Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
in [Golf]
|
From: Carbon on 5 Sep 2009 10:06 On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 06:40:49 -0700, dene wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > news:4aa24743$0$4943$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:34:43 -0400, Jack Hollis wrote: >> > On 04 Sep 2009 23:12:30 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >>> Not at all. Just like Congress withdrew the "death panel" part >> >>> of the health care legislation, the VA has withdrawn this >> >>> booklet. >> >> >> >>I would not have done that. I would have sent people around to the >> >>various media outlets to point at the ridiculousness of the death >> >>panel astroturf campaign, to explain how it was funded, that it was >> >>designed to appeal to retards, etc. >> > >> > I have no doubt that the purpose of the VA pamphlet, and the "End >> > of Life Counseling" sessions, is to increase the probability that >> > they (VA and Medicare) will get the chance to "pull the plug" on >> > more people than they do now and thus save money. And I assure you >> > that I am not retarded. >> > >> > BTW, it's not like you to be so crude. Perhaps you should find a >> > way to insult people in a more sophisticated manner. >> >> I didn't mean that I think *you're* retarded, Greg. But putting >> dingbats on FOX screeching about death panels is absolutely designed >> to appeal to retards. It's exactly the same M.O. used in the birther >> campaign. The Republicans have long indulged in such tactics, which >> is not surprising given their demographics, but it's a bad sign that >> they have nothing else. > > I have yet to hear a Republican say that there is any truth to death > panels. Perhaps they have....I've not paid any attn. to it. O'Reilly > certainly hasn't said it, nor has anyone on his show. > > Now....there is truth regarding medicare rationing, and if you're on > the short stick of that deal, then perhaps the people who decide this > could be considered a "death panel." Your whole take on it is wrong, I'm assuming not deliberately. There needs to be some sense injected into the system. If I was in a permanent vegetative state I would not want to be kept alive like Terry Schaivo. Would you? These things happen because there is no clear direction about how to proceed in the event of a catastrophic medical event. Not death panels, Greg. Saving money by giving people what they want in the first place. Besides, we already have death panels: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/08/11/denial_of_care/
From: Jack Hollis on 5 Sep 2009 11:26 On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 13:22:35 GMT, Bobby Knight <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote: >You have to be kidding! > > In the first place everything...EVERYTHING...here is taken out of >context. I'm sorry BK, but it's you that has to be kidding. These are all entire paragraphs and some are consecutive paragraphs and entire pages. Nothing is taken out of context. >The premise is not one that is being suggested, rather what >a regime, such as the Planetary Regime, COULD do if it was so >dedicated. This is a "what could happen" scenario, not a suggestion >for the Obama administration. Hell it was written 32 years ago. This is just an indication of how radical some of the Obama's advisors are. Van Jones is another example of how out of touch with America Obama and his advisors are. The fact that anyone could even suggest the things that Holdren suggests is an indication that the man is totally unacceptable to be a member of the US government on any level. The same is true for Van Jones. >Now go back and see where any of this is deemed OK, or that this kind >of Big Brother medical practice is suggested as policy by this, or any >other administration. Bobby, you asked for a cite where members of the Obama administration suggested forced abortions and you got it. In addition, you got a lot more than that. Forced abortions were the least of it. Mostly of this stuff could only be carried out by a totalitarian regime like the Communists or the Fascists. This type of thinking has no place in a democracy. However, there is serious doubt that Holdern actually believes in democracy or the US Constitution. If he did, he could have never written such things. >Hollis knows better too, but its the kind of ultra-right-wing bullshit >that they spread in order to scare those of you who believe anything. > >BK Bobby, all I did was quote directly from Holdren's book. These are his words, not mine. The facts are the facts. My guess is that Holdern dropped a little too much acid back in the old days and hasn't returned to his right mind yet. It frightening that he is an advisor to the President.
From: Howard Brazee on 5 Sep 2009 16:51 On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: >They want to take something like 50 billion from medicare...and they >will have to ration; anyone with an ability to think the issue through >knows this. IMHO rationing will have to happen anyways. We can't give >everyone the best care possible. I don't like the idea of this >happening through the govt. It's a power I would not like to see the >govt have. It's too open to abuse if and when you get abusive leaders, >that come along from time to time, as history has shown us. Now that argument makes sense to me. (Unlike the arguments which simply state that the state will ration, without mentioning how that is different from Big Business rationing). I agree that rationing will continue either way, and that it is scary to think of Big Brother controlling it. I am curious though about who is making these decisions in places where the socialized medicine is via the government. Has it been a problem? There is also a chance of the reverse happening - to get votes, the state can pay for anything and everything, whether it makes sense or not. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison
From: Howard Brazee on 5 Sep 2009 16:54 On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 11:26:27 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: >This is just an indication of how radical some of the Obama's advisors >are. Van Jones is another example of how out of touch with America >Obama and his advisors are. Whenever politicians disagree with *me*, I take it as an example of how out of touch with America those politicians are. After all, it only makes sense that the whole country agrees with me. Funny thing though, no matter what stand the politicians make, there are people who make the came claim. In fact, I've heard it from people on both sides of this one issue. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison
From: dene on 5 Sep 2009 18:13
"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:giv4a5dkqs5hat2dl2lffm6l3dqng7pl0o(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 13:22:35 GMT, Bobby Knight <bknight(a)conramp.net> > wrote: > > >You have to be kidding! > > > > In the first place everything...EVERYTHING...here is taken out of > >context. > > I'm sorry BK, but it's you that has to be kidding. These are all > entire paragraphs and some are consecutive paragraphs and entire > pages. Nothing is taken out of context. > > >The premise is not one that is being suggested, rather what > >a regime, such as the Planetary Regime, COULD do if it was so > >dedicated. This is a "what could happen" scenario, not a suggestion > >for the Obama administration. Hell it was written 32 years ago. > > This is just an indication of how radical some of the Obama's advisors > are. Van Jones is another example of how out of touch with America > Obama and his advisors are. > > The fact that anyone could even suggest the things that Holdren > suggests is an indication that the man is totally unacceptable to be a > member of the US government on any level. The same is true for Van > Jones. > > >Now go back and see where any of this is deemed OK, or that this kind > >of Big Brother medical practice is suggested as policy by this, or any > >other administration. > > Bobby, you asked for a cite where members of the Obama administration > suggested forced abortions and you got it. In addition, you got a lot > more than that. Forced abortions were the least of it. Mostly of > this stuff could only be carried out by a totalitarian regime like the > Communists or the Fascists. This type of thinking has no place in a > democracy. However, there is serious doubt that Holdern actually > believes in democracy or the US Constitution. If he did, he could > have never written such things. > > >Hollis knows better too, but its the kind of ultra-right-wing bullshit > >that they spread in order to scare those of you who believe anything. > > > >BK > > Bobby, all I did was quote directly from Holdren's book. These are > his words, not mine. The facts are the facts. > > My guess is that Holdern dropped a little too much acid back in the > old days and hasn't returned to his right mind yet. It frightening > that he is an advisor to the President. So that's KnitWit's excuse.....that it was written out of context, 32 years ago. I'm glad I didn't bother to read this nonsense on GG. Let's suppose there is merit to his Knit's excuse. Where's the cite that indicates the author changed his mind. Unless there is, his words stand. -Greg |