2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
i'm not sure what falls under the gender reaffirming care that is being offered to inmates. breast implants and penis lopping are components gender care in the outside world, but perhaps not under the Progressive Prison Plan, or Trump's Prison Plan.
Ok, well until someone can explain what exactly this benefit is that is being provided to inmates but not to free world citizens, I can't be outraged about it. For all I know it's just a monthly chat with a shrink or something. I find it hard to believe that inmates are receiving expensive cosmetic surgery on the house, but if they are, then sure, that doesn't sound like something for which taxpayers should be footing the bill.
Ok, well until someone can explain what exactly this benefit is that is being provided to inmates but not to free world citizens, I can't be outraged about it. For all I know it's just a monthly chat with a shrink or something. I find it hard to believe that inmates are receiving expensive cosmetic surgery on the house, but if they are, then sure, that doesn't sound like something for which taxpayers should be footing the bill.
Ok, put me down as someone who disagrees with this and thinks it's ridiculous. The **** has it got to do with Kamala, other than being from California? Is she proposing that the federal government adopt this policy? It looks like the state was forced to do this by a court ruling anyway?
Ok, put me down as someone who disagrees with this and thinks it's ridiculous. The **** has it got to do with Kamala, other than being from California? Is she proposing that the federal government adopt this policy? It looks like the state was forced to do this by a court ruling anyway?
Fed government has paid for breast implants:
Fed government has paid for breast implants:
Again, while I think that this is all ridiculous, it looks like it was the result of a court ruling and not some Democratic policy, so I'm struggling to see wtf it has to do with Kamala.
Edit: sorry, missed your second link, just reading now.
Ok, read it. Looks like she's sitting on the fence and being deliberately vague about what she means by "medically necessary". Count me as one of the people who definitely thinks that taxpayers shouldn't be paying for any elective medical procedures for inmates, but her stance on this definitely doesn't appear to be "illegal aliens and convicts first" which is what rickroll would have had us believing. Looks like a court ruled in favour of some of these surgeries for whatever reason, too lazy to look up the cases, and she's just trying to answer some interview question without alienating either side. Then Trump's campaign took snippets of that 5 year old interview and spliced them together in a misleading manner, which is why it's suddenly become an issue.
LOL. You said:
If your actual problem is providing inmates with very specific types of healthcare, then use those words.
i believe convicts with appendicitis should receive the treatment just as someone who works part time at target and is uninsured would be treated
they get the care they need and then they and their family are sent a bill just like everyone else
perhaps the debt will never be paid - but you should not get special rights and privileges the rest of our society does not have simply because you chose to commit a crime or cross over illegally
Ok, put me down as someone who disagrees with this and thinks it's ridiculous. The **** has it got to do with Kamala, other than being from California? Is she proposing that the federal government adopt this policy? It looks like the state was forced to do this by a court ruling anyway?
you're finally seeing the light, i thought all hope was lost with you tbh
in 2020 she campaigned aggressively on this - only officially removed it as a policy last week - which is likely more to do with her losing ground specifically to that stance rather than signifying an actual change in opinion on the matter
Dude, don't blame me because you can't explain what you're talking about and I had to drag it out of you. If you had just explained originally exactly what type of healthcare you were talking about and that Kamala had campaigned for it instead of speaking in generalities and vague allusions and providing a little extra tidbit of information with every post, this whole exchange could have been about 1/10th of the length and I would have probably agreed with you sooner. If you can provide the link for her campaigning on this policy in 2020 (or 2024) as you stated, that is.
Do you have a link? Specifically, did she campaign that prisoners should receive better/more healthcare than your hypothetical part time Target employee?
aclu still has all her positions up
https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/202...
it's going to get the same treatment as the "she wasn't anti-fracking, she was only talking about banning fracking on federal lands" treatment by the kool aid cultists who will explain away all the insanity from their own side just to justify the candidacy of anyone opposing trump
spoiler alert - due to america's natural resources and land ownership laws, the only area where the government could have any jurisdiction or decision making ability was on federally owned lands - this is tantamount to saying "Bernie Sanders wasn't in favor of providing free universal healthcare because he never advocated doing so for Mars"
aclu still has all her positions up
https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/202...
it's going to get the same treatment as the "she wasn't anti-fracking, she was only talking about banning fracking on federal lands" treatment by the kool aid cultists who will explain away all the insanity from their own side just to justify the candidacy of anyone opposing trump
This is presumably the same questionnaire that housenuts' factcheck.org article references. I gave my thoughts on that above.
aclu still has all her positions up
https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/202...
it's going to get the same treatment as the "she wasn't anti-fracking, she was only talking about banning fracking on federal lands" treatment by the kool aid cultists who will explain away all the insanity from their own side just to justify the candidacy of anyone opposing trump
spoiler alert - due to america's natural resources and land ownership laws, the only area where the
this is the specific answer
Yeah, look, I'm not a doctor, if the doctors are saying that gender transition is a medical necessity then I guess I'm not going to argue. She is not suggesting that they get elective surgery, those are your words because you disagree that it's a medical necessity.
Do part time target employees not also receive any treatments that are a medical necessity and then get the bill later? I thought that was how it worked.
This is presumably the same questionnaire that housenuts' factcheck.org article references. I gave my thoughts on that above.
i didn't click his link but you can see her direct passage above, she explicitly says they all need to receive gender affirming surgeries and whether true or not, she takes full credit as being the person behind why this is already happening in california
Yeah, look, I'm not a doctor, if the doctors are saying that gender transition is a medical necessity then I guess I'm not going to argue. She is not suggesting that they get elective surgery, those are your words because you disagree that it's a medical necessity.
Do part time target employees not also receive any treatments that are a medical necessity and then get the bill later? I thought that was how it worked.
last i checked part time target employees do not receive federally subsidized breast implants - but i've never worked for target so perhaps i'll need to go there myself today and start copping some feels to see for myself
i didn't click his link but you can see her direct passage above, she explicitly says they all need to receive gender affirming surgeries and whether true or not, she takes full credit as being the person behind why this is already happening in california
last i checked part time target employees do not receive federally subsidized breast implants - but i've never worked for target so perhaps i'll need to go there myself today and start copping some feels to see for myself
I think you're eliding over the part where the medical professionals are saying it's a medical necessity. That sounds to me like the point of contention, not the fact that prisoners get treatments which are a medical necessity. They are not getting treatments categorised as elective, whether you or I agree with the categorisation or not.
But yes, I'd certainly question which of these treatments are a necessity and why. Would it be in my top 500 list of issues when choosing between Kamala and Trump? No. In a world where Kamala is running against her twin who is identical in every respect other than she doesn't want to spend my tax money on fake tits for prisoners, I vote twin.
Yeah, look, I'm not a doctor, if the doctors are saying that gender transition is a medical necessity then I guess I'm not going to argue. She is not suggesting that they get elective surgery, those are your words because you disagree that it's a medical necessity.
I'm guessing there's many doctors that would deem breast implants as a medical necessity.
Yeah, look, I'm not a doctor, if the doctors are saying that gender transition is a medical necessity then I guess I'm not going to argue. She is not suggesting that they get elective surgery, those are your words because you disagree that it's a medical necessity.
Do part time target employees not also receive any treatments that are a medical necessity and then get the bill later? I thought that was how it worked.
again, i can't emphasize enough, you're assuming way too much with how medical coverage actually works in the USA, even the best of medical coverage often treat these as uncovered and elective surgeries
even with the best health insurance out there, most transitions cost people well into 6 figures of their personal spending
again, i can't emphasize enough, you're assuming way too much with how medical coverage actually works in the USA, even the best of medical coverage often treat these as uncovered and elective surgeries
even with the best health insurance out there, most transitions cost people well into 6 figures of their personal spending
Yes, I don't know, so I'm asking you to clarify. Who decides whether a treatment is necessary or elective? Are different treatments categorised differently in different contexts?
Would it be in my top 500 list of issues when choosing between Kamala and Trump? No. In a world where Kamala is running against her twin who is identical in every respect other than she doesn't want to spend my tax money on fake tits for prisoners, I vote twin.
for me it's the canary in the coal mine
i can't ever support such insanity - so much that as much as i despise trump, i'd sooner have 4 more years of him than a single year of kamala
i'm still not a trump supporter and will either not vote or vote for stein, but i'll never support a kamala presidency - would rather have a raging buffoon than someone wants to give preferential policies for criminals and illegal immigrants than actual citizens - that's antithetical to what you want in a leader of a country
can you possibly imagine the board of Walmart considering a CEO candidate who has repeatedly stated during the screening process that they care deeply about ensuring Target earns more money than they do in order to level the playing field for that chain which was unfortunate enough to be headquartered in minnesota?
in short, i'd rather have a treasonous buffoon who i believe should be in jail who is actively scamming americans with crypto than someone who says we need to give things to immigrants and convicts that millions of citizens don't have themselves
in short, i'd rather have a treasonous buffoon who i believe should be in jail who is actively scamming americans with crypto than someone who says we need to give things to immigrants and convicts that millions of citizens don't have themselves
Aside from the overall ridiculousness of this view, I think you're completely strawmanning her position on this. Can you answer my question about who decides whether a treatment is necessary or elective? Does Kamala's policy/proposed policy define what is necessary, or does it just say "provide prisoners with whatever the doctors deem necessary"? That seems like a key point here.
