor by Republicans.

There's a distinction in what types of Medicaid she supports and can afford as a doctor to provide her services for. Not the crap you think the poor are worth.

And who the fuck are you? You're a slime ball Republican corporate whore if I'm not mistaken. Who are you to even utter a moral high ground on Medicaid for the poor in the first place?

This coming from a party that just bribed a Democratic State Senator with a six figure job and a judgeship for his daughter to gain control of the State Senate so the poor don't have coverage with our own tax dollars.

These are the same people that just did that this month. These God damn Republicans that have the nerve to bring up Medicaid.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Basically the Republicans are criticizing John
> Foust for not forcing his political ideology on
> his wifes private profession into accepting a
> crappy Medicaid plan that was purposely legislated
> to be crappy by REPUBLICANS to begin with.

No, they are highlighting the irony of his wife not taking Medicaid while he's pushing for expansion.

The Medicaid system is not the responsibility of Republicans. The reimbursement rates are not solely our responsibility, as they all have to be approved by the federal CMS.

This is just another reason why we have been trying to explain that expanding Medicaid isn't going to solve the problem of getting coverage for the poor - many, many doctors don't take it and expanding coverage without expanding the number of providers will make it even harder for folks to get care.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Basically the Republicans are criticizing John
> > Foust for not forcing his political ideology on
> > his wifes private profession into accepting a
> > crappy Medicaid plan that was purposely
> legislated
> > to be crappy by REPUBLICANS to begin with.
>
> No, they are highlighting the irony of his wife
> not taking Medicaid while he's pushing for
> expansion.
>
> The Medicaid system is not the responsibility of
> Republicans. The reimbursement rates are not
> solely our responsibility, as they all have to be
> approved by the federal CMS.
>
> This is just another reason why we have been
> trying to explain that expanding Medicaid isn't
> going to solve the problem of getting coverage for
> the poor - many, many doctors don't take it and
> expanding coverage without expanding the number of
> providers will make it even harder for folks to
> get care.


But expanding Medicare will help some and then we need to work on bringing cost down and reimbursements up.
It will help all of us

Caring and sharing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If they really cared, then they could just donate
> their services and help those poor people for
> free.
>
> Bwwahahahahahaha!!! That's funny.


Would you want to work on the crotch of a medicaid recipient?

On Foust's website, his wife has written a letter supporting her husband and all his altruistic qualities. Sharon Malone-aka Mrs. Eric Holder--has written a statement that is on Foust's website endorsing him. (She doesn't even live in Virginia).

Since they are on his website as supporters of Foust, it does make them fodder for discussion. They have both put themselves out in public as supporters of Foust. This is hypocrisy. Foxhall is a very ritzy neighborhood in DC. I assume that is the location of the practice. FWIW, they don't even take all insurance.

The elite never live like the rest of the people in a socialist country. Sure, they'll condemn the successful, wealthy people while campaigning, but after they seize power, they're more than happy to embrace the role of the corrupt privileged elite.

You don't see Kim Jong Un going hungry, do you? The Commie Party elite in China milk their country for every bribe they can get. And here in the U.S., the Obamas, Clintons, Pelosis, Reids, and rest of the socialist elite are even worse.

No Brian, Republicans in this state work tirelessly to enroll our states Medicaid recipients in a low reimbursement private health plan.

It is a serious problem in Virginia and is a direct result of Republican legislators. You know Brian, you don't seem to be very informed on the fight for Medicaid expansion in this state and this a serious issue for many people. I would recommend you gather more information on the topic before going into the standard Republican dodge, spin and deny maneuver.

This was actually one of the things that the governor was willing to compromise with Republicans on for expansion is keeping the shitty low reimbursement private plan system Republicans want the state currently utilizes in place.

Take responsibility when its the truth Brian.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2014 11:02AM by Gerrymanderer2.

So Brian, this is the Medicaid REPUBLICANS want for Virginia's poor. One with poor reimbursement that limits doctors for Virginia's poor.

Brian, why aren't your politicians willing to accept responsibility for their own actions and blaming doctors and wives of candidates instead?

It's a damn shame and desperation it seems. You Republicans are looking desperate as usual as Brian. I don't understand why Republicans always think people are stupid when we do nothing but show them the door in this state.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So Brian, this is the Medicaid REPUBLICANS want
> for Virginia's poor. One with poor reimbursement
> that limits doctors for Virginia's poor.
>
> Brian, why aren't your politicians willing to
> accept responsibility for their own actions and
> blaming doctors and wives of candidates instead?
>
>
> It's a damn shame and desperation it seems. You
> Republicans are looking desperate as usual as
> Brian. I don't understand why Republicans always
> think people are stupid when we do nothing but
> show them the door in this state.

Yep

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No Brian, Republicans in this state work
> tirelessly to enroll our states Medicaid
> recipients in a low reimbursement private health
> plan.
>
> It is a serious problem in Virginia and is a
> direct result of Republican legislators. You know
> Brian, you don't seem to be very informed on the
> fight for Medicaid expansion in this state and
> this a serious issue for many people. I would
> recommend you gather more information on the topic
> before going into the standard Republican dodge,
> spin and deny maneuver.
>
> This was actually one of the things that the
> governor was willing to compromise with
> Republicans on for expansion is keeping the shitty
> low reimbursement private plan system Republicans
> want the state currently utilizes in place.
>
> Take responsibility when its the truth Brian.

I'm getting really tired of the stock response of folks on your side of the aisle that anybody who disagrees with them is uninformed. That's simply not true. I understand Medicaid and have practical experience with the system.

Again, the reimbursement rates are set by the state, but they have to be within the guidelines for the system and those are set by the federal government, which happens to be controlled by Democrats right now. If there was a problem with Medicaid reimbursement rates, why didn't you guys address it from 2008-2010 when you controlled Congress and the White House? Or address it through the regulatory process?

Oh wait, you did. It was part of the ACA, and CMS issued the final rule in 2012. The rates are the same as the Medicare rates now. So how is this the Virginia Republican legislature's fault?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2014 12:40PM by BrianSchoeneman.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So Brian, this is the Medicaid REPUBLICANS want
> for Virginia's poor. One with poor reimbursement
> that limits doctors for Virginia's poor.
>
> Brian, why aren't your politicians willing to
> accept responsibility for their own actions and
> blaming doctors and wives of candidates instead?
>
>
> It's a damn shame and desperation it seems. You
> Republicans are looking desperate as usual as
> Brian. I don't understand why Republicans always
> think people are stupid when we do nothing but
> show them the door in this state.


Psssttt... VA could expand Medicaid and his wife (whose office is in DC to begin with) STILL wouldn't be taking Medicaid patients.

DC has expanded Medicaid. She still doesn't take it.

Lots of political families make very poor political decisions

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So Brian, this is the Medicaid REPUBLICANS want
> for Virginia's poor. One with poor reimbursement
> that limits doctors for Virginia's poor.
>
> Brian, why aren't your politicians willing to
> accept responsibility for their own actions and
> blaming doctors and wives of candidates instead?
>
>
> It's a damn shame and desperation it seems. You
> Republicans are looking desperate as usual as
> Brian. I don't understand why Republicans always
> think people are stupid when we do nothing but
> show them the door in this state.

Virginia's Medicaid system complies with federal law. We provide at least the minimums required.

Nobody is blaming Foust's wife for not taking Medicaid - that's a perfectly rational decision for her practice to make and one that lots of doctors around the country have made. But it's hypocritical to be serving as her husbands chief health care surrogate, blasting Barbara Comstock for opposing the expansion knowing that while she will be increasing the burden on her colleagues who do accept Medicaid, she won't have to deal with the aftermath of the problem her husband's policy preference would create.

It's just hypocritical.

We're not desperate, we are just tired of the "do as I say, not as I do" attitude that is fundamental to the modern Democratic Party.

So you create plans that only provide at least the minimums required, your own words, as Republican legislators, and then blame doctors for not taking plans you designed won't pay them for services?

And you call doctors that want to change that and establish better plans for Medicaid recipients the hypocrites here?

I think you Republicans are the hypocrites here and full blown living in your own little state of absolute delusion. It's just an alternative reality irrespective of the facts and your actions and responsibilities.

The reason for these substandard Medicaid plans is you. You are the overarching reason there is the problem to begin with. That matters. That's more important than his wife not being able to accept Medicaid because of you.

You Republicans are responsible for it to begin with. Am I just living in a twilight zone or in an alternative reality with these people. It's just funny their audacity sometimes.

I would suggest that Republicans should start concerning themselves with peoples problems including health care needs rather than simply playing political gimmicks with a system Republicans work hard to keep broken and fundamentally flawed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2014 01:06PM by Gerrymanderer2.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> And you call doctors that want to change that and
> establish better plans for Medicaid recipients the
> hypocrites here?
>

When those doctors don't even take Medicaid patients in their own practice?

Absolutely! lol

Let me give you an example. It's like not giving your child school lunch money to buy lunch, then you blame the lunch lady for supporting a free lunch program but not being able to pay for your child's lunch.

He was your child and your responsibility to begin with and your indifference to his need for lunch is what the problem is here not the lunch lady.

Not only that, it gets worse. Since that lunch lady supports a program where your child can eat but can't buy your child lunch for you. You demonize her and attack her for being a hypocrite. And you demand she buy your child that lunch or show no compassion for your child at all to begin with or her husband shouldn't be elected to Congress.

That's the gist of this nonsense lmao. If it didn't make you cry it would make you laugh.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Basically the Republicans are criticizing John
> Foust for not forcing his political ideology on
> his wifes private profession into accepting a
> crappy Medicaid plan that was purposely legislated
> to be crappy by REPUBLICANS to begin with.


LoLz


 
Attachments:

Cue the dumb gif's and meme's. That's when you know the pwning is complete.

Let me give you an example. It's like a tree
falls on your head and you start talking German
even though you never spoke German before in your
entire life. And then your own parents refuse to
even learn German.

And then, for some reason, squirrels start sitting
outside the windows of you home and they are
wearing French hats. Sometimes, they're even
smoking cigars and drinking brandy.

That's the gist of my understanding of any situation
if it concerns Obama. He is never wrong, even when
he is.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cue the dumb gif's and meme's. That's when you
> know the pwning is complete.


LoLz

 
Attachments:

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cue the dumb gif's and meme's. That's when you
> know the pwning is complete.


No way. We're not even close to being finished owning your dumb ass. lol

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you create plans that only provide at least the
> minimums required, your own words, as Republican
> legislators, and then blame doctors for not taking
> plans you designed won't pay them for services?

I don't know whether our rates are at the minimum or not - I am simply saying that the minimums themselves are the same as the Medicare reimbursement rate and have been since 2012. This was part of Obamacare. If there was an issue with the minimum rate, that could have been addressed and it should have been. You guys didn't.

So there is no reason to blame Republican legislators if you had the ability to fix something you perceived as being a problem but didn't.

> And you call doctors that want to change that and
> establish better plans for Medicaid recipients the
> hypocrites here?

No, I'm calling Foust a hypocrite.

> I think you Republicans are the hypocrites here
> and full blown living in your own little state of
> absolute delusion. It's just an alternative
> reality irrespective of the facts and your actions
> and responsibilities.

And we feel the same thing about you. Neither of that is helpful.

> The reason for these substandard Medicaid plans is
> you. You are the overarching reason there is the
> problem to begin with. That matters. That's more
> important than his wife not being able to accept
> Medicaid because of you.

If the plans are substandard, you had two years to fix them when we had little power to stop you. This isn't a situation where his wife CAN'T accept Medicaid, it's that they choose not to.

It's typical for you to blame Republicans for a third party choice.

> You Republicans are responsible for it to begin
> with. Am I just living in a twilight zone or in
> an alternative reality with these people. It's
> just funny their audacity sometimes.

You're in the twilight zone.

> I would suggest that Republicans should start
> concerning themselves with peoples problems
> including health care needs rather than simply
> playing political gimmicks with a system
> Republicans work hard to keep broken and
> fundamentally flawed.

The solution you all are proposing to fix this problem will neither fix it, nor is it a sustainable solution. Republicans aren't going to expand Medicaid for you all to feel better about yourselves when the result won't solve the problem.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let me give you an example. It's like not giving
> your child school lunch money to buy lunch, then
> you blame the lunch lady for supporting a free
> lunch program but not being able to pay for your
> child's lunch.
>

No, it's more like when a typical hypocritical lib doctor comes out in favor of expanding Medicaid when they don't even accept Medicaid.

First of all Brian, we did fix that problem in the two years we had in power. But the Republican Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts took it upon himself to give state legislators the power to refuse to expand Medicaid in their respective states.

And Republican legislators in Virginia worked to do and did just that. So your line of reasoning is not in line with the facts once again.

Substandard plans are not a federal issue. It varies state to state on what sort of Medicaid program the state adopts. Whether it be private or not.

Because of Virginia's state Republicans, our state opts for private substandard Medicaid plans.

I just wish a day would come where a Republican would take some responsibility for his actions.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2014 02:02PM by Gerrymanderer2.

Not shocking that a libtard like Gerry didn't understand what's wrong with this picture.

You seem to complain a lot, Gerry. But you don't seem to do anything about it.

Oh I know what's wrong with the picture. I see the picture clear as day. The picture is in HD when it comes to Gerry.

The problem with you Republicans is you're so dense and caught up in your own BS that you don't know know if you're lying or telling the truth sometimes. And whether you're the ones being hypocritical when you charge others with hypocrisy.

Moneywhereyourmouthis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You seem to complain a lot, Gerry. But you don't
> seem to do anything about it.

I'm doing something right now, I'm hoping to create many more Ken Cuccinelli's in this state.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh I know what's wrong with the picture. I see
> the picture clear as day. The picture is in HD
> when it comes to Gerry.
>
> The problem with you Republicans is you're so
> dense and caught up in your own BS that you don't
> know know if you're lying or telling the truth
> sometimes. And whether you're the ones being
> hypocritical when you charge others with
> hypocrisy.


LoLz

 
Attachments:

The problem is that she supports Medicaid expansion, works in an area where it has been expanded, but doesn't accept Medicaid.

John Foust is the compassionate man of the people needed to represent Northern Virginia.

Teach the Republicans in Richmond that gerrymandered our districts that they can't hold us down. Comstock or whatever the hell the name is is obviously running scared. If this is how she campaigns she'll be an embarrassment out the door soon anyway.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John Foust is the compassionate man of the people
> needed to represent Northern Virginia.

... whose typical hypocritical doctor wife writes articles advocating Medicaid expansion and has a practice in an area where Medicaid has been expanded, yet doesn't accept Medicaid.

In fact, given the insurance limitations noted in some of the reviews, I doubt that they even accept most Obamacare insurance. Which he and she also advocate.

The Republican legislators that are bought and paid for by the insurance companies blaming the doctors for the uninsured and underinsured. We've reached a new low.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> First of all Brian, we did fix that problem in the
> two years we had in power. But the Republican
> Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts
> took it upon himself to give state legislators the
> power to refuse to expand Medicaid in their
> respective states.

We aren't talking about the Medicaid expansion. You are trying to explain why Foust's wife's practice doesn't take Medicaid, and you argued that the reimbursement rates are too low.

I pointed out that the reimbursement rates are now the same as Medicare, and they were raised as part of the ACA. If that wasn't a big enough increase to get doctors to take Medicaid, that's because your folks didn't get the numbers right.

That's not the fault of Republican legislators. That's your fault.

> And Republican legislators in Virginia worked to
> do and did just that. So your line of reasoning
> is not in line with the facts once again.

Expanding Medicaid wouldn't get more doctors to accept Medicaid patients. In fact, it would make the existing problem worse because you'd have 400k more patients and no increase in doctors to cover them.

> Substandard plans are not a federal issue. It
> varies state to state on what sort of Medicaid
> program the state adopts. Whether it be private
> or not.

Substandard plans are a federal issue because the federal government sets the minimums.

> Because of Virginia's state Republicans, our state
> opts for private substandard Medicaid plans.
>
> I just wish a day would come where a Republican
> would take some responsibility for his actions.

And I would wish the same for Democrats.

Regardless of your macro partisan complaints, the point remains - Foust supports expanding Medicaid, he has attacked Barbara Comstock for voting against it, Foust's wife is a doctor who doesn't accept Medicaid.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Republican legislators that are bought and
> paid for by the insurance companies blaming the
> doctors for the uninsured and underinsured. We've
> reached a new low.

Gerry, the ACA is the biggest payday the insurance industry has had in a long, long time. That wasn't our doing.

What is it about she works where Medicaid has been expanded but doesn't take Medicaid don't you understand?

Foust's wife is an woman with an independent profession. She also reserves the right to support Medicaid expansion and conduct her business how she see's fit.

Barbara Comstock has no moral high ground here since she is in opposition of Medicaid as a whole. The Republican Party has no business criticizing anyone for not showing more compassion for Medicaid recipients or less fortunate in need of health care.

Obviously it would seem that opposition to Obama Care and Medicaid expansion isn't as popular as Republicans would like to make it seem or such ridiculous campaign tactics wouldn't be necessary.

One would have to assume that the human cost of Republican indifference to the plight of the poor's access to health care in this state is starting to take hold.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foust's wife is an woman with an independent
> profession. She also reserves the right to
> support Medicaid expansion and conduct her
> business how she see's fit.

I agree with this.

> Barbara Comstock has no moral high ground here
> since she is in opposition of Medicaid as a whole.
> The Republican Party has no business criticizing
> anyone for not showing more compassion for
> Medicaid recipients or less fortunate in need of
> health care.

Barbara is not against Medicaid. She voted against the Medicaid expansion. We are not criticizing Foust or his wife because they aren't being compassionate, we're criticizing them for not being consistent.

> Obviously it would seem that opposition to Obama
> Care and Medicaid expansion isn't as popular as
> Republicans would like to make it seem or such
> ridiculous campaign tactics wouldn't be
> necessary.

No, it still unpopular.

Obamacare - 54.3% opposed http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

Virginia Medicaid Expansion - 53% opposed
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/24/poll-support-medicaid-expansion-eroding-virginia/

> One would have to assume that the human cost of
> Republican indifference to the plight of the
> poor's access to health care in this state is
> starting to take hold.

We're not indifferent. We just disagree with you on how to address it.

Gerry desperately tries to change the subject away from a liberal candidate's wife's hypocrisy in supporting Medicaid expansion while not accepting Medicaid.

Fails miserably.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Republican legislators that are bought and
> paid for by the insurance companies blaming the
> doctors for the uninsured and underinsured. We've
> reached a new low.


Guess that's why Obama, Pelosi and Reid let big insurance and big pharma write the ACA then. Moron

"We're not indifferent. We just disagree with you on how to address it."

Now that's funny, how can you simply disagree when you have no plan? Obama Care was the Republican plan. Created in the walls of the Heritage Foundation with Newt Gingrich, first implemented in Massachusetts by your most recent Republican nominee for president.

"We just disagree", no, you oppose altogether with indifference.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "We're not indifferent. We just disagree with you
> on how to address it."
>
> Now that's funny, how can you simply disagree when
> you have no plan? Obama Care was the Republican
> plan. Created in the walls of the Heritage
> Foundation with Newt Gingrich, first implemented
> in Massachusetts by your most recent Republican
> nominee for president.


Is that why his liberal hypocrite wife doesn't take Obamacare insurance?

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "We're not indifferent. We just disagree with you
> on how to address it."
>
> Now that's funny, how can you simply disagree when
> you have no plan? Obama Care was the Republican
> plan. Created in the walls of the Heritage
> Foundation with Newt Gingrich, first implemented
> in Massachusetts by your most recent Republican
> nominee for president.
>
> "We just disagree", no, you oppose altogether with
> indifference.


LoLz

 
Attachments:

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "We're not indifferent. We just disagree with you
> on how to address it."
>
> Now that's funny, how can you simply disagree when
> you have no plan? Obama Care was the Republican
> plan. Created in the walls of the Heritage
> Foundation with Newt Gingrich, first implemented
> in Massachusetts by your most recent Republican
> nominee for president.
>
> "We just disagree", no, you oppose altogether with
> indifference.

We do have a plan - grow the economy and give people the tools to get jobs that provide health insurance.

Oddly enough, that was supposedly the President and the Governor's plan too - at least, they ran on job creation. Whether or not they actually meant it is a different story.

Oh job creation, great plan. Next you'll tell me cutting taxes will insure everybody. I'm baiting you so don't bite on that.

I remember Republicans caring about jobs until recently. Oh that's right the presidential election passed.

288,000 jobs added for the month of June by the way, down to 6.1 percent unemployment. If only Republicans had a track record of creating jobs it might be a semi plausible position to have.

Your plan has already been accomplished under Obama's watch, no matter how you spin the job results. The stock market and unemployment rate are significantly better than they were 5 years ago and will continue to trend in the right direction.

But, it's not too late to come up with a new plan.

And the workforce participation is much, much lower.

I pretty much stay out of politics, and after reading this feel justified. I think Brian is wrong on some points, same with Gerry. But Brian seems better in presenting, Gerry just seems like a hate-filled person who is irrational.

Averager Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I pretty much stay out of politics, and after
> reading this feel justified. I think Brian is
> wrong on some points, same with Gerry. But Brian
> seems better in presenting, Gerry just seems like
> a hate-filled person who is irrational.

To be fair, I do this for a living. I should be better at it than Gerry.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Averager Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I pretty much stay out of politics, and after
> > reading this feel justified. I think Brian is
> > wrong on some points, same with Gerry. But
> Brian
> > seems better in presenting, Gerry just seems
> like
> > a hate-filled person who is irrational.
>
> To be fair, I do this for a living. I should be
> better at it than Gerry.


To be fair, you're a lobbyist for a living, not a politician. Don't try and pad your resume Brian. It's unbecoming. Plus, you're not that good anyway. It's just that Gerry is a certified retard and a tree would be 'better at it' than he is.

brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Averager Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I pretty much stay out of politics, and after
> > > reading this feel justified. I think Brian
> is
> > > wrong on some points, same with Gerry. But
> > Brian
> > > seems better in presenting, Gerry just seems
> > like
> > > a hate-filled person who is irrational.
> >
> > To be fair, I do this for a living. I should be
> > better at it than Gerry.
>
>
> To be fair, you're a lobbyist for a living, not a
> politician. Don't try and pad your resume Brian.
> It's unbecoming. Plus, you're not that good
> anyway. It's just that Gerry is a certified
> retard and a tree would be 'better at it' than he
> is.

What I said was that I present arguments for a living, which is what a lobbyist/lawyer/public official/blogger or whatever you prefer to call it does.

You act like politician is some kind of honored title.

^^^ +1

First, I am a lifelong democrat.

Second, both members are greedy pigs who could care less about the poor when it comes to their money.

I am familiar with this practice, they don't even accept insurance. They expect patients to pay the bill and seek their own reimbursement. Spring valley is Beverly hills basically.

Roust is two faced about this, but so was Michelle Bachman. She moaned about big evil over meant while her husbands company and their family farm collected govt benes.

Without double standards liberals would have no standards at all.

I think the facts speak for themselves. Quite frankly I think Republicans have no business attacking the wife of a candidate for not being able to accept Medicaid patients whose plans they are primarily responsible for.

That's the hypocrisy and it's repulsive. Obviously Republicans in Virginia put national politics over the interests of the state and it's uninsured. Now they will have to deal with the consequences.

Smoke and mirrors won't fool anyone in Northern Virginia. The same ole Republican smoke and mirrors tactics don't work around these parts. Ask Ken Cuccinelli, he ran against Medicaid expansion.

These Republicans in Virginia need to be taught a lesson that Washington style indifferent obstruction and deadlock won't fly in this state.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think the facts speak for themselves. Quite
> frankly I think Republicans have no business
> attacking the wife of a candidate for not being
> able to accept Medicaid patients whose plans they
> are primarily responsible for.
>

What don't you understand about Medicaid already being expanded in DC? Where she still DOESN'T accept it. lol

Yes, it is hypocritical and repulsive.

I see the grasping of straws when there should be legislating for the uninsured.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let me give you an example. It's like not giving
> your child school lunch money to buy lunch, then
> you blame the lunch lady for supporting a free
> lunch program but not being able to pay for your
> child's lunch.
>

Let me give you a better example.

It's like the federal government offering the states free money for the school lunch program, but they can only use it to buy brussels sprouts.

The states buy the brussels sprouts, reporting how many jobs they create by doing so.

The lunch ladies put out the brussels sprouts on the lunch lines.

The children take the brussels sprouts because they are required to take one with their free/reduced lunch card, and because the tasty veggies are all gone.

They throw the brussels sprouts at their friends, stick them to the ceiling, or discard them in the trash.

The lunch lady reports all the brussels sprouts sold.

The reports are aggregated by the Feds to prove success of the program.

Of course, this has nothing to do with Medicaid, or the hypocrisy of the John Foust family. But it was fun to write.

In an ideal Gerrymanderer world, the Feds would require the States to issue Medicaid vouchers (or some equivalent word, as vouchers are evil) and require all health care professionals to accept these Medicaid vouchers as payment in full.

I see a typical hypocritical limo liberal promoting Medicaid expansion while she doesn't accept Medicaid patients.

Those po' folks don't pay the rent on her +$3 million joint I guess. She probably lets them cut the grass though.

^^^ + 1,000

Gerry posted 20 times in this thread and convinced no one. Sad.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Averager Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > I pretty much stay out of politics, and
> after
> > > > reading this feel justified. I think Brian
> > is
> > > > wrong on some points, same with Gerry. But
> > > Brian
> > > > seems better in presenting, Gerry just
> seems
> > > like
> > > > a hate-filled person who is irrational.
> > >
> > > To be fair, I do this for a living. I should
> be
> > > better at it than Gerry.
> >
> >
> > To be fair, you're a lobbyist for a living, not
> a
> > politician. Don't try and pad your resume
> Brian.
> > It's unbecoming. Plus, you're not that good
> > anyway. It's just that Gerry is a certified
> > retard and a tree would be 'better at it' than
> he
> > is.
>
> What I said was that I present arguments for a
> living, which is what a lobbyist/lawyer/public
> official/blogger or whatever you prefer to call it
> does.
>
> You act like politician is some kind of honored
> title.


Politician has become a sleazy title. The only thing in our system more sleazy than the politicians are the lobbyists whores who buy their influence. That would be your btw.

brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

He sure looks the part in this picture...
Attachments:

brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Politician has become a sleazy title. The only
> thing in our system more sleazy than the
> politicians are the lobbyists whores who buy their
> influence. That would be your btw.

It has become a sleazy title because cynical people who have no idea what politicians do besides what they see in TV have made it sleazy. The same goes for lobbyists.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Politician has become a sleazy title. The only
> > thing in our system more sleazy than the
> > politicians are the lobbyists whores who buy
> their
> > influence. That would be your btw.
>
> It has become a sleazy title because cynical
> people who have no idea what politicians do
> besides what they see in TV have made it sleazy.
> The same goes for lobbyists.


One would expect you, getting a paycheck from the system, to defend the system. But to deny the reality that our political system is now a sleazy mess full of self-serving elitists on both sides of the aisle is laughable.

Brian is a very patient man. Even when these Kool Aid drinkers call him names and spread lies, he still remains civil and on the point.

I already posted a perfect example of the hypocrisy of this Republican line of attack.

"Let me give you an example. It's like not giving your child school lunch money to buy lunch, then you blame the lunch lady for supporting a free lunch program but not being able to pay for your child's lunch.

He was your child and your responsibility to begin with and your indifference to his need for lunch is what the problem is here not the lunch lady.

Not only that, it gets worse. Since that lunch lady supports a program where your child can eat but can't buy your child lunch for you. You demonize her and attack her for being a hypocrite. And you demand she buy your child that lunch or show no compassion for your child at all to begin with or her husband shouldn't be elected to Congress."

Gerry, I think you are missing the point of this thread. It's not about school lunches. I think it's about some hooker who won't accept Medicaid at her DC practice while openly campaigning for more Medicaid.

That's not nice, she's a practicing OBGYN that brings babies into the world. Have some self restraint.

""Let me give you an example. It's like not giving your child school lunch money to buy lunch, then you blame the lunch lady for supporting a free lunch program but not being able to pay for your child's lunch.

He was your child and your responsibility to begin with and your indifference to his need for lunch is what the problem is here not the lunch lady.

Not only that, it gets worse. Since that lunch lady supports a program where your child can eat but can't buy your child lunch for you. You demonize her and attack her for being a hypocrite. And you demand she buy your child that lunch or show no compassion for your child at all to begin with or her husband shouldn't be elected to Congress."

Hey Gerry, these are adults--not children. The Brussels sprouts example was much better done.

We're all children of this great nation.

Notice how Gerry talks about everything but the actual facts.

Another good-for-me-not-for-you democrap.

Brian makes sense, Gerry makes nonsense.

brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> One would expect you, getting a paycheck from the
> system, to defend the system. But to deny the
> reality that our political system is now a sleazy
> mess full of self-serving elitists on both sides
> of the aisle is laughable.

I don't defend the system because I'm getting paid to defend it - and the only check I get from the taxpayers is for the Electoral Board and that's less than what your average McDonald's employee makes in a year. I defend the system because I believe in it.

If the system is full of self-serving elitists, you only have yourself to blame. Your vote and your willingness to work to get rid of those people is the difference between them winning or you electing someone who represents what you want.

I have to shake my head at the cynical people who bitch and moan about government while ignoring that they have the tools in their hands to fix what they think is broken.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2014 11:26AM by BrianSchoeneman.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > One would expect you, getting a paycheck from
> the
> > system, to defend the system. But to deny the
> > reality that our political system is now a
> sleazy
> > mess full of self-serving elitists on both
> sides
> > of the aisle is laughable.
>
> I don't defend the system because I'm getting paid
> to defend it - and the only check I get from the
> taxpayers is for the Electoral Board and that's
> less than what your average McDonald's employee
> makes in a year. I defend the system because I
> believe in it.
>
> If the system is full of self-serving elitists,
> you only have yourself to blame. Your vote and
> your willingness to work to get rid of those
> people is the difference between them winning or
> you electing someone who represents what you want.
>
>
> I have to shake my head at the cynical people who
> bitch and moan about government while ignoring
> that they have the tools in their hands to fix
> what they think is broken.


And yet, you rail against the Tea Party because they want to get rid of those people. Let's see how well your boy Gillespie does this Fall without the 300K of Tea Party voters that will sit it out because assholes like you decided you'd rather have a turd like McAuliffe win than support Cuccinelli. Now it's payback time. No way Gillespie wins VA without us and he can't have us. Sadly, since your awash in the shit of this system, you really don't care who's in office as long as they'll answer your phone call and let you take them to dinner.

Gillespie doesn't have a chance no matter what you do.

What goes around..... Wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------

> And yet, you rail against the Tea Party because
> they want to get rid of those people. Let's see
> how well your boy Gillespie does this Fall without
> the 300K of Tea Party voters that will sit it out
> because assholes like you decided you'd rather
> have a turd like McAuliffe win than support
> Cuccinelli. Now it's payback time. No way
> Gillespie wins VA without us and he can't have us.
> Sadly, since your awash in the shit of this
> system, you really don't care who's in office as
> long as they'll answer your phone call and let you
> take them to dinner.

I donated to Ken, I wrote positive articles about Ken, I tried to rally the moderates to support Ken, and I voted for Ken. There wasn't much else I could have done to help Ken, and what I did was more than most.

My issue with the Tea Party is the apparent inability of some of them to figure out who their real opposition is. Is not me or Ed Gillespie. It's the Democrats.

You can't complain about people shredding the Constitution when you spend most of your time undermining it with false claims of corruption, or outright attacks on it, like your anti-lobbyist nonsense is.

There is more to politics than just railing against perceived corruption and complaining when things don't go your way. When you win, you have to be able to govern, and my biggest issue with the Tea Party is that too often, the things they say and do and the positions they demand of the candidates they support make it impossible for anybody who courts their support to be able to do their job if they win. And that just starts the vicious cycle all over again.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2014 12:34PM by BrianSchoeneman.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


>
> I donated to Ken, I wrote positive articles about
> Ken, I tried to rally the moderates to support
> Ken, and I voted for Ken. There wasn't much else I
> could have done to help Ken, and what I did was
> more than most.
>
> My issue with the Tea Party is the apparent
> inability of some of them to figure out who their
> real opposition is. Is not me or Ed Gillespie.
> It's the Democrats.
>
> You can't complain about people shredding the
> Constitution when you spend most of your time
> undermining it with false claims of corruption, or
> outright attacks on it, like your anti-lobbyist
> nonsense is.
>
> There is more to politics than just railing
> against perceived corruption and complaining when
> things don't go your way. When you win, you have
> to be able to govern, and my biggest issue with
> the Tea Party is that too often, the things they
> say and do and the positions they demand of the
> candidates they support make it impossible for
> anybody who courts their support to be able to do
> their job if they win. And that just starts the
> vicious cycle all over again.


Sure Brian. I guess you think we can't go back a year and read your posts where you wrote that you'd rather lose than have the support of the Tea Party. Guess Ed will find out what that feels like since you can't even get on a ballot anywhere.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gillespie doesn't have a chance no matter what you
> do.

The one thing in this thread that Gerry's said that makes any sense.

Double post.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2014 01:36PM by Gerrymanderer2.

Ken Cuccinelli should have been nominated by primary. Which of course wouldn't have happened and Bill Bolling would be our governor today. Republican extremists hijacked the nomination process and forced their nominee through tyrannical means.

They have no one to blame but themselves for the results.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is more to politics than just railing
> against perceived corruption and complaining when
> things don't go your way.

This message was posted at lunch time on a Friday. Was Brian:

1. Eating at his desk in his office;
2. Taking Friday off and posting from home;
3. Eating lunch at a Panera, etc. using their wifi; or
4. Eating lunch in a private club that caters to lobbyists and other elitist politicos?

Libs say "Do as I say, not as I do!"

real reality Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Brussels sprouts example was much better done.

Thank you. I enjoyed writing it; glad you read it.

.....comes around Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> >
> > I donated to Ken, I wrote positive articles
> about
> > Ken, I tried to rally the moderates to support
> > Ken, and I voted for Ken. There wasn't much else
> I
> > could have done to help Ken, and what I did was
> > more than most.
> >
> > My issue with the Tea Party is the apparent
> > inability of some of them to figure out who
> their
> > real opposition is. Is not me or Ed Gillespie.
> > It's the Democrats.
> >
> > You can't complain about people shredding the
> > Constitution when you spend most of your time
> > undermining it with false claims of corruption,
> or
> > outright attacks on it, like your anti-lobbyist
> > nonsense is.
> >
> > There is more to politics than just railing
> > against perceived corruption and complaining
> when
> > things don't go your way. When you win, you
> have
> > to be able to govern, and my biggest issue with
> > the Tea Party is that too often, the things
> they
> > say and do and the positions they demand of the
> > candidates they support make it impossible for
> > anybody who courts their support to be able to
> do
> > their job if they win. And that just starts the
> > vicious cycle all over again.
>
>
> Sure Brian. I guess you think we can't go back a
> year and read your posts where you wrote that
> you'd rather lose than have the support of the Tea
> Party. Guess Ed will find out what that feels
> like since you can't even get on a ballot
> anywhere.

I know you can't do that, because I never wrote that. And I've been on a ballot. Come on now. Make some sense.

place your bets Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is more to politics than just railing
> > against perceived corruption and complaining
> when
> > things don't go your way.
>
> This message was posted at lunch time on a Friday.
> Was Brian:
>
> 1. Eating at his desk in his office;
> 2. Taking Friday off and posting from home;
> 3. Eating lunch at a Panera, etc. using their
> wifi; or
> 4. Eating lunch in a private club that caters to
> lobbyists and other elitist politicos?

4.

What do I win?

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> place your bets Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > There is more to politics than just railing
> > > against perceived corruption and complaining
> > when
> > > things don't go your way.
> >
> > This message was posted at lunch time on a
> Friday.
> > Was Brian:
> >
> > 1. Eating at his desk in his office;
> > 2. Taking Friday off and posting from home;
> > 3. Eating lunch at a Panera, etc. using their
> > wifi; or
> > 4. Eating lunch in a private club that caters
> to
> > lobbyists and other elitist politicos?
>
> 4.
>
> What do I win?


The same thing you won in 2011 when you got trounced by that pinch-faced turd Bulova, NOTHING.

brianschoeneman is the devil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > place your bets Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > There is more to politics than just railing
> > > > against perceived corruption and
> complaining
> > > when
> > > > things don't go your way.
> > >
> > > This message was posted at lunch time on a
> > Friday.
> > > Was Brian:
> > >
> > > 1. Eating at his desk in his office;
> > > 2. Taking Friday off and posting from home;
> > > 3. Eating lunch at a Panera, etc. using their
> > > wifi; or
> > > 4. Eating lunch in a private club that caters
> > to
> > > lobbyists and other elitist politicos?
> >
> > 4.
> >
> > What do I win?
>
>
> The same thing you won in 2011 when you got
> trounced by that pinch-faced turd Bulova, NOTHING.

Oh, I got plenty from that.

If this is about Medicaid expansion then you people better do your homework.

Provide medical care to the poor? Sounds awesome.

How much does it cost? Anyone?

Can we trust the politicians with an accurate number? Hell no.

Silver line cost how much.....mixing bowl......hot lanes.....are they ever accurate?

No.

Stop asking me to pay other people's bills. I am sick of it

lol, the bellow the belt stone throws are flyin now...

What is pinch faces name? I want to see what he looked like.

David Bulova. I don't get the characterization.

I knew going in to that race that it was going to be uphill. But I learned a lot, met a lot of people, and I didn't simply lose and walk away. While I don't like losing, I like it more than never stepping up and taking the risk. So when folks who have never taken that risk throw it in my face, it doesn't really bother me.

Stop being politically correct, you and I both know he's a pinch face lol. We'll just keep it an unspoken understanding.

David and I get along. I won't call him a pinch face, and he won't comment on my haircut.

lol