or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Biggest Threat to Obama's Health Care "Reform" - Reality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Biggest Threat to Obama's Health Care "Reform" - Reality - Page 40

post #1561 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Now you're just getting nasty. That's hitting below the belt. Where do you get off reminding us all that the Democrats were in on this too?

Not all...
post #1562 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Not all...

Not all Republicans either. In fact, here's what one principled Republican had to say around the same time as a few of those quotes listed above. Note the stark contrast.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1563 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

It was the prevailing Democrat view at the time =>

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton, 1998

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

Quote:
It was the prevailing Democrat view at the time

So what?

They were hoodwinked also.

You want to believe what your president is saying. Especially when he seems so sure. And about the Clinton quote that was 5 years before the war. He may have had WMD at that time . However there was very little reason to think he did shortly before the war ( other than the report that Bush had fron the CIA which was totally fucking wrong ). Most of the inspectors over there were saying they didn't think there was anything to find ( even if Saddam was being uncooperative ). That was their opinion. The UN didn't want to proceed with military action. They didn't think the evidence was enough to start a war over. However in the end Bush pushed this through and we will always live with the consequences.

None of your quotes change anything about the fact that this invasion was started ( as advertised ) for reasons that didn't really exist. If the public had known the truth it would have never gotten that same support and have never happened. None of what you've said changes a thing.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1564 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Not all Republicans either. In fact, here's what one principled Republican had to say around the same time as a few of those quotes listed above. Note the stark contrast.

And here's what one principled Democrat had to say:

http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/...ch_vote-no.htm

Note the stark contrast.

Most importantly, note the reasons for opposition. They are vastly different, though both parties were intelligent enough to doubt the presence of WMDs and not be fooled by the fear machine. As were I and many other members of this board at the time.
post #1565 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

And here's what one principled Democrat had to say:

http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/...ch_vote-no.htm

Note the stark contrast.

Most importantly, note the reasons for opposition. They are vastly different, though both parties were intelligent enough to doubt the presence of WMDs and not be fooled by the fear machine. As was I and many other members of this board at the time.

There's actually a fair amount of overlap between those two speeches. And both, I believe, make substantially correct and valid points.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1566 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Most importantly, note the reasons for opposition. They are vastly different, though both parties were intelligent enough to doubt the presence of WMDs and not be fooled by the fear machine. As were I and many other members of this board at the time.

One small problem with your rationale here tonton; if we do not protect ourselves against the presence of such a threat there is no recourse if we make a mistake, as I am sure you might gather. At the time, as I have indicated, the best intelligence, along with the sentiments and judgments of Democrats and Republicans, was united. We made the decision we made. Monday Morning Quarterbacking is fine for historians but irrelevant for this issue. Moreover, we declined to act against Al Qaeda prior to 2001 and look at what that yielded! If our government does not act against known threats, with the best intelligence we have, we do a disservice to the public that elected that government to office.
post #1567 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

One small problem with your rationale here tonton; if we do not protect ourselves against the presence of such a threat there is no recourse if we make a mistake, as I am sure you might gather. At the time, as I have indicated, the best intelligence, along with the sentiments and judgments of Democrats and Republicans, was united. We made the decision we made. Monday Morning Quarterbacking is fine for historians but irrelevant for this issue. Moreover, we declined to act against Al Qaeda prior to 2001 and look at what that yielded! If our government does not act against known threats, with the best intelligence we have, we do a disservice to the public that elected that government to office.

What fucking threat? There was clearly no connection between Al-qaeda and Saddam ( as a matter of fact our invasion allowed them into Iraq without the opposition of Saddam they are now a presence there ). No connection between Iraq and 911. No chance his missles could reach us ( 1200 miles on a good day ). And no WMD to sneak into the US. What threat? Just conjuring up the old fear machine isn't good enough these days. There are lots of countries with evil dictators out there. Maybe we should invade them all? That old smoke and mirrors fear machine has to have substance these days. You have to argue with substance. Your argument has none.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1568 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What fucking threat? There was clearly no connection between Al-qaeda and Saddam. No connection between Iraq and 911. No chance his missles could reach us. And no WMD to sneak into the US. What threat? Just conjuring up the old fear machine isn't good enough these days. There are lots of countries with evil dictators out there. Maybe we should invade them all? That smoke and mirrors has to have substance these days. You have to argue with substance. Your argument has none.

Seems you need basic illustrations to catch on to a point because text is clearly beyond your comprehension. However, to express it again in simple to understand assertion with basic fact, the threat from WMDs is worldwide and mass destruction is just that; something nations cannot await and then react to. Security against WMDs needs to be proactive not reactive; thus Iraq's proven use of WMDs against Iran. particularly Saddam's chemical massacre of the Kurds in Halabja in 1988, showed that Iraq had WMD. If you lack the comprehension to understand this, have someone explain it to you with illustrations.
post #1569 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

Seems you need basic illustrations to catch on to a point because text is clearly beyond your comprehension. However, to express it again in simple to understand assertion with fact, the threat from WMDs is worldwide and mass destruction is just that; something nations cannot await and then react to. Security against WMDs needs to be proactive not reactive; thus Iraq's proven use of WMDs against Iran. particularly Saddam's chemical massacre of the Kurds in Halabja in 1988, showed that Iraq had WMD. If you lack the comprehension to understand this, have someone explain it to you with illustrations.

It seems you need math skills. That was 15 years and one war before the invasion.

There were no WMDs before the 2003 invasion. Your argument is a little late to the party. And suggesting that the US become the marauding bad guy of the world every time we suspect something deals a disservice to the honorable history of this great nation. That kind of reactionary ( hardly proactive ) tactic is without honor and not the way a world power should act.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1570 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And suggesting that the US become the marauding bad guy of the world everytime we suspect something deals a disservice to the honorable history of this great nation. That kind of reactionary tactic is without honor and not the way a world power should act.

I agree 100%. I hope you'll hold to this same position as Barack Obama does the same thing.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1571 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I agree 100%. I hope you'll hold to this same position as Barack Obama does the same thing.

I've already stated previously that it's something where Mr. Obama and I don't agree. We should bring those troops home and concentrate on our problems here right now. The Soviet Union practically went broke trying to fight in Afganistan. There's a lesson to be learned there.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1572 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I've already stated previously that it's something where Mr. Obama and I don't agree. We should bring those troops home and concentrate on our problems here right now. The Soviet Union practically went broke trying to fight in Afganistan. There's a lesson to be learned there.

Agreed. I hope he does this and stands down from his tough talk with Iran, Pakistan and North Korea also.

Regarding Afghanistan: I read somewhere recently that it is known as the "empire killer" or some such similar moniker.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1573 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Agreed. I hope he does this and stands down from his tough talk with Iran, Pakistan and North Korea also.

Regarding Afghanistan: I read somewhere recently that it is known as the "empire killer" or some such similar moniker.

Quote:
I read somewhere recently that it is known as the "empire killer" or some such similar moniker

Not suprising at all. This is a time when our military is already overextended. Our budget is in about the same shape. We need to pay some attention to the items here at home for awhile or we'll become one of those fading empires.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1574 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

There were no WMDs before the 2003 invasion.

Hyperlinks work by clicking on them - move your cursor over the link and depress - the link provided in my prior post not only shows you wrong, but me (and more important my point) right.

Lest you are unable to scroll back herein is the evidence: i.e., Iraq's proven use of WMDs against Iran. particularly Saddam's chemical massacre of the Kurds in Halabja in 1988. This WMD use, and its presence in country, validated our invasion of Iraq. I have no doubt you'll parrot some leftist propaganda in response, but do try to at least accept the facts that history has shown true.

Oh and one last thing on topic to Obama: THIS!
post #1575 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I've already stated previously that it's something where Mr. Obama and I don't agree. We should bring those troops home and concentrate on our problems here right now. The Soviet Union practically went broke trying to fight in Afganistan. There's a lesson to be learned there.

What is it with Obama and Afghanistan? I mean seriously. 90% of conservatives should be opposing him just because he's a Dem, and at least half of the Liberals should be opposing him because we're against the war. How can he think he is representing the people on this? Even worse than Bush, in my opinion, because at least Bush had half the nation's support.
post #1576 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

What is it with Obama and Afghanistan? I mean seriously. 90% of conservatives should be opposing him just because he's a Dem, and at least half of the Liberals should be opposing him because we're against the war. How can he think he is representing the people on this? Even worse than Bush, in my opinion, because at least Bush had half the nation's support.

Shouldn't those %'s be reversed? 90% (or more likely 100%) of liberals because they are supposedly anti-war, but only 50% of conservatives because they are supposedly anti-liberal but pro-war?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1577 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Shouldn't those %'s be reversed? 90% (or more likely 100%) of liberals because they are supposedly anti-war, but only 50% of conservatives because they are supposedly anti-liberal but pro-war?


h
Unfortunately, in the US, party line plays far more of a role than it should. Hence my numbers.
post #1578 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

What is it with Obama and Afghanistan? I mean seriously. 90% of conservatives should be opposing him just because he's a Dem, and at least half of the Liberals should be opposing him because we're against the war. How can he think he is representing the people on this? Even worse than Bush, in my opinion, because at least Bush had half the nation's support.

I know. He campaigned on getting our troops home. I'm liberal but I wouldn't describe myself as extremely to the left and this is the number one complaint for me ( yes there are more ). Almost all of the people I know that supported Obama feel the same way.

Let me make this clear however it doesn't mean I want to vote Republican. I'm pretty sure if McCain had won he'd be doing the same thing. In Iraq it's about oil in Afganistan it's about car batteries ( lithium ).
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1579 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

Hyperlinks work by clicking on them - move your cursor over the link and depress - the link provided in my prior post not only shows you wrong, but me (and more important my point) right.

Lest you are unable to scroll back herein is the evidence: i.e., Iraq's proven use of WMDs against Iran. particularly Saddam's chemical massacre of the Kurds in Halabja in 1988. This WMD use, and its presence in country, validated our invasion of Iraq. I have no doubt you'll parrot some leftist propaganda in response, but do try to at least accept the facts that history has shown true.

Oh and one last thing on topic to Obama: THIS!

Quote:
the link provided in my prior post not only shows you wrong, but me (and more important my point) right.

Did you read my link. It's all reference material that you can looked up yourself or cross reference ( not speculation ). http://www.historycommons.org/timelines.jsp

How? 1988 was a long time ago. I was 35! And once again news flash there was no WMD in Iraq in 2003. I've heard the Syria theory. A last desperate attempt to show we were right to invade. It's never had a shred of proof! Those same photo's from orbit would have shown massive movement like this. And how is it that this hasn't been reported elsewhere? It would be huge! There'd be no reason to cover this up? No supporting evidence and very unlikely. Get over it.

Give it up. No one's buying today.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1580 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

How? 1988 was a long time ago. I was 35! And once again news flash there was no WMD in Iraq in 2003.

Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons (WMDs) in his massacre of the Kurds in Halabja in 1988, during the Iraq/Iran war, verified that Iraq had WMDs in country. That disproves your allegation that Iraq lacked WMD, whether you were 35 at the time or not. And the key part here - they part that you need to admit - is that these WMDs in country in Iraq verified and validated that premise that most of the world's security agencies and GWB advanced, that Iraq had WMD. Where these WMD stocks went when coalition troops arrived in Baghdad cannot be determined but the dessert is very large...
post #1581 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons (WMDs) in his massacre of the Kurds in Halabja in 1988, during the Iraq/Iran war, verified that Iraq had WMDs in country. That disproves your allegation that Iraq lacked WMD, whether you were 35 at the time or not. And the key part here - they part that you need to admit - is that these WMDs in country in Iraq verified and validated that premise that most of the world's security agencies and GWB advanced, that Iraq had WMD. Where these WMD stocks went when coalition troops arrived in Baghdad cannot be determined but the dessert is very large...

Quote:
but the dessert is very large...

Not from space. You would see massive movement like this shortly before the war. Also the evidence that Bush had has been proven false.

Once again you can say 1988 until you're blue in the face. I see that they had them then. It doesn't matter because that was 15 years and one war before the invasion. A lot of history since then. And in the end what did we find when we got there ( or since )? If someone had proof that they moved them to another country it would be all over the news. But as most of us know that wasn't the case.

Your argument doesn't hold water ( or any other kind of liqiud ).

When the right acts so desperate to try to sell something like this it's embarrassing.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #1582 of 2360
Dean predicts demise of insurance mandate:

Quote:
He predicted that the so-called individual mandate which has been called unconstitutional by a group of state Attorneys General who are challenging the new reform law will be stripped out before the legislation goes into effect in 2014.

By the time this thing goes into effect in 2014, the mandate will be gone, either through the courts, or because its unpopular, he said. "You don't need it."

Backers of the bill argue that the requirement that all Americans purchase insurance is a central tenet of the overhauled system that brought and kept insurance companies at the negotiating table during the protracted health care debate.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1583 of 2360
Oh shit, what's this?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

Quote:
Opposition to the landmark health care overhaul declined over the past month, to 35 percent from 41 percent, according to the latest results of a tracking poll, reported Thursday.

Fifty percent of the public held a favorable view of the law, up slightly from 48 percent a month ago, while 14 percent expressed no opinion about the measure, according to the poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The public is coming around and is realizing that the healthcare reform is a good thing. Now we just need to get the public option back and work toward single-payer and end the profiteering off sick people once and for all.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1584 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

The public is coming around and is realizing that the healthcare reform is a good thing....



Health care reform lawsuit clears 1st hurdle
http://mddailyrecord.com/2010/08/02/...rs-1st-hurdle/

Opposition Mounts Against ObamaCare Tax Provision
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/69985

13 states join in anti-health care reform lawsuit in Florida
http://hrblogs.typepad.com/the_shad_...n-florida.html
post #1585 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Oh shit, what's this?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews



The public is coming around and is realizing that the healthcare reform is a good thing. Now we just need to get the public option back and work toward single-payer and end the profiteering off sick people once and for all.

I have to give you credit for recognizing what Obama and the Congressional Democrats were counting on...that time heals all wounds and, in particular in politics, time erases all wrongs.

I think you're reading far too much into that poll than it warrants. I mean nothing really substantial about this bill has really kicked in yet (and won't, quite cleverly, until after Obama is re-elected and/or out of office)! That's when people's opinions might matter a little more.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1586 of 2360
Unbelievable.

The FDA is considering decertifying a breast cancer treatment drug, reportedly due to cost concerns.

This drug was a political football to start with, so it's not like the White House doesn't know what it is.

It really doesn't matter whether these "cost concerns" are about the beginning of health care rationing in the U.S. or not. The fact is that it sounds credible, and the GOP will happily beat that drum all the way to the polls in less than 90 days. And women are a key Democratic constituency.

Given the Mosque comments and now this, is Obama trying to lose Congress on purpose?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1587 of 2360
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Unbelievable.

The FDA is considering decertifying a breast cancer treatment drug, reportedly due to cost concerns.

This drug was a political football to start with, so it's not like the White House doesn't know what it is.

It really doesn't matter whether these "cost concerns" are about the beginning of health care rationing in the U.S. or not. The fact is that it sounds credible, and the GOP will happily beat that drum all the way to the polls in less than 90 days. And women are a key Democratic constituency.

Given the Mosque comments and now this, is Obama trying to lose Congress on purpose?

The most insane and ironic bit about this is how arguments for government health care, and made in films like Sicko by Michael Moore, consist of declaring private health care is immoral due to the fact that those private insurers sometimes deny requests for treatment with these drugs for experimental uses.

Yet the government isn't just going to deny it for one person, they will deny for all people. When insurance can't see the rationale, they are greedy and when government can't see the rationale, they are enlightened.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #1588 of 2360
Interesting. BTW the anecdotes from individual patients are not useful and can be disregarded.

It seems that ignoring the cost there is emerging evidence that the drug does not help with metastatic breast cancer. Having the FDA revoke its labeling for breast cancer is just political cover for medicare to stop paying for it. Medicare could do that on their own if they wanted to. So could the other payers. Of course if the private payers did that Obama would look for whose ass to kick and put his boot to their neck (what a hot headed cowboy).

Patients that want to pay out of pocket can still do so if they find a doctor to prescribe.


But this is what happens when the government pays for stuff. It invites all of politics into the discussion.
post #1589 of 2360
Hmm...politics or unbridled greed...hmm....tough choice but I'll still take the former.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1590 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Hmm...politics or unbridled greed...hmm....tough choice but I'll still take the former.

There's a difference?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #1591 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Hmm...politics or unbridled greed...hmm....tough choice but I'll still take the former.

It's not a huge surprise, but it shows how unbalanced the liberal mind can be.

Funny, how you managed to use the word 'choice' in your response. As Alanis would say, Isn't it Ironic?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1592 of 2360
Government run healthcare doesn't mean it's illegal to have private doctors. You still have choice.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1593 of 2360
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Hmm...politics or unbridled greed...hmm....tough choice but I'll still take the former.

It's cute that you assign a process that needs half a billion dollars to elect someone to president as one not driven by greed. Perhaps those trillion dollar bailouts aren't really about greed either.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #1594 of 2360
We wouldn't need half billion dollar campaigns if we had some more fucking regulation (which of course you hate, too).

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1595 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Government run healthcare doesn't mean it's illegal to have private doctors. You still have choice.

Actually, you don't.

First of all, when the FDA decertifies a treatment, it is illegal for private doctors in the U.S. to use it.
Isn't that what decertification means?

Secondly, while you may be moving to a hybrid system as an interim step, once Obamacare takes root the parallel private system will gradually be folded into the public system. That's what government-run health care does.

If you look to the Canadian system that Americans so often marvel at, you will see that it bans private clinics for the most part.
Abortion clinics, of course, are an exception.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1596 of 2360
So clearly the Canadian system is the ONLY system.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1597 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

So clearly the Canadian system is the ONLY system.

Not at all. France's system has a lot more private health care. But it's far more likely that the same ideological madness that infects the Canadian system will infect the U.S. system, since many of the major players are alike (if not, in many cases, the same.)

But long range guessing isn't the main issue here. The fact is that the rumoured FDA decertification of the breast cancer treatment I mentioned will impact both the public and private system.

So where's the choice you believe exists?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1598 of 2360
I don't know about all the details regarding the breast cancer treatment so I can't really comment about that. However, even if everything you say is true, one fewer choice is not NO choice. You speak as if it's the latter.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1599 of 2360
Oops. Can someone say "unintended consequences?"

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1600 of 2360
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It's cute that you assign a process that needs half a billion dollars to elect someone to president as one not driven by greed. Perhaps those trillion dollar bailouts aren't really about greed either.

And the Republicans believe:
Quote:
Cheney to Treasury: "Deficits don't matter"

Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill was told "deficits don't matter" when he warned of a looming fiscal crisis.
O'Neill, fired in a shakeup of Bush's economic team in December 2002, raised objections to a new round of tax cuts and said the president balked at his more aggressive plan to combat corporate crime after a string of accounting scandals because of opposition from "the corporate crowd," a key constituency.
O'Neill said he tried to warn Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. "You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter," he said, according to excerpts. Cheney continued: "We won the midterms (congressional elections). This is our due." A month later, Cheney told the Treasury secretary he was fired.
The vice president's office had no immediate comment, but John Snow, who replaced O'Neill, insisted that deficits "do matter" to the administration.
Source: [X-ref O'Neill] Adam Entous, Reuters, on AOL News Jan 11, 2004
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Biggest Threat to Obama's Health Care "Reform" - Reality