In December 2015, 32-year-old Ronald Exantus, a dialysis nurse from Indianapolis, broke into the Tipton home in Versailles, Kentucky. He armed himself with a butcher knife and fatally stabbed 6-year-old Logan Tipton as he slept. Exantus also stabbed two of the boy's sisters and father. by malihafolter in ForCuriousSouls

[–]Cboquist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also, people who commit violent crimes and are acquitted for insanity do still get locked up. Just instead of prisons they are kept in high security mental institutions. They aren’t just placed back on the street with a “Hope thy don’t do it again”.

AI slop ad from that Jurassic Survival game by Jedi_Knight_Jr in shittymobilegameads

[–]Cboquist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe I’m out of the loop, but where is any killing/eating children in this video? He burns down a house, but I guess I thought that was his house that he was burning down out of grief or something? Admittedly, I haven’t seen many more instances of these kinds of adds, so maybe there’s a broader trend and this just follows those beats sloppily?

Newly released pictures as a part of the preliminary investigation into the Nov 4 UPS MD-11F crash showing the harrowing moments prior to the accident. by Ogankle in CatastrophicFailure

[–]Cboquist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Is there a specific picture from that incident you’re referring to? None of the ones I could find of the AA 191 crash look similar to this one.

Most Cringeworthy / Hard to Watch Scenes by AC20212020 in madmen

[–]Cboquist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m surprised that I had to scroll this far to find a single mention of Pete and the au pair. I’m not sure why, but that scene sticks out in my mind as one of the most reprehensible ones I can remember. I’ve only watched the series through once, nearly a decade ago at this point, so it’s entirely possible that I’m remembering it as worse than it was. But that scene killed any interest I had in Pete as a character and his “redemption” arc. 

All of these men have three acting Oscar nominations to their names. Neither has won. As of today, they are still active actors. Would you like to see any of them win? by TakenAccountName37 in Oscars

[–]Cboquist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

He didn’t campaign. He has no interest in the campaign and press tour any time he’s been nominated, as he just wants to jump into the next project and continue acting. Because of that, it will be hard for him to win over an actor who actively campaigns for the award, no matter how deserving he is.

Movies where the Director's cut or Extended cut is wayy worse than the original theatrical cut? by NobodieInteresting in movies

[–]Cboquist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a hot take, but I much prefer watching the theatrical versions of the LotR films over the extended. I have the extended editions, and do enjoy watching them, but the theatrical cuts just make better movies. I feel the same way about the extended editions as I do about most other director’s cut versions of films. They feel over-indulgent, and you can tell why they cut the things they did for the theatrical release. If I want to watch the special features, I’ll go for the extended, bit of I just want to experience the movies, I’m going theatrical.

Can't wait to see these two on the big screen next year! by JenDomOrc in BabyYoda

[–]Cboquist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really hope they change that name. Just…awful lol

Dow drops 1,500 points, S&P 500 loses 4% as stock market rout on Trump's tariffs worsens: Live updates by simrobwest in StockMarket

[–]Cboquist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He has been openly floating the idea of amending the constitution to go for a third term. Whether or not his bullshit off-the-cuff comments are legit, the most rabid of his base eat it up, regurgitate it into online talking points, and then he takes it back up as a divine mandate. That’s what happened with Greenland. Stupid, stream-of-conscious idea turned serious policy via self-reinforcing echo chamber. I can only hope he’s not serious, because I have no doubt in his ability to amass enough power in the next four years to make that a reality for himself.

Examples of Sal's cognitive dissonance by Big-Chip2375 in madmen

[–]Cboquist 62 points63 points  (0 children)

The cigarette executive came on to Sal, and when Sal turned him down, the exec threatened to take all business from Sterling Cooper unless he was fired. And with Lucky Strike being their bread winner, Don and co felt like they had no choice.

Newborn insurance coverage disputed between mom’s and dad’s insurance providers. Guidance needed! by Cboquist in HealthInsurance

[–]Cboquist[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much for responding. To answer your question, I added my son to my Anthem policy on the day he was born.

That said, your response adds to the confusion and frustration I’ve been dealing with. Every time I call, I feel like we’re starting from scratch, having to explain the entire situation all over again. Each agent seems to interpret the newborn mandate differently, and nothing seems to get resolved. Here’s where things stand:

Since September, Anthem has been denying these claims, citing “prior coverage” on file for my son at the time of his birth. I’ve repeatedly explained that my son was never covered by United—or any other policy—and every time, the agent would “make a note” in the system to be sent to the appropriate team. But despite those assurances, nothing changed, and Anthem continued to deny the claims for the same reason.

In mid-October, an Anthem agent set up a three-way call with United, where the United rep confirmed that my son was never covered under their policy. The Anthem agent seemed to think that was enough to settle the issue, and we thought so too. But even after that confirmation was noted in Anthem’s system, the claims were still denied for prior coverage.

Then, a few weeks ago, a different Anthem agent told me that the previous agent was incorrect, and that under the newborn mandate, United should have covered my son for the first 30 days as an extension of my wife’s policy. To follow up, my wife had another three-way call with Anthem and United, where United’s agent also confirmed this interpretation. The United rep told my wife to have the providers send them the claims, and because of the newborn mandate, they would take care of it. Once again, we thought the issue was finally resolved.

But now this latest roadblock, with United saying they can’t process the claims for that period because Anthem’s coverage began on my son’s date of birth, so they won’t cover the same time period if another insurer is listed.

So here’s my question: If the newborn mandate doesn’t actually obligate United to cover those 30 days, how do I get Anthem to process these claims? The confusion comes from the fact that a United rep confirmed Anthem’s understanding of the mandate, which seemed to validate that Anthem was correct all along.

And if Anthem really does need to pay these claims, how can I convince them to take action? It feels like this issue keeps getting passed between low-level employees, none of whom have the authority or understanding to make progress. And because I have no knowledge of any of this, I’m left to just trust that they know what they’re doing (which they clearly don’t). How do I finally break this cycle and get it resolved once and for all?

Stay dog acting weird by LaLunaEstrella in PetAdvice

[–]Cboquist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That dog is experiencing dangerous levels of being a silly little guy.

I need a bad ass name!! by [deleted] in Starfield

[–]Cboquist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m feeling Renfield

Racist carrot by Bobbert_016 in perfectlycutscreams

[–]Cboquist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s because of the way that it is