GOP Congresswoman Virginia Foxx: Health Care Reform Bigger Threat Than Terrorism
Think Progress has kept tabs on the hyperbolic statements of Republican North Carolina Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, and so have we. For example, in 2008, Foxx attacked Democrats who voted against drilling in ANWR, saying:
“We had a great opportunity to pass a bill yesterday that would have created more American energy, but my colleagues on the other side don’t seem to be in favor of more American energy. They seem to be anti-American energy, just as many other things that they support seem to be anti-American power and anti-American control.”
Now, Foxx may have topped herself, railing on about how people fear for our freedoms:
Everywhere I go in my district, people tell me they are frightened. … I share that fear, and I believe they should be fearful. And I believe the greatest fear that we all should have to our freedom comes from this room — this very room — and what may happen later this week in terms of a tax increase bill masquerading as a health care bill. I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.
Stop bashing her…she represents Mount Airy…that’s the Andy Griffith Show’s “Mayberry.”
flap Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:40 pm
*Begin Preemptive EricG rant*
You would like a show where there were no blacks and women were held down, Flap. A bigoted place where you can live in your white utopia where women would have back alley abortions and die in the process.
You’re nothing but an extreme hateful Republican fascist. That’s the decision I’ve come to.
The rest of the Republican Party is no better than you, I think.
Why don’t you take your racist, bigoted views and leave this country?
*End Preemptive EricG rant*
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Now that’s what I like: a radical rightwing republikkkan who disses himself.
Good job, Brownie.
piffle Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Flap is commenting on the static banality of liberal talking points and inability to oppose arguments with anything but comfortable ad hominem stereotypes and self fulfilling prophecies.
flap Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Hehe, RocKKKy, if you consider ME to be a radical Republican, you’re more out-of-touch than EricG.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:12 pm
“…comfortable ad hominem stereotypes and self fulfilling prophecies…”
Ya, we learned about that stuff from you guys. And stop trying to act all learned and sophisticated with your “banals” and “ad hominem-izing.”
“…if you consider ME to be a radical Republican…”
If you ain’t on my side, you’re on THAT side. I dispense with all shades of gray because that’s another thing we learned from you guys.
“…you’re more out-of-touch than EricG…”
Eric is a great guy and I like his F-ing attitude, without any qualification whatsoever, GD it.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Awesome! Simply awesome.
OldLefty Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:21 pm
As opposed to the ” static banality of liberal talking points and inability to oppose arguments with anything but comfortable ad hominem stereotypes and self fulfilling prophecies.”
Some people DO that, as some on YOUR side do, such as traitors , radicals, Marxists, fascists, troop haters, appeasers, etc.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:44 pm
specifically ericg
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Following the US Constitution and reading the words of a man for what they are is “static banality” huh?
Maybe you should do some actual reading and some actual research before you jump and down on your partisan tirade.
Just a thought. You sound like all the other misinformed hate-mongers on the right who don’t love America and only love their corrupt party in it’s place.
–
By the way you all are complete hypocrites because you would love me if I only attacked the left instead of you and also because (prepare for a shocker) I’m ripping off the hatred and nonsense I have heard from right-wingers and just spring boarding it right back at you lowlifes.
Hurts doesn’t it?
Good. You all do nothing but mock and degrade others in your every word.
You don’t do “politics” here on Liberaland.
You do “hatred”.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:03 pm
I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t like your posts even if you changed positions.
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:10 pm
Having fun playing games with Satan?
I hope so.
You look like it.
–
“Out of touch” would be having no facts or basis in what you say.
You know … like calling people who are capitalists “socialist” and calling the president a “racist” and labeling liberals based on the views of people who hate liberals with all their black little hearts.
I think … wait, I forgot … the only opinions that ever mattered are the opinions of the right.
Nevermind, I always say the babies have their bottles.
You little babies want to feel right and think you are winning. Sure, whatever.
Just don’t be shocked when the nation rejects you once again at the polls and at the voting booth.
Here’s a tip if you don’t want to see your party and your ideology die:
Try bringing a solution to an issue instead of just hatred for the other side and fear-mongering about accusations you made up yourself.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:13 pm
having no facts or basis in what you say.
I’m gonna regret doing this, but here goes nothin’
EricG, you talk a lot. You say a lot of things that folks of your way of thinkin’ like to hear. You claim we lie and make up facts to support our views.
Question. Honestly. Have you given even one single fact based argument in the last, oh, say, 3 months?
EricG Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:49 am
I LEARNED IT FROM WATCHING YOU, OKAY!
(lol, that’s a old anti-drug ad I’m quoting)
I admit openly that I’m ripping off the right wingers I listened to on the radio prior to getting on this website when people have just gone ape-bannas on me.
I like to point out that Limbaugh or Beck is the true author of the vile joke I just told about politics.
And then people get more angry because they see that the hatred flames they light for Democrats are just as easily lit for Republicans. It’s all the same noise, except humming a different tune.
Thank you, Rocky. I appreciate your words.
I have decided to “tamp it down” in so far as I don’t want to be so personal in my distaste for neo-con ideology.
That much, I can see is clearly wrong.
But my attitude is not going anywhere in terms of the hosility I recieve for what are often rather silly and obviously tongue-in-cheek comments about conservatives.
EricG Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 am
I wasn’t aware that I was held to journalistic standards not found for any of the right wingers in the media, nor the ones on this website, in their political commentations.
I do use facts, but I also learned a little about sales & marketing recently.
You don’t sell toasters or coffee cakes or cars with logic. You sell it with emotion.
Politics is no different.
I’ll bore you to tears with all these little wonder independent studies that confirm all the noise about health care reform being good for the country … but I know ahead of time that I would be better to use my time to beat The GOP to the punch in coming up with things like “death panels” and “government take-over”.
Grandma is dying and it’s all because of the greed of insurance companies!!!
Ahhhhhhhhh!
Save grandma!!!
(Ok, that was lame but does anyone see the point?)
Facts are important, more important than you obviously think they are. But they are not the only part of a debate. God forbid someone should point out that they are pissed off at the process as much as the issue. It’s tough to get facts on things like that. Should people be mute because of this standard?
My point is that if you love facts and hate hyperbole then why the hell do you watch / listen to Fox? Doesn’t make sense.
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
(Glad to see right-wingers don’t listen to me when it comes to the fact that putting words in the mouths of others is both unpatriotic and low.)
*Begin Flap Rant*
Slavery and abortion are connected because I want them to be!
People only matter if they are in a womb, otherwise they can starve to death and die of simple infection.
Jesus was lying in the Bible and I can decide that he was something he was not because I don’t like facing the fact that Jesus Christ was a socialist.
*End Flap Rant*
–
Well I hope you losers are having fun using me as your punching bag.
The truth of the day is always the least popular thing spoken aloud.
flap Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:08 pm
“Well I hope you losers are having fun using me as your punching bag.”
You bring it upon yourself with the over-the-top rhetoric!
“Slavery and abortion are connected because I want them to be!”
Take a group of people and make them non-human property to use/dispose of at your whim. It’s fairly logical, whether you agree with it or not.
“People only matter if they are in a womb”
Actually, I think murder is wrong wherever it occurs.
“I don’t like facing the fact that Jesus Christ was a socialist.”
Christ was liberal in many ways. Liberal is not necessarily bad. But He also was pretty darn conservative…”I am the Way, the Truth….” Believe in ME…that’s not very liberal.
And, tell me that Christ would have agreed with NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and abortion-on-demand! See if you have the guts to make that outlandish claim!
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
“Well I hope you losers are having fun using me as
your punching bag…”
Condemnation from the radical rightwing is the highest form of flattery. Hell, when THEY hate your guts you KNOW you’ve got all the answers.
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:27 pm
LOL!
LOL!!!!
OMG, you are serious too. Aren’t you?
–
let me introduce a term to you:
“Reactionary Politics”
–
There you have it, Flap.
I’m reacting to something I heard or mimicking the memes I hear spouted in the opposition.
Every time I am dead serious and just sharing a perspective I have some hate-monger like you or John Galt jump down my throat and make crazy statements that are extreme, radical right-wing perspectives.
Like so many things, you should learn more about what is “over-the-top” before you declare me as someone doing the worst of it.
then perhaps you’ll agree with me that the Military Industrial Complex must be gutted and nationalized to prevent blood-profiteering.
Have you ever read that quote in context from the Bible?
I would think you would have.
If you did then you already know that was Jesus reassuring (John I think) that he would find him in the afterlife and not telling the world that he was the only path to God.
Jesus was no liberal, because he was much closer to a socialist than he was a liberal.
“Marxist” might also work to describe Jesus of Nazareth.
I prefer the term “populist” and “social progressive” in regards to Jesus because the terms “Marixst” and “liberal” and “socialist” are too modern to talk about a man who lived more than two thousand years ago.
Christ would have supported Planned Parenthood.
No question.
I ask of you to do some non-biased research on PP and tell me what you find.
While you at it do some non-biased research on ACORN as well.
I have no idea what “abortion on demand” is.
We have illegal or legal abortions in the US.
I believe that not only would Jesus, were he alive today, be Pro-Choice he would be strongly in this direction only because it can be shown to be true that making abortion illegal only contributes to the death of mainly poor women.
Don’t forget that Jesus was more concerned about the poor than he was about some certain ideology of some certain perspective in some certain group.
I have no earthly idea what NARAL is … forgive me.
–
I have the guts to speak for Jesus. Because nobody speaks for him but everyone uses his name.
Jesus’ stance would be similar to mine in regards to abortion:
This is a tragedy of our times because it is preventable but the solution is not in bickering and hatred for your fellows but rather in coming together as a society with solutions like counseling and collaboration between groups like Operation Rescue and Planned Parenthood.
–
Oh no … I’ve spoken seriously on this website.
Just wait, someone has to flame me now.
It’s the standard of debate these days.
Say something not idle commentary = a right winger will show up and start being the bully.
–
My own bullying is what I’ll stop, or do my best to.
I believe “BIGOT GO HOME” is my worst of it all.
I’ll try to be more friendly, but I am not changing my stances that the neo-conservative ideology is expressly un-American and what we see from the right-wing in regards to Obama critism is nothing less than unpatriotic propaganda issued mainly by a political lobby disguised as a news group.
flap Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:19 pm
“Christ would have supported Planned Parenthood.”
And the outrageous statement of the year goes to…
*drumroll*
ERICG!
–
“This is a tragedy of our times because it is preventable but the solution is not in bickering and hatred for your fellows but rather in coming together as a society with solutions like counseling and collaboration between groups like Operation Rescue and Planned Parenthood.”
That statement SOUNDS good, but it doesn’t necessarily work. I don’t have hatred for anyone, but the solution to baby killing is to stop baby killing. That type of compromising was tried for slavery before the Civil War…did that work?
I understand that it can be a difficult, controversial issue and one that is not easily resolved especially because there are confounding factors. I understand that there are very harsh situations such as in rape and incest that create dilemmas. It’s all very unfortunate. However, the bottom line is that killing a fetus is just too grossly immoral to be compromised on. Like slavery. We’re dealing with HUMAN LIVES here. I’ll even grant you that torture probably falls into that same category (though I am less sympathetic in that case).
Human life is too precious to be killed off when it is just beginning. It cannot and should not be a choice. Just as parents cannot kill off infants, pregnant women (ESPECIALLY late term) should not be allowed to kill off their children. It’s no different morally.
“I’ll try to be more friendly”
Haha, don’t give in to conservatives or me, and certainly don’t compromise your beliefs…though I do think you should tone it down a bit!!
jasperjava Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Aunt Bea got elected to Congress?
She used to be a nice old lady, before she went senile.
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:05 pm
I could get into this thing about how personal attacks that have nothing to do with positions or policy really aren’t serving any real purpose other than to make the lowlifes of the world feel good about themselves for a little bit while someone else has to be put down for this to take place, of course. Such is the way of heartless bullies and the ungodly.
–
I’ve decided recently that turn my “filter” back on.
Because people hate the truth, left and right.
It’s a waste of time being straight with people.
They just spit in your face either way.
–
I think we should start teaching our children that politics is actually just an excuse to call each others names and say “YOU LIE!” when someone is speaking. Why lie to children? This is what we do.
Not a debate, just a partisan-hate-fest.
Also we should teach our children that if they are Republicans they don’t need to worry about going to jail or even being held accountable for their actions but if you are a Democrat then you will be held to double-standards and told vicious lies about everyday.
Once again. Why lie to children?
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
pot…kettle…kettle…ericg.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:16 pm
it’s not even a partisan hatefest…it’s just you.
Make sane rational postings, engage in a good debate, cut the rhetoric to a minimum and we’ll all get along just fine…like Lee, Lefty, JG, Um Cara and everyone else.
the only reason I pester you so much is that I think you have better in you, but if you want to get along with others you have to stop being such a whiny pretentious rhetoric spewing hate-monger to everything you don’t agree with. You don’t agree with it..that’s fine and dandy, I think that’s why we all come here, if we didn’t disagree what would be the point of showing up and talking politics, we could go to MSNBC or Foxnews if we all wanted our backs patted for believing the way we do.
unfortunately your entire schtick is tiring, unimaginitive, and quite frankly boring.
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:31 pm
I would think you would have.
If you did then you already know that was Jesus reassuring (John I think) that he would find him in the afterlife and not telling the world that he was the only path to God.
Jesus was no liberal, because he was much closer to a socialist than he was a liberal.
“Marxist” might also work to describe Jesus of Nazareth.
I prefer the term “populist” and “social progressive” in regards to Jesus because the terms “Marixst” and “liberal” and “socialist” are too modern to talk about a man who lived more than two thousand years ago.
Christ would have supported Planned Parenthood.
No question.
I ask of you to do some non-biased research on PP and tell me what you find.
While you at it do some non-biased research on ACORN as well.
I have no idea what “abortion on demand” is.
We have illegal or legal abortions in the US.
I believe that not only would Jesus, were he alive today, be Pro-Choice he would be strongly in this direction only because it can be shown to be true that making abortion illegal only contributes to the death of mainly poor women.
Don’t forget that Jesus was more concerned about the poor than he was about some certain ideology of some certain perspective in some certain group.
I have no earthly idea what NARAL is … forgive me.
–
I have the guts to speak for Jesus. Because nobody speaks for him but everyone uses his name.
Jesus’ stance would be similar to mine in regards to abortion:
This is a tragedy of our times because it is preventable but the solution is not in bickering and hatred for your fellows but rather in coming together as a society with solutions like counseling and collaboration between groups like Operation Rescue and Planned Parenthood.
–
Oh no … I’ve spoken seriously on this website.
Just wait, someone has to flame me now.
It’s the standard of debate these days.
Say something not idle commentary = a right winger will show up and start being the bully.
–
My own bullying is what I’ll stop, or do my best to.
I believe “BIGOT GO HOME” is my worst of it all.
I’ll try to be more friendly, but I am not changing my stances that the neo-conservative ideology is expressly un-American and what we see from the right-wing in regards to Obama critism is nothing less than unpatriotic propaganda issued mainly by a political lobby disguised as a news group.
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Eric, my own view of Jesus is that he was “heterodox” meaning he preferred his religion straight and simple, no fancy rituals, rites, and the rest. I would not say he was “liberal” or “conservative” for that matter because he didn’t play by anyone else’s rules but his own. After all, he only did what his dad told him to do, so he really wasn’t acting on his own volition anyway.
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:48 pm
I am so glad to hear that you don’t ever watch Fox News or listen to conservative-talk radio.
That is a good thing.
Oh wait, you were spinning the truth again!
You nasty little man!
Newsflash:
You just admitted recently that NOT READING anything I say is exactly what you do.
You might have noticed everyone is different.
Like how Old Lefty and Lee don’t just repeat each other or how Daddio and yourself don’t either.
You are telling me to conform.
Well, liberalism is partly based in non-conformity to the status quo.
Welcome to Liberaland.
Town Hall is always waiting for you. Nobody there does anything but stroke each others egos. You might enjoy it.
the only reason you pick me out of the crowd and “pester” me is because you find me engaging or dangerous or interesting or you want to shut me up.
I find it very rare that I get an actual reply on this site like I do on my own blog.
What I get here is scorn and mocking from people who have no life or have no respect for others.
It wears on me and makes me assume all conservatives are alike. They are all like you guys and the unpatriotic jackals in the media.
I know it’s not true but man-o-man you all don’t make it easy to think otherwise.
If you want to get along with others you have to drop the hatred you subscribe to in regards to Obama, Pelosi and all Democrats.
I’ll stick to the issues and make it less partisan if you can show me some of your side doing this as well.
I don’t believe it. I’ve said it before.
I don’t think conservatives are invested in this country. They are invested in their party and in their business interests. They could give a damn about the future. Prove me wrong.
–
I don’t want my back patted. Of course we all come here rather than pick our love-fest media.
That’s why I like Alan’s show and why I am not boycotting Fox News.
But this idea that you on the right can just walk away from your ideology, party and movement all fell flat on their face and the facts just don’t support these views on the recession being caused by Fannie & Freddie and matters like the illegal invasion of Iraq and the unconstitutional use of torture and so on.
I have said it many times about how I am not a journalist and this is “punditry”.
Want to know how “Fox News Lies”?
They don’t do exactly that. They will not label themselves as a pro-conservative network and they have people working for them that refuse to label themselves as pundits and try to use the term “journalist” when that is plainly false.
I like facts, but the right-wing succeeds by ignoring the facts and working on emotion instead.
In many ways I’m the biggest threat out there for conservatives. I want to rip you guys off.
It’s obvious that screaming “COMMUNIST DOGS!” and making up wild claims like that Dick Cheney is a child rapist are what gets things done in politics these days.
You all find it offensive? Really?
Well I’m not excused in my vulgarisms but I would point out that I am only dancing in the field that Beck / Limbaugh / Coulter laid out for me.
You should take a pound of flesh off the vicious partisans on the right who lie and smear for a living.
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Yes you would Guido.
I get spread all over conservative blogs the moment I do something toward that ideology.
Let’s give you an example so you can decide fro yourself:
http://ericlightborn.wordpress.com/2009/09/30/truth-about-lobbyists-and-interest-groups/
“One study of eighty-three (primarily liberal) public-interest groups found that one-third of them received half or more of all their funds from foundation grants; one-tenth received over 90 percent from such sources. In one ten year period the Ford Foundation alone contributed about $21 million to liberal public-interest groups. Many of these organizations were law firms that, other than staff members, had no members at all. The Environmental Defense Fund is supported almost entirely by grants from foundations such as the Rockefeller Family Fund. The more conservative Scaife foundations gave $1.8 million to a conservative public-interest group, the National Legal Center for the Public Interest.” [Wilson, DiIulio 2008]
The concept of using public interest groups to promote the agendas and ideals of a movement is, by this source, not exclusive to the liberal movement but heavily favored by it thus far.
President-elect Barack Obama may ultimately isolate himself from major liberal movement members if the proposed audit of Washington politics were to take a lasting toll on the liberal lobbies. The next four years will certainly answer just how far this coming administration is willing to go to remove corruption in public interest group finance and practice, but four years from now there will also once again be a national referendum on the highest office.
Should the effort ultimately take power from once strong lobbies for popular liberal agendas, the informed American Democratic Voter could potentially face a struggle at the polls when considering a vote for the incumbent President.
The power of an interest-group, in a classic design, should expand as the number of members and contributors expands. The ‘funded & unoccupied lobby’ described in quote above as a law firm is a critical element of what causes the real disruptions in Washington politics.
The figures and organizations that form the American lobbies and public-interest groups of today are not necessarily the root of the problem so much as the agendas of the highest funded public interest groups overriding the highest agendas of the wills of the people.
–
If the National Legal Center for the Public Interest (a weak lobby) were to receive a large increase in both number of members and in contributions. they should rightly increase in the voice and recognition in Washington and receive foundation grants in turn.
If the Environmental Defense Fund (a strong lobby) were to lose both member and public support their voice as a lobby should rightly decrease and even though they do not receive a majority in foundation grants they should be kept from taking them if they lacked any significant support in the public domain.
This is all within a classic definition of how the public interest groups should work. Any number of factors can increase or decrease the power of a single lobby and for this reason most of us limit our discussion on public-interest groups, or lobbies, to the number of members that are well-known or outspoken and the money behind the group.
–
Lobbyists are not are always motivated by ill or by good, despite the fact the lobby they work for is focused on a critical social issue or an important national matter that concerns you–or perhaps for a group with which you disagree strongly.
To speak broadly, they are like salesmen of political stances a person in Washington should take.
They are not invested into the case they are making in every single case but rather deliver the best argument in favor of the lobby that they can devise.
Politicians and lobbyists are very much the same, in many ways.
Without means to search the hearts of others to know for sure if they really believe what they contend or if they are simply going with the popular ideology to gain your favor, we will never know for certain if they stand for the people or if they stand for their own private interests.
We can only judge their actions in office as solid statements of policy.
Eric Lightborn
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
If no one noticed yet I am far more … crazy-partisan … on here (really anything instant publish) than I am on my own blog.
Why?
because I sit and work out what you read in a blog of mine in a word processor and when you read this right here it is RAW STREAMING PISSED OFF LIBERAL!
Deal with it.
And I also would note, as final comment, that I don’t swear or use the same kind of language common from someone like Rocky and I never really seek to bring up this difference. even though a great many neo-con bloggers have nothing but vile language and hateful statements on their work and many other liberals on the web don’t care about spreading four-letter words all over their blogs.
Point is, you are safe with me. One might not like what I say but I’m not going to make it so you have to hide the screen from your grandma or your kids. Call it “standards” if you must.
Everyone is different.
I actually pause and go “I dunno…” every time i write words like “lowlife” and “losers” and “unpatriotic” and so on.
I know nobody on the right-wing will believe it, but it’s true. I just decide that it’s not any worse than everything else that is said in politics thus fair game. And it is with people lying about liberals and making up un-American (or should I say “shameful” instead?) lies about the president.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:07 pm
I rarely if ever watch any news commentary programs and only occasionally ever listen to radio programs, Alan’s show being the most common show I listen to…
that makes me a nasty little man?
additionally, the one time I said I didn’t read your posts was just the one time…I try to read as much as everbody as I can, just so I can make an informed post. Sometimes I have to skim due to the sheer length of some posts (such as the two back to backers here), but I do try and read everything.
–
You are also woefully or ignorantly disinformed on my worldview.
—
what you do isn’t journalism or punditry…there’s another name for it.
Lee Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Eric,
“because I sit and work out what you read in a blog of mine in a word processor and when you read this right here it is RAW STREAMING PISSED OFF LIBERAL!
Deal with it.”
To be honest, I think you’d be better off putting the rants on your blog and the reasoned positions on this forum. I enjoy reading points from fellow Liberal’s particularly when they are well thought out and backed up with evidence. But I don’t get much out of ‘debating’ with people who feel the same way as me.
I stopped posting on some Conservative forums because of the moronic ‘get off here LIBRUL!’ type rants and difficulty in engaging in civilized debate. It’s different here on Alan’s site and it’s much more rewarding.
EricG Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:20 am
Excellent point, Lee.
Believe it or not, I do have rants on my blogs.
I’m sure it’s a shock to everyone…
In this much is where I was wrong in days past, without question.
I and nobody else should be singuling people out and doing the “get out here bigot” or whatever else anger-fueled partisanship I might have unfornately engaged in.
However, I am aminor student of History and there is no such thing as “civil debate”. There is “debate” and there is “civil discussion”.
What we see from the likes of Alan Colmes is a great oddity.
I would slap the tongue right out of the mouth of Randll Terry caling Dr. Tiller names on the radio. A million other times when if I was Alan, I would have done something extreme in response to the amazing levels of hatred and ignorance expressed.
But this idea that it’s something unique to debate is not true.
We should focus on no personal attacks and no individual isolation but at the same time be highly critical of one another’s logic and reasonig if we see fault.
I only think that people lose track of what is “criticism” and what is “partisnship” these days and it’s not native to Liberaland by any means.
–
A good point you make, that it should be reversed.
But the truth is that I decided years ago that bipartisan efforts are wasted online and better suited to the real world.
If we all ate dinne together … people might be shocked to learn I’d rather settle it in the ballot booth than upside your face.
Anyone with me on that? Because I worry that politics has become a breading-ground for nothing but fist-fights and screaming-matches.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:35 pm
This eludes any comparison to the “boy who cried wolf” because crying out to warn about a wolf might be seen as having some basis in reality.
How much longer do radical rightwing republikkkans suppose they can go on burbling these absurd fantasies and lies before they are regarded not merely as the laughingstocks of the United States, but of the whole planet?
I’d say the time has already arrived.
And this woman represents Mount Airy? That’s the town that inspired Andy Griffith’s Mayberry.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Over the top hyperbolic statement from someone utterly opposed to legislation. Almost as far removed from the lunacy of Al Gore saying his IPCC boy’s club (declining in membership) position paper thesis is more dangerous than terrorist attacks, which people have actually died from. How far down the calendar are we from Ban Ki-Moon’s doomsday clock entrail reading?
EricG Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:50 pm
So you are saying people don’t die from lack of health care?
That’s a strange position.
One not founded in facts or research data.
Did you maybe hear that on some brand of Fox Broadcasting?
piffle Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:23 pm
“So you are saying people don’t die from lack of health care?”
People die from lack of health care but not lack of health insurance. This is being sold as “health insurance reform” but the opposition is pointing out it really will affect the care delivery system.
The US does not have a free market health care delivery system, and thats actually one of the reasons for many of the problems. But forgetting that for a second, there are dozens of programs. There are very few percent who have no options, and no one opposes trying to work out a way to solve that problem. Well, maybe some people who are paid off by the insurance industry and don’t care about the bad rep, but most people do want to help thsoe who legitimately have no options.
But when you inflate those numbers with people who could afford coverage and don’t buy it, or people who are in the nation illegally, or don’t account for people in transition between jobs and will acquire coverage at a different point in the year, and then design the “reform” process to create a larger oligopoly (with intent to become a govenrment monopoly overtime), you will not only make the system worse but also decrease care possibilities.
So EricG, if you want to get into facts I could show you the nosocomial rates for methycillin resisten Staphylecoccus aureas infections in the NHS, which is a serious debate occuring in their cross party politics, or the concern for lack of family doctors per 80 patients in Canada, and spin that any way I want to show why the US system is better. Becuase your portrayal that what the president and Pelosi are plugging is utopian panacea and that only greedy racists are standing in their way is patently false.
But for the record I said that Foxx was being patently absurd, the same as Gore has been. There is no magic legislation that will solve any problem, whether its polio or civil rights or cocaine addiction. Therein lies the inherent distrust of the state thinking people possess.
Lee Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:05 pm
“People die from lack of health care but not lack of health insurance. ”
No, that’s silly. It’s like arguing people who died in a wreck because they were not wearing a seatbelt actually died because of the impact of their head on the dash and not because of the lack of a seatbelt.
The fact is that independent studies (e.g Institute of Medicine) show clearly that lack of insurance causes needless deaths.
“There are very few percent who have no options”
Right and hey tough luck for them, Eh?
“But when you inflate those numbers”
Or ‘deflate’ also based on nothing other than assumption.
“you will not only make the system worse but also decrease care possibilities.”
Baseless nonsense.
“if you want to get into facts”
Ah yes, and this is the classic Conservative tactic. Take one element of one healthcare system which has Universal Healthcare and extrapolate that generally as a result of their ‘foolish’ ideals. Please..
“There is no magic legislation that will solve any problem, whether its polio or civil rights or cocaine addiction.”
No you legislate to let the government control services where for-profit adds no benefit or is counterproductive to the effectiveness of the service. In addition to where you need to control costs.
But you are right at least in that government-paid healthcare won’t solve this problem on it’s own. There are certainly other steps we need to take to fix the cost model, but its nevertheless an essential component of a real solution.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:41 pm
The fact is that independent studies (e.g Institute of Medicine) show clearly that lack of insurance causes needless deaths.
But it does not show that these people couldn’t get insurance if they wanted it; only that when they got sick or hurt, they didn’t have it.
Right and hey tough luck for them, Eh?
Yes. Again, you understand that you are unable to legislate away death. You are not going to be able to give everybody all the medical care they want. All you are going to be able to do is give as many people as good of care as you can.
let the government control services where for-profit adds no benefit or is counterproductive to the effectiveness of the service.
You continue to misunderstand the role of profit.
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:48 pm
“Again, you understand that you are unable to legislate away death.”
-john with all due respect this sounds like a cop-out argument. You know the right to “life” is in the Declaration of Independence. This talk of you can’t legislate away death sounds cynical especially coming from someone representing the “pro-life” crowd.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 pm
-john with all due respect this sounds like a cop-out argument. You know the right to “life” is in the Declaration of Independence. This talk of you can’t legislate away death sounds cynical especially coming from someone representing the “pro-life” crowd.
My point is that you are no more able to legislate away cancer than you are able to legislate “free care to everybody.”
Obama could just as soon pass a law making gravity optional.
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:19 pm
who’s talking about “free-care?” The plans would be paid for by charging premiums to those that can afford it……maybe the expansion of Medicaid would be sorta free because after-all it’s helping the poor attain health insurance. A guy that got nailed to a cross 2000 years ago might agree with helping the poor in that situation.
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:24 pm
and once again, your argument of legislating away cancer is cynical….face it john, you are a cynic about the govt……besides your argument here is a slap in the face to legislators that have worked on funding research for cancer treatments……but you don’t care about the right to life so what difference does it make?
Lee Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:42 pm
“But it does not show that these people couldn’t get insurance if they wanted it; only that when they got sick or hurt, they didn’t have it.”
This is facile. Your idea of ‘insurance’ seems to be 50 dollar a month gimmicks with ridiculously high deductibles. ‘Normal’ insurance costs around 10000 dollars a year. Thats the kind of insurance that gives you real access to preventative and primary care that prevents many premature deaths.
You are completely in denial here.
“Yes. Again, you understand that you are unable to legislate away death.”
How many people die due to lack of insurance in universal healthcare countries? Oh yeah, it’s zero because they all have insurance due to what? LEGISLATION!
“You continue to misunderstand the role of profit.”
No, it’s you who don’t understand the role of profit. I understand the boundaries of where profit is good and where it’s ‘not so good’. You don’t even seem to understand there are boundaries and fail to understand that when it comes to human needs, profit doesn’t care.. profit is good for growing wealth and although thats a very good thing there are times where growing wealth is counterproductive to our needs.
Almost every other Western country has figured this out.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:42 pm
who’s talking about “free-care?”
What do you call something given to someone that doesn’t pay for it?
The plans would be paid for by charging premiums to those that can afford it
I see; I didn’t read far down enough. You would call it forced charity.
A guy that got nailed to a cross 2000 years ago might agree with helping the poor in that situation.
I agree. He would. He would argue that each of us should look deep within each of us to find that humanity given to us by Him to take care of the poor and the sick. You are absolutely right.
He would NOT mandate it though. If He was in favor of mandated charity and good works, He would have taken that route already.
face it john, you are a cynic about the govt
You owe me a glass of wine. And by the looks of things, a new monitor as well. Me? Cynical about the government? Of COURSE I am cynical about the government.
The government, repub or dem, can’t DO anything well. Trains? Broke. USPS? Broke. SS? Broke. Medicare/aid? Broke. Libraries? Broke. DMV, Federal Parks, Voter Registration, Bailouts name it. The government is poor poor poor.
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:49 pm
and that’s the difference……there are things the govt does that makes me cynical, for instance needless wars, but at the same time our govt can do things no other govt can do, we just fail to tap into it. Name another govt that has put a man on the moon (if you aren’t one of those weirdos that believes the moon landing was fake).
More to the point, I’m here to tell you that as a state employee, I’ve seen things the govt can do that the private sector can’t. Trust me on this, the private sector would not take as good as care of my folks as the facility in which they live now.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:49 pm
This is facile. Your idea of ‘insurance’ seems to be 50 dollar a month gimmicks with ridiculously high deductibles.
But but but but Obama said that what we are trying to do is prevent people from going bankrupt if they get hurt or sick. $50 a month does that.
And even if we just blow through the fact that you can’t keep your goals straight, I have ONE preventative care visit a year. One! Even without insurance, that bill is at most $120. A year. Sheesh. In your world is the individual responsible for ANYTHING?
How many people die due to lack of insurance in universal healthcare countries?
Look, you can wiggle your nose and wave you ponytail all night long. Make a health insurance policy magically appear in your hand. You’ll still die waiting in line.
Or of whatever else that money DIDN’T buy as a result of giving you free medical care.
Almost every other Western country has figured this out.
Every single system of universal care doesn’t work, is broke and has its customers [citizens] screaming for reform.
Lee Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:20 pm
“But but but but Obama said that what we are trying to do is prevent people from going bankrupt if they get hurt or sick. $50 a month does that”
We were arguing about lack of insurance causing death. But anyway, even your 50 dollar a month plans don’t prevent bankruptcy. The facts are most medical bankruptcies are people who had/have insurance.
” I have ONE preventative care visit a year. One! Even without insurance, that bill is at most $120. ”
That’s often all it takes and might precipiate some associated medicine like anti-hypertensive drugs etc. But I don’t know where you plucked that number from. A check-up with blood-screening etc certainly costs in the hundreds of dollars, particularly for the uninsured who ironically have to pay the highest rates.
“Make a health insurance policy magically appear in your hand. You’ll still die waiting in line.”
Look, if all you have is myths about ‘waiting in line’ causing deaths then give me a break. There is no such evidence that increased waits have caused death.
“Every single system of universal care doesn’t work, is broke and has its customers [citizens] screaming for reform.”
Universal Healthcare has been in existence over a hundred years. Not one country that has it wants a market based system for payment. The only reform people scream for is more funding. No-one is screaming for a system like the US!
Countries with Universal Healthcare have healthier, happier citizens and a system which is on average twice as cost-efficient as our own. Our truly broken market-based system which most certainly doesn’t work, is unsustainable and has resulted in one of the unhealthiest nations in the Western world.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:32 pm
The facts are most medical bankruptcies are people who had/have insurance.
1. Yes. Of that sub-group of Americans who claim medical bankruptcy, most have insurance. That’s because most American’s have health insurance.
2. The inverse is not true. Most American’s don’t claim medical bankruptcy. In fact, as I have show before, the number is vanishingly small.
precipiate some associated medicine like anti-hypertensive drugs
Glad you brought that up. I recently was put on Lisinopril; a common hypertension drug. You wanna know the price? It’s crazy–better sit down. $4. Not per pill, that’s crazy talk. I’m talking $4 a month.
These for profit robber barons just won’t give the workin’ man a break! $4, how COULD they?!?
There is no such evidence that increased waits have caused death.
If you can make up facts, then let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that so can I.
The only reform people scream for is more funding
Q.E.D.
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:58 pm
hey john, I’m glad you have the access to care and you had a problem diagnosed early-on and are receiving the medications for that. Acutally, I’m not glad you have the problem, but glad you have the care. Anyway, think of the poor souls walking around who have no idea they have hypertension (silent disease it’s been called) and will one day be in the ER from a stroke, heart attack, or ruptured aneurysm. You see, it’s those poor souls who don’t have the access that you have that ironically end up costing you and me and the rest of libland because we end up with the tab. But if all they needed was 4 bucks a month to prevent a catastrophe, then we would’ve saved a lot getting that individual the care they needed sooner rather than later. Enjoy the wine because it’s good for your arteries (not in excess though).
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:46 pm
You see, it’s those poor souls who don’t have the access that you have that ironically end up costing you and me and the rest of libland because we end up with the tab.
They HAVE access to that care. You can get a physical for less than $100-$125. Even if you just went every OTHER year that would be great.
But if all they needed was 4 bucks a month to prevent a catastrophe, then we would’ve saved a lot getting that individual the care they needed sooner rather than later.
I agree. But who doesn’t have $4 a month!?! Virtually no one. Not more than a tenth of 1% of Americans don’t have 4 bucks.
Lee Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:51 pm
“2. The inverse is not true. Most American’s don’t claim medical bankruptcy. In fact, as I have show before, the number is vanishingly small.”
650000 a year!!! As I also stated more than the population of Baltimore.. Are you kidding me? Thats 650000 people that would not have filed bankruptcy in almost any other Western nation.
“These for profit robber barons just won’t give the workin’ man a break! $4, how COULD they?!?”
Would you care to expand on how/where you were getting $4 for a 30-day supply? Let’s see what the cost is when you have no insurance and develop such a pre-existing condition?
“If you can make up facts, then let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that so can I.”
Look, here is the difference. I don’t make up facts. Period. All the stuff I’ve quoted is backed up by a credible study/report of some kind.. All of it. Furthermore I don’t play your game of as I’ve stated before, taking some negative aspect of a particular example of a universal healthcare system and not only making the general extrapolation to all UH nations but blaming it on their government paid for method even though there is absolutely no evidence for such a link.
“The only reform people scream for is more funding
Q.E.D.”
Have you ever talked to some Brit’s or even Canadians about their views of their healthcare system? Most will probably lament some shortfalls of their system but there is a big difference between griping about the system and wanting a different one altogether. Almost none of them want anything to do with our’s.
In this country people don’t just complain about our system, the majority actually want a different one!
“Are people fleeing America to get the care they need? Or are the world’s nations fleeing TO America for the care they need.”
It’s probably the former actually as cost is the biggest factor by far, of medical tourism. You should check out the facts before posting such claims.
John Galt Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 am
650000 a year!!!
Actually, the number you quoted was something like 70% of 650,000. But why quibble. 650k is less than 1/3 of 1% of the population of America. That’s pretty close to vanishing.
Would you care to expand on how/where you were getting $4 for a 30-day supply?
It’s like shootin’ fish in a barrel. I get this 30 day supply at the low low cost of 4$ from:
Drum Roll please:
Walmart!
The DIRTIEST and ROTTENEST profiteers the world has ever seen.
i.walmart.com/i/if/hmp/fusion/genericdruglist.pdf
It’s probably the former actually as cost is the biggest factor by far,
Yes, I agree. For commoditized services it makes sense to go where the cost is the lowest.
You should check out the facts before posting such claims.
Irony.
Lee Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:46 am
“Actually, the number you quoted was something like 70% of 650,000. But why quibble. 650k is less than 1/3 of 1% of the population of America. That’s pretty close to vanishing.”
No, as I also pointed out last time, I tried to help you out by doing the math for you so it was actually 1.5 million x 0.66 x 0.68.
Still, claiming that 650000 people per year is negligible when that figure is zero in almost every other Western nation is quite breathtaking.
“It’s like shootin’ fish in a barrel. I get this 30 day supply at the low low cost of 4$ from:
Drum Roll please:
Walmart!”
Well I must admit it’s a good program and I’ll concede the point that if the uninsured need generics, good old Walmart is there.
But consider this, without it’s giant and domineering position in the market, Walmart wouldn’t be able to offer such low prices. Similarly, the government is the ultimate in ‘large and domineering’ entities so in terms of being able to extract low prices from healthcare providers and drug companies, there is no better solution than the government.
“It’s probably the former actually as cost is the biggest factor by far,
“You should check out the facts before posting such claims.
Irony.”
Do you honestly think I would have written that if I had just based my position on wishful thinking? I’ll repeat what I wrote earlier..
I never make up facts. Period. They are always backed up by credible research/studies.
A couple of examples..
content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/21/3/19
krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/sun-sand-and-surgery/
OldLefty Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:03 pm
“Every single system of universal care doesn’t work, is broke and has its customers [citizens] screaming for reform.”
…………….
Shhh! Those other countries didn’t get the memo, and are quite happy.
Some of them have expanded it to post graduate education…and NOW they are even talking about expanding it to the internets.
John Galt Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:21 pm
are quite happy.
But they aren’t. They aren’t getting the basic care they were promised. They are seeing their country go further and further into debt. And they continue to come to America for any real shot at getting well.
One simple fact alone should point out which nation has it right. Are people fleeing America to get the care they need? Or are the world’s nations fleeing TO America for the care they need.
It ain’t even close.
creh3, i really could use that glass of wine ;-)
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:35 pm
well I’m more of tea drinker (green tea), but have a drink on me and a good night.
OldLefty Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 7:38 am
But they are.
There is not one single person I know from Canada, Europe or Australia; physician or layman who confirms what you say.
You seem to come from the Downing Street Memo School:
‘Fix the facts around the policy’.
******************
“Are people fleeing America to get the care they need? Or are the world’s nations fleeing TO America for the care they need.”
……………….
Only the richest people in the world…while average Americans are going the other way.
From pbs Nightly Business Report, Sept 11, 2008;
“The greenback is still down more than 13 percent against other foreign currencies over the last three years. That situation has been a boon for foreigners seeking elective medical care in the U.S. As Jeff Yastine reports in tonight’s “Bill of Health,” it has meant big business for clinics and hospitals that cater to medical tourists.
Analysts say the slowing U.S. economy means fewer U.S. patients are opting for those elective procedures, which means hospitals, surgeons, and other specialists have to keep the flow of foreign patients coming just to help pay the bills.
Then, look at the booming medical tourism for middle class Americans.
I don’t consider the treatment of the few wealthiest people a good indicator.
So far, we have the medical professional societies, a few insurance insiders, and the majority of the American people on one side, and the middle men and their lobbyists on the other side.
It’s like expecting us to ignore advise about smoking from former smokers, healthcare providers, the Heart Association.. and the lung Association, and instead get our “facts” from Phillip Morris.
Where it “It ain’t even close”, is between the very rich and the rest of Americans.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Wow, I thought without ‘keeping us safe’ George Bush at the helm, we were all doomed to terroristic destruction. Nice to know all we have to worry about now are those pesky uninsured democratic voters staying alive for another election.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:37 pm
A healthcare bill is more dangerous than a terrorist attack? Yep. Paranoid dementia has finally settled in on the ol’ Foxx.
jasperjava Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:34 pm
“Don’t let that mean ol’ Mistah ‘Bama pull the plug on Granma an’ kill Miss Saruh’s bay-beh with hiz mean ol’ death panels!”
She even took the name of Rupert Murdoch’s misinformation network for her last name, but didn’t quite know how to spell it.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Screw Flap as is sanctimonious ungodly attitude.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:00 pm
another civil debate flowing from the mighty fingertips of ericg.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:21 pm
“…another civil debate…”
Imagine we’re in a town hall.
flap Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:02 pm
“another civil debate flowing from the mighty fingertips of ericg.”
Well, I did make fun of him, so I probably actually deserve it this time (for once).
EricG Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 am
Read all the way down at the very bottom of this thread for some version of “civility”.
You know what I say?
Screw political correctness.
That’s what I say.
EricG Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:32 am
If you actually read the things I write then you might already know that I am more interested in the honest opinion of real people than i am in some repeated blather on the TV / radio.
I thank you being honest. Seriously.
I think it is more important to be honest and straight-forward than it is for everyone to hold hands and hug (GROUP-HUG LIBERALAND!) each other every five seconds.
Opinions are nasty things, not pretty things.
I want people to be straight-up, no matter the cost.
If they really think I’m a far-left radical loon who defends conservatives and talks about missing the loyal opposition of days past … then that’s what they think.
But dishonesty chaps my hide and that’s what I’m getting far too much of when I listen to conservative-talk and I’ve found I’m in a much better mood these past few days completely ignoring them and all their … slant.
I guess I can’t do “oppositional research” without giving myself a case of the “freaking crazy ranting syndrome”.
Let some other liberal try to choke on all this for awhile. I’m taking an official break from radical right-wing media because I’m beginning to lose my s**t here.
As I thank you all for pointing out.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:44 pm
I don’t know about this statement (seems out of touch to me) however I’m going to have to agree with her substance (if not the specific rhetoric) of the ANWR statement.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm
This is makes perfect sense to me.
These people are more afraid of helping others and using the government to do good than they are of getting attacked again.
I believe it. They are that completely divorced from reality that they really do fear words on a page that we can change anytime more than they fear a man with a bomb.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Que Flap’s Satanic hatred for others and un-Christian ideals of letting others suffer while he counts his money:
flap Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:04 pm
I’m pretty poor, EricG, so send me some money. If you don’t send me money, you are un-Christian because you are letting me suffer. Obama isn’t sending me any checks, so I need some cash.
EricG Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 am
How poor are you?
Can you feed yourself tonight?
I’m serious and you’re kidding …
I don’t like the “who is the better Christian game” very much but misrepresenting what Jesus spoke about is exactly what you just did.
I hope you feel good about yourself.
Help me in defending the poor from the venomous vipes of greed and sinful hatred, then maybe I’ll believe you when you speak of Christian brotherhood or being blessed under God.
EricG Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:40 am
If I had two coats and you had none, my coat would be yours.
If you need a place to stay for the night, maybe help finding work, you can come to me. (Though I doubt you are in the area.)
If someone is suffering in either spirit or in body I want to help them, be it help that is currency or nothing but an ear to lend.
–
I find it better to be a silent Christian and I believe like other issues I need to re-examine how I conduct myself.
It’s pointless to promote Christianity, I’m beginning to see, because nobody is interested in the real story of Jesus but instead want the tale to reflect whatever ideology–religion–upbringing they hold dear.
It has nothing to do with what I know to be true about the Eternal Spirit of Jesus.
So it’s better kept to myself.
I’ll just do what I do and when people ask “why” and take in a life-review then realize I’m the only person they know who never ever did them wrong I will be sure to say: that’s just me.
I’ll cut Jesus out of the picure, since everyone is happier without him even among the Christians.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:47 pm
The tried and trusted Republican tactic of fearmongering in full flow.
So far, the Republican plan seems to be:
1) Allow ‘competition’ across state lines
2) Let people pool together to buy insurance
3) Tort reform
It’s like preparing for a tsunami with a few dozen sandbags on the beach.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:20 pm
And of course when they say “tort reform” they really mean YOU CAN’T SUE INSURANCE CORPORATIONS ANY MORE, no matter how many people they kill.
Time to eliminate the insurance industry’s immunity to anti-trust prosecution.
piffle Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:27 pm
There is no such thing as a class action law suit in Europe because the government owns everything. Good luck trying to get Pelosi to recompensate you when an affirmative action lower tier surgeon sews you up with a scalpel for a misdiagnosed invasive procedure.
I’d start carrying a magic marker for writing “not this leg!” if you guys get your own way.
crh3e Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:48 pm
haha, you fool, surgeons already write “wrong” and “right” on places they are going to or not going to cut……nice try piddle!
OldLefty Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Of course there are class action suits in Europe.
There are also many private industries”
Survey sees more U.S.-style class-action lawsuits in Europe
By Julia Werdigier
Published: Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Le Figaro, France
Class Action Lawsuits: A U.S. Import Europe Should Do Without
EDITORIAL
Translated By Sandrine Ageorges
June 7, 2008
jasperjava Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:46 pm
“an affirmative action lower tier surgeon”
… aaaaaand racism rears its ugly head.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:43 pm
just wondering Rocky…
is that what you really think people mean when they talk about tort reform?
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:39 pm
“…is that what you really think…”
Talking about tort reform, if you’re serious about it, is like talking about the dust in one corner of the room while the roof is caving in on your head.
It’s crap.
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
“I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.”-Foxx
-ok then put money where mouth is located and pull the troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq now so they can protect us from universal healthcare legislation.
TDro319 Reply:
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:26 pm
LOL! I’m all for bringing our troops home – especially for something as important as to protect us from the evil universal healthcare.
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Me thinks Flap is one man Will Rogers never met
flap Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Methinks you can cram it! I’m very likable…I can’t help it if ultra-partisan libs hate my positions and hate me because I’m conservative.
I like everyone on this board…even including EricG and TDro. I’m THAT loving and giving as a person.
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:04 pm
–
Okay I promise to be raw-rational in my comments, in this reply:
So if insurance gets people killed then the only obvious solution is to get rid of health insurance altogether. Obviously. Thus many support single-payer. But my position is far more complex and founded in a study of US Law rather than simple modernist-ideology or something hollow like scientific findings.
Nutshell: My plan is single-payer state opt-in + no public option state opt-out + optional Medicare for ages zero to sixty-five.
(Have you actually read any of the proposals moving around? HR 676 is a light read. I never finish them but go straight to horse’s mouth or get out of the barn, you know?)
I don’t think it’s true, nor have I seen anything solid, that backs up your assertion that reforming the insurance laws would negatively affect the delivery of health care. In fact, every real independent study shows that the delivery of health is hampered by the system we have because it doesn’t encourage GPs into the system strongly enough. Those interesting numbers you have sound more like talking points from someone who works in broadcasting. I could care less what they think on either side. I’m listening to doctors and nurses and health care professionals, not pundits, for this topic.
–
There is no such thing as a truly “free market”. The people in power (with the money) try to hang on to it by any means necessary including changing the numbers. Which is not very “free”. My argument is only that there should be traffic cops now that we have seen that can’t operate without the enforcement of the already written rules. Regulated Capitalism = Tenet of Liberalism. (I guess I have to play the teacher these days since people speak out of school so much. I’d rather not. I mean, who doesn’t already know that?)
What your side advocates for is an “unregulated” market which everyone who is intelligent in any fashion knows full well was the cause of the recent market crash. So I apologize if I get hot under the collar but I quite literally view your position as trying to get the FEC off Bernie Madoff’s back. These issues right here is why I’ve crashed on “bipartisanship” mentality. A lot of what used to up for debate is not anymore and one side of the argument is refusing to look at facts. (Alan Greenspan said it all.)
When describing the health care agenda you made serveral assertions that are not founded in facts and have more to do with your own negative wishes for the national proposal and not reality nor the proposed legislation. The “monopoly” at issue here is the insurance companies and their anti-trust excemption. (Geez, facts n’ stuff in a argument!?! Whoa…) I invite you to read more independent sources of information on the issue of U.S. Health Care.
–
I would like to say that I was highly offended when people called George W. Bush a “racist” after Katrina and a person like yourself calling both The Speaker and The President racists based on nothing but venom is a small piece of what frustrates me ever so much. I feel as though it might actually pain you physically to make a point on policy about Pelosi and / or Obama, based on your statements.
Much like Guido was saying he saw a shinning outline to the terrible demon that is I; I should point out that the very outter-most ideological positions within conservatism are highly respectable in my mind. The Pre-Reagan Era, let’s call it.
Nowadays I have to just throw up my hands in utter frustration. I think “neo-conservative” better suits what I hear from the tea party or Fox Party or the GOParty.
Did you know commonly recognized infections in other countries go ignored and undiagnosed in the U.S. because the infections effect primarily the poor and undocumented in the country?
You can believe whatever you want but I know that groups like Freedomwatch have spread misinformation in regards to health care statistics. I believe such actions are immoral.
–
This “distrust of the state” is false, or I should say it’s actually manufactured just like a product you might buy in a store. I cannot believe it when the same people stood by silently as Bush TARPed us and prior to that with the warrantless-wiretapping. I would never know of a single person, maybe someone out there really was talking about the dangers of federalist power-grabs back in 2006 in the “tea party” movement. But I don’t buy it.
This is the anti-Obama movement in which you associate, and nothing to do with the “distrust of the government” of which you speak. If you fear the government so much, then check out of politics–move to some isolated area–destroy all your identification–grow your own food–dig your own well–build your own house. I bet you even in this day and age if you pick a good place nobody will ever bother you about “following the law” ever again. For now, we have a government in this country and surprising you and I can have some kind of say in how it is run instead of them just killing us if we happened to disagree. I think you do America a injury with your talk, not just to the president but in regards to wishing failure on this country no matter what the issue just because you don’t like who is in power. And you get a chance to vote him out and run your own candidates … it all sounds unpatriotic to me. That’s just my impression.
These same people on the right-wing trusted the government just fine when they elected the people sitting in the same seats. They all had no trouble, until Barack Obama got elected. Then it became about the “taxation” and “budget” every ten seconds from these people.
I am sorry but when people were ignoring me bringing up the budget in regards to the two wars we were fighting for years on end and then suddenly want to play dress-up as “fiscal conservatives” when another party takes power away from their representatives … it’s just too clear to someone like myself to take seriously.
If you have a valid concern or complaint about the government I am probably right there with you, but to “fear” or “distrust” the government in some blanket-ideology is just absurd.
You should be more worried about nations actually run by crazy-people than a nation like our’s that bends over backwards just to let you foam wildly about health care reform at a town hall meeting.
There is a heavy level of spin going around exactly this lately. I am not the one to dispell it all, but basically the government is slow, expensive and tricky to deal with. They (at least our country) are not coming to “get you” or “take” anything from you. It’s all legislation that you have every right to object to and offer your own alternatives that you would prefer, even if that meant no reform at all.
This thing called “government” started one day when people started asking: So who is going to take the fall when everything screws up?
And then they made some poor guy do it.
(Funny part is that is only half-humor.)
–
I don’t just think about it, I study it. I find multiple sources and use something rarely seen anymore called “objectivity” or my best efforts to do so, at least. (Do people really want dry-academic-objective-politics? My research says resoundingly “no!”… I could do that though.)
I study Political Science. I could go on and on about “Views on Government” so don’t mistake me. If you truly mistrust all forms of all government I suggest you research about “true” (Russian) anarchism or the ideals of libertarianism, because those are both very different ideologies from conservatism.
–
Misinformation is the only danger within the free exchange of ideas & information.
Failing to declare yourself for your true positions or your political action-agenda amounts to misinformation.
It is my singular opinion that these people expressing great “fears” and talk of the “road to socialism” are misrepresenting themselves thus spreading misinformation in the public.
Somehow it became perfectly alright to spread wild theories as fact and act highly offended when someone points out that your argument is based wholly on your completely undeclared ideological prespective.
I am a liberal, so obviously no conservative is going to agree with me.
I could draw a little diagram and show you where we are fit … you would be surprised where I fit on most diagrams. Pretty darn close to the middle.
But if I’m a “socialist” to certain people no matter what I say then I’m afraid I’m dropping the status-quo and going for the “fascist” label-dropping. In case anyone failed civics class that is what you do with free speech you find offensive: fight it with your own free speech.
(I like to add: “And don’t be surprised when everyone throws a tantrum.”)
As much as one misdefinition is true, as is the other.
I suppose I could say “anti-individualists”. Point is if it’s common place for misdefinitions to be used then why is anyone ever upset by my … unique commentary … on certain news groups and opinion-makers?
What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.
That’s called: Oppositional Politics.
In case you didn’t know, and if people misrepresented conservatism half as much as they misrepresent liberalism in our party you would have several metaphorical heart-attacks.
Alan Grayson is really the only person who appears to be at all aware of how to handle a oppositional-populist-outrage party.
We are talking politics here. Seems to me only one side is playing the game and they are throwing grenades and we are responding with rocks.
These comments like “health care is worse than terrorism” are a measuring point at which to guage how extremely polluted and innane our politics have become.
You don’t need to make sense or even be honest anymore.
Just pretend you are your favorite shock-jock and say something insane.
I long for the days of seeing the sense and logic in the conservative position, even if I didn’t agree entirely.
–
Did you see Nancy Pelosi cry?
Well that’s why I’d rather just stay angry at the venomous-right than dig into my bipartisan-bucket-of-goodies, right there.
I could cry too. This is the worst I’ve ever seen things get. (Granted I’m not that old.)
How the mighty hath fallen…
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:55 pm
Mount Airy? Wasn’t that where Andy Griffith was from? As in Mayberry, Barney Fife and Gomer/Goober?
Foxx looks a bit like Aunt Bea.
anonymouse Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:44 am
Oops, I’m sorry. Someone else pointed out the Mayberry connection. I got a little dizzy, scrolling, and missed it.
Well, gollllllleee.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:29 am
Eric, I like you…keep it up(:
Debby Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:25 am
Here- Here Eric! I like you too. Although I enjoy the discussions between Lee and John, even when his many of his arguements are not based in fact but New Right Wing talking point, I truely enjoy your comments! I guess, I have enough Republican left in me and certainly, enough Scottish, to enjoy a good fight. You are quick and your spelling and typing is perfect, unlike me. (Typing and boucing around in the sleeper of a semi and needing to send before I lose my signal). When I first started reading your last comment, I thought one of my brothers had finally decided to Post their views and when I got to the bottom and saw your name, well I just had to smile!
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:12 am
Speaking of Smiling, thats exactly what I did when I saw CaT equipment moving again, on a a flatbed. I smiled, hoping their Cat employees were working again. They took quite a hit. Then, I read, that Catapillar and the Chinese are considering a joint venture, In China. Now, I want the Chinese people to do well and they do help provide $4.00 prescriptions to Walmart (which we too have purchased) but I’m sorry, I have to cheer for my own team, the American worker and American IndustrY. Grim future if we don’t!
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:48 am
“We will great them with Love!” That was the response, by a MN. Fan, on my personal FB page, to a comment made by another man, “I saw the Green Bay Packer Fans, heading west with torches and pitch forks” Enabling our Industry and Business to leave the USA is like the Green Bay Packers giving the Vikings…Brett Favre (?). I don’t watch Football but even I know what that means!
Debby Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:06 am
“We will greet them with Love!” Eeeks…wowza! Cannot type!
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:03 am