Well speedy. Pain builds character and Keithy could use some.

Good thing David (Rove indictment guaranteed) Schuster wasn't his doctor!

LOL. The guy's appendix burst, which could have been lethal. Not only does he wait 2 days to see a doctor, but he's also back to bidding on eBay baseball crap as soon as the anesthesia wore off. It sounds as if he is recovering nicely. Get well soon.

You know he was chomping at the bit to break the Greenspan story, but there'll be plenty of similar stories to come. Get well soon, Olby. Please refrain from pulling a Katie Couric, leave the operation roll at home.

9/17/2007 9:25:51 PM
Abuse Alcohol

Bill O'Reilly is always in first
Krazy Keith ranks people as worst
With all of Keith's lies
Many people despise
So much his appendix may burst

Hollyweird screwballs throw another low blow
The latest from has-been Barry Manilow
Can't take a right wing woman on TV
Dissent on the View gives him the hebe jebees
Now the Flying Dingbat her derangement must show

Sorry, me. I have to disagree. Greenspan's confirming in print the ol' "Oil for Money" motive from Bush, Inc. is a significantly different kind of sidebar than your typical market story.

Personally I think this "Appendix" jive is all a ruse. I'm guessing El Naranja was actually interned for one of the following:

A)Inhaled the powdered soap he received in the mail.

B) Got his "manhood/thumbtack" got caught in the vacum cleaner while reading his playboy interview...Err vacuming the drapes.

C)Bite marks on his @$$ from Marv Albert.

Manilow and Hasselbeck are hardly peers,
The old man's got talent, while she's got a set of... ears.
The View still awaits intelligent dissent
While prattling is confused for entertainment
Unlike Liz, Barry's been writing his own words for years.

The View's main course-too many dingbats
Cackling away even before the fat rat
Rosie, unhinged and on steroids
Channeling rage, barely still a humanoid
Now Manilow can't handle a different point of View

So strong women intimidate you, ee? You've come to the right place. Plenty of panty waists around here. Ever met the Dipshit who calls himself Royal King?

Sorry, me. I have to disagree. Greenspan's confirming in print the ol' "Oil for Money" motive from Bush, Inc. is a significantly different kind of sidebar than your typical market story.
Posted by: at September 18, 2007 1:01 AM

Greenspan is out making the rounds right now stating that his words have been taken completely out of context and he meant no such thing.

But you arent' going to hear that from the MSM. They've already presented the 'news'

Posted by Anonymous:

"Sorry, me. I have to disagree. Greenspan's confirming in print the ol' "Oil for Money" motive from Bush, Inc. is a significantly different kind of sidebar than your typical market story."

END QUOTE

Thanks for admitting you are an fucking idiot. Bill O'Reilly said the other night Moveon.org was targeting uneducated, ignorant young people. I almost fell out of my chair. Moveon.org and Olbyfuck exist because of idiots like this.

HS grads in the US place near 30th in math and reading skills, SAT scores continue to slide desspite massive cheating lead by union, liberal biased teachers.......Saying today's young are uneducated and ignorant is like saying water is wet. They are so intelligent they question the existence of God.

Wow! I don't know which flaw this most illustrates: The Bush administration's love affair with the so-called "independent contractors" or its contempt for democracy in Iraq...

"The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, apologised to the Iraqi government yesterday in an attempt to prevent the expulsion of all employees of the security firm Blackwater USA.

The ministry of interior yesterday took the decision to expel Blackwater after eight Iraqi civilians were killed and 13 wounded in Baghdad when shots were fired from a US state department convoy on Sunday..."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2171334,00.html

What do you bet that the "democratic" and "autonomous" government of Iraq gives in to Bush?...

Chavez continues with his dictatorship:

CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez threatened on Monday to close or take over any private school that refuses to submit to the oversight of his socialist government as it develops a new curriculum and textbooks.

"Society cannot allow the private sector to do whatever it wants," said Chavez, speaking on the first day of classes.

The rest of the story can be found at
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070917/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_socialist_education_3

Great article Sharon. Once again, the left is shown for what they truly want....Control.

Freedom is the antithesis to every leftist ideology, including what was springing out of the mind of Hillary Clinton yesterday regarding health care in America. I hate the cliche...but the slippery slope continues....soon nothing will be free of government regulation.

Glenn Beck equates national health care to a national meal plan... why not expand the government to ensure 3 square meals a day for every citizen and have it delivered by the government. Isn't food for everyone a right not a privilege? And just like hillary's health plan, require that everyone submits. Food for thought.

Once again, the left is shown for what they truly want....Control.
+++++----+++++
I bet you'd give your left nut for some bladder control, Pops .... Thanks for getting him all worked up, Sharon. Gram just put a new Depends on him and it's time to change again.
)-(-)-(-)-(
Glenn Beck, benson? WTF? Best you can come up with? Watch "I Love Lucy." It's be uplifting.

Couldn't take a strong woman, so Rosie quit the View
Now the idiot Barry Manilow opts out too,
Hating those with whom they disagree
But don't mind so much the real enemy
Our very existence turns the Loons blue

Get well soon, Keith.

I am wondering did Bill send you a private nurse yet.

All my best,

Benson:

"Glenn Beck equates national health care to a national meal plan...."......With all due respect, Keith Olbermann is a virtual genious when placed next to Glenn Beck, and by THAT standard, Kieth's show really IS a news broadcast.

"Why not expand the government to ensure three square meals a day for every citizen"....Because a single "square meal" never costs $200,000 or more, as do many medical emergencies. Few citizens can handle a crisis like this without help, ..... through no fault of their own. Compare the two concepts if you choose, but there really IS no comparison.

"and have it delivered by the government"...By YOUR logic, we should also abandon our public education system because that too is a form of socialism. After all, why should I help pay to educate YOUR kids?

"Isn't food for everyone a right and not a privilidge?"...Actually, neither food nor health care is a "right", but food CAN already be easily obtained by everyone in America, therefore it isn't a problem, while castastophic health care definitely IS a problem.

"And just like Hillary's health plan, require that everyone submits."....If hard working and responsible people were dying all over America because of a lack of food, your metaphor would be applicable. But since that ISN'T happening, it becomes a rather silly comparison.

"Food for thought."....Not at all. Everyone who has ever advocated a single payer healtcare system that covers everyone for catastrophic healthcare has already considered and rejected your analogy because there simply IS no comparison.

The truth is Benson, America will never truely be a completely civilized nation until this problem is dealt with.

Mike - I do not subscribe to his theory - YET - do not understand how health care is more than a right and NOT a privilege.

"Food for thought."....Not at all. Everyone who has ever advocated a single payer healtcare system that covers everyone for catastrophic healthcare has already considered and rejected your analogy because there simply IS no comparison.

The truth is Benson, America will never truely be a completely civilized nation until this problem is dealt with.
Posted by: Mike at September 18, 2007 10:57 AM

Well, of course the "truth" is that nationalized health care won't cover everyone for catastrophic health care either. It doesn't in Europe and it doesn't in Canada.

Health care rationing exists there and benefits approval will be based upon age and other risk factors, prognosis, and quality of life decisions all decided for you...the "non-consumer".

It's fine for you to embrace a particular plan as being the best. But never lose sight of the fact that this is your opinion. Please stop confusing THAT with civilization, itself...

I hate to inject myself here, but Hillary Clinton is not mandating catatrophic coverage. She is expanding a medicare/medicaid-like system which has proven to be much more costlier and inefficient since their creation than any other government run program....including the military budget.

Some states spend 50% of their revenues on medicaid.

The name game is in effect here. I would have no problem making people have insurance for catastophic medical events....they are rare, expensive events that can ruin live and the coverage cost is actually doable for most middle-class people. But Hillary wants complete health insurance including preventive care. It is going to cost a lot more than what she predicts and the revenue is not there in the long term (even ten years from now) with all of the other problems facing entitlement programs....especially Social Security.

Just from the financial side, this plan is smoke and mirrors. It is not necessary to insure every American because of the fear of a catastrophic medical illness that could happen. Cover that, fine, but comprehensive coverage is over-kill.

Cecelia:

Well of course the "truth" is that nationalized health care doesn't cover everyone for castastrophic healh care either. It doesn't in Europe and it doesn't in Canada.".....Well, now's our chance to improve on their systems.

"Health care rationing exists there and benefits approval will be based on age and other risk factors, prognosis, and quality of life decisions all decided for you...., the non-consumer."....Yes, pretty much just as it already is today for most insured Americans. I've never believed a perfect system is possible, but we can certainly make it better.

"It's fine for you to embrace a particular plan as the best, but never lose sight of the fact that this is your opinion. Please stop confusing THAT with civilization itself...."....Since you have hammerd me with this rather obvious point several times, please tell me what it is about my writing style that conveys to you that I believe I am expressing anything more than my opinion?

Besides that, we have a simple health care system. If yo're poor, you don't get health care. Works like a charm. Unless your poor, or lower middle class, or upper middle class.

Cee on castastrophic coverage: "Cover that, fine, but comprehensive coverage is overkill.

For the first time ever, I agree with you. People SHOULD pay for routine medical care. They pretty much do so anyway, .... with the added expense and hassle of the insurance monkey that is almost always present. It's when you cross into catastrophic situations, along with many chronic situations that the problem becomes intollerable.

Since you have hammerd me with this rather obvious point several times, please tell me what it is about my writing style that conveys to you that I believe I am expressing anything more than my opinion?

Posted by: Mike at September 18, 2007 11:35 AM

"Everyone who has ever advocated a single payer healtcare system that covers everyone for catastrophic healthcare has already considered and rejected your analogy because there simply IS no comparison."

Sure they have....

Sure they've considered that health care will be rationed regardless of who pays for it...

Sure they've all decided that they'd rather the govt do this for everyone....

No, I don't think you speak for everyone who advocates a single payer system. Anymore than I think you have a real understanding that health care will be rationed by whoever pays for it...

With all due respect, Keith Olbermann is a virtual [genious]sic when placed next to Glenn Beck, and by THAT standard, Kieth's show really IS a news broadcast.

posted by mike

()>{}////\\\\++---++(-)(-)[]

This unbelievably ignorant comment brought to us by Olbermahn's Cheif Apologist.

Well Mike, Clinton is not proposing catastophic coverage. I look at it like car insurance. The states should force people to have a plan that covers emergency surgey/hospital care and subsequent recovery follow-up...just like they require drivers to have liability insurance if they hurt someone or their property with their car.

But a federal system that sets up another layer of medicare style combination private coverage/prescription drugs for chronic illness/preventive testing.....oh my goodness....trillions of dollars.....

Along with all of the other entitlements that Americans are now addicted to....especially Social Security, and we are all living longer into our 80's and 90's?....

Ok, if no one sees the problem with the numbers just on the surface, I don't know what else to say.

Cecelia:

"No, I don't think you speak for everyone who advocates a single payer system."....And I never said I speak for eveyone who advocates a single payer system. You took that particular quote out of context since it addressed the food analogy that Benson used only, and not the larger issue.

"Anymore than I think you have a real understanding that health care will be rationed by whoever pays for it."....Actually, I suspect that I have a better understanding of that than you do.

>>Freedom is the antithesis to every leftist ideology, including what was springing out of the mind of Hillary Clinton yesterday regarding health care in America. I hate the cliche...but the slippery slope continues....soon nothing will be free of government regulation.

Wow, cee! Guess you are against the "No Child Left Behind" program...

"Wow, cee! Guess you are against the "no child left behind" program..."

My guess is that he is also for dismantling Social Security and our publicly funded education system as well.....Socialist concepts - all!

Yes, Mike, I am for the abolishment of the public school system as it has morphed into a huge, wasteful special interest. NCLB is a poor band-aid for what ails it....The public schools do not porperly teach basics, they concentrate on social problems better left for the family to deal with. Competition from schools would force improvements across the board and parents should be allowed to vote with their feet locally with regards to quality.

And don't get me started with Social Security. It is part of the government treasury and the mother of all entiltlement programs. Once again, freedom should allow people to choose what they do with their retirement investments and no one should be forced into putting their money into a fund that yields such small dividends.

Leftists like to control. The public school system is the model for how you guys work in childhood and Social Security/medicare is how you hold people in reliance as they age. The poor are covered and kept in place by mediaid, food stamps, welfare etc....now all that is left is the rest and health care is just the right scary boogeyman to cause enough fear to drive sensible people into giving up more of their freedom out of fear.

I shake my head because the cost is what will ultimately doom it all and then what?...Your guess is as good as mine.

cee,

You missed the point, son. Bush is on the RIGHT and he has controlled public education to the point that it is practically useless.

Bush wants to control what you say, who you talk to and what you see on television...

Again, Bush is on the RIGHT, child...

"Anymore than I think you have a real understanding that health care will be rationed by whoever pays for it." Cecelia

Actually, I suspect that I have a better understanding of that than you do.
Posted by: Mike at September 18, 2007 12:09 PM

Careful Mike, that ain't saying much.

Cecelia:

"No, I don't think you speak for everyone who advocates a single payer system."....And I never said I speak for eveyone who advocates a single payer system. You took that particular quote out of context since it addressed the food analogy that Benson used only, and not the larger issue.

"Anymore than I think you have a real understanding that health care will be rationed by whoever pays for it."....Actually, I suspect that I have a better understanding of that than you do.
Posted by: Mike at September 18, 2007 12:09 PM

Well, as usual you want it all ways.

You want to say that the most reaonable of men reject other plans outside of nationalized system because they are not complete... and then you wish to say that you know nationalized plans aren't complete....

GREAT...maybe we're headed in the direction where near complete isn't as much a harbinger of civilization as personal control....only you and your next and most latest argument will say for sure... :D

I wonder if Keith will try to somehow blame Bush for having his appendix removed, dont bet against it.

ctually, I suspect that I have a better understanding of that than you do.
Posted by: Mike at September 18, 2007 12:09 PM

Careful Mike, that ain't saying much.
Posted by: at September 18, 2007 12:59 PM

Indeed! It's merely an opinion that states that a little for a lot is more "civilized" than the standard of as much personal control as can be available to any.

Indeed, this is an opinion and it doesn't say much.... agreed...

I think he confused is real emergency pain for how he feels everytime he covers one of Bush's speeches...

"Bush is on the RIGHT and he has controlled public education to the point that it is practically useless.

?

Oh no, blindrat, I understood what you were implying. NCLB is an attempt to have the schools be accountable for their federal funding. It is not an attempt to take any control...the federal government has controlled the local schools since the 1950's and NCLB is not anything new with regards to federal interference with what used to be a totally local/state run affair.

Also, if you are now implying that Bush is trying to control everything, examples would be nice. Once again, you like to diverge to Bush when Hilliary Clinton was just talking about government financial control of one of the biggest industries in the country. This is typical.

Also, wannawipe, if you have something cogent to post, please do.

Ah, cee...No Child Left Behind was an example. Cheney's warning to watch what we say is an example. Bush's crackdown through the FCC is an example. I've ALWAYS got examples, child, unlike yourself...

All NCLB has done is forced teachers to teach based on the Standards of Learning test. And, guess what, son...

...our children are getting less and less educated compared to the rest of the world...

...our children are getting less and less educated compared to the rest of the world...

###
.....which has been happening since the 1950's and is the fault of the left's favorite special interest, teacher's unions. They hold off vouchers and other eal remidies because they fear competition from outside the public school system. The decline in the US public school system can be traced to the 1960's, blindrat and it will continue despite NCLB because the schools do not teach.

And if VP Cheney's words caused you to change in anyway, I really have to say you are a silly little girl. The FCC enforcing decency standards on the PUBLIC airways is mandated by law and finally, you can still go down to your local peep show if you like, blindrat....you may see many other sodomists like yourself of various political ideologies. Private behavior was and is not in danger from Buch and Cheney.

The decline in the standards of US education system were declining way before NCLB which has only been in force for 5 years. You have no idea what you are talking about. In fact, NCLB was a BIPARTISAN effort with the full backing of the left's retard leader, Senator Kennedy, and would never solve the problems facing the public school system.

Just like Hillarycare will not solve the problem of the medically uninsured.

It is about control. Making people reliant on a government that needs needy/fearful people....You claim it about terrorism and civil liberties and have all sorts of paranoia about Bush/Cheney listening in on your phone sex....Why do you suspend your cynical attitude when it comes to freedoms involving other areas of people's lives?

This is the HUGE parado about the left. As they claim they are protecting your freedom and right to live without government manipulation and interference out of one side of their mouth, another regulation, tax, incentive, program or fee is being laid down to comply with.

THERE ARE THEM LEFTISTS IN THE CLASSROOM!

Posted by: SATAN'S SCHOOL FOR LEFTIST CHILDREN at September 18, 2007 12:53 PM

42

Cee:

Yes, Mike, I am for the abolishment of the public education system as it has morphed into a huge, wasteful special interest."....Since I notice that you failed to mentioned the still publicly funded alternative to public eduction - vouchers, I have to assume you are not even in favor of them, as most conservatives seem to be? That said, I guess you advocate returning to the days when only those who could afford to educate their children did so? Is THAT what you advocate Cee?

"And don't get me started about Social Security".....Why not Cee? I guess you also advocate going back to the days when older folks were forced to raiding public dumps just to try to survive?

"Leftist like to control"....This is nothing but a tired and very ignorant talking point you and yours have falsly embraced ad nauseum. The ultimate form of "control" would be to deny public education, retirement security, and health care to all who could not afford it, .... which would be an enormous segment of the population under YOUR plan!

Cee, I have friends who claim to be staunch conservatives, but I know NO ONE as rabidly and callously right wing as YOU are! I have suggested to them that MANY conservatives feel exactly as you do about these issues, and they tell me I'm wrong about that...yet, here you are!...Living proof that there really are right wingers as callously selfish as yourself toward all who are not as fortunate as yourself!

You call yourself a Christian, .... but I come from a family of devout Christians, and I just can't see any compassion or Christianity in any of your musings!

Unbelievable!

cee,

Get off it, dumbass! Even you don't believe the tripe that you spew. The schools started going downhill after the conservative Proposition 13 the schools went straight to shit. Tip: Don't pretend that you know what you are talking about, son...

People are being arrested for their t-shirts, dumbass--no foul language, just political speech. Here's another tip: Try not defending the indefensible.

The right has been involved the everyone's personal life since its inception...

blindrat, you are absolutely lying. America's dominance in the world regarding our education system as been eroding since the 1960's. More money has been thrown at the problem and all measures continue to show that overall, the public school system has declined. You pick any measure and the numbers are pathetic.

People arrested for t-shirts?...please give me a break. You are emotional, ma'am, and really need to calm down. You are now claiming there is no free speech when just this weekend I saw a bunch of the smelly hippies chant their point-of-view in DC.

Oh, my, both you and Mike are so fearful that it is no wonder you have the world-views you hold....People eating out of dumps, being arrested for wearing tie-dye, seniors eating pet food...oh yeah, it was happening everyday and everywhere before the government decided to act.

The fear is palpable in your posts, and rather sad. I challenge you to find one post of mine where I reflect even 50% the amount of personal fear of the "bad old islamic terrorist!" that you display of starving, becoming homeless or worse! being put in a concentration camp because you wore a Grateful Dead tee.

You guys are really something.

Fear is the first thing you need to control people.

And don't get me started about Social Security".....Why not Cee? I guess you also advocate going back to the days when older folks were forced to raiding public dumps just to try to survive?

"Leftist like to control"....This is nothing but a tired and very ignorant talking point you and yours have falsly embraced ad nauseum. The ultimate form of "control" would be to deny public education, retirement security, and health care to all who could not afford it, .... which would be an enormous segment of the population under YOUR plan!

Posted by: Mike at September 18, 2007 1:56 PM

So here we have it.... giving tax breaks to people so they can have a choice as to where to send their children to school, what insurance policy to purchase for themselves..., and to opt out of a mandated system of retirement benefits that may or may not be available to the next generation... is tantamount to DENYING them schooling, health care, and retirement....

They're such open-minded sorts, Cee... how can you be so arbitrary as to enable people to opt for what they wish, even when it means opting out.... fascist... :D

Poor wannawipe, your alcohol induced ranting is early today...did you have an "eye-opener" today.

When the public schools stopped allowing the free expression of religious beliefs out of the misreading of the US Constitution, they did decide to stunt the free exchange of ideas. This is not freedom. Restrictions of religious speech should be just as egregious to you as any speech, but because it is not, it shows your bias.

I pay taxes and do not want my children taught the value system of secular humanism. Is that a problem for you, wannawipe? The public school system in my state (and I assume in many other places) mandates such curricula. It is a religious view. Like it or not, a god is not required for a set of beliefs to be a "religion." Just basic tenets that are accepted and organized....And guess what....the atheist secular humanist is just as much a fanatic as Jerry Falwell ever was.

So please take your ALL CAPS rants and direct them to someone who cares about your error in thinking. You seem not to want to learn about what I believe so I'll just watch you rant.

Please Cecelia, it is always the same reaction. My wish to have control over my life takes away some person's ability to live. Fear!

Mike, I understand there needs to be a "safety net." A safety net does not need to mean an income for life that enables people to live extravagently without understanding the risks. Saving money instead of vacations, expensive cars and large homes is a start. Consumption at will and not waiting for things. These are the things the safety net is now covering and I resent it. People should plan for their own "rainy days" as much as possible and the government only involved when circumstances are too big for them. In my experience, the average recipient of Social Security and Medicare would be doing just fine with their own retirement planning and private insurance program.

Freedom to live and prepare for life's challenges has been the way of the world before 1965 and people did pretty well. Sure, help those in need, but entitlements to the middle and upper economic classes is not automatic and it should always be cynically approached.

"[Clinton] said she could envision a day when 'you have to show proof to your employer that you're insured as a part of the job interview — like when your kid goes to school and has to show proof of vaccination,' but said such details would be worked out through negotiations with Congress."

###
Why? Oh yeah....just like I have to show proof that I have car insurance to the cop when I get pulled over for whatever, now a potential employer would need to serve as Clinton's cop to impliment her program.

Wow. Government intrusion if I ever saw it. Will I be able to get a job if I do not have health insurance?

Hello? Which party is intent on taking away people's freedom?

cee,

Thanks for all of your examples, proof and specifics, son...

I give as specifically as I get, blindrat....Your "specifics" as you call them,

Cheney frowning and being stern....

Some smelly hippie being escorted out of a some event he/she is intending to disrupt....

Howard Stern being fined for using potty humor.....

etc. etc. etc.....

are as lame as your sense of humor, ma'am.

cee,

How about a woman arrested for attending a FEMA event that she was invited to, son? Or a boy with a sign that was expelled from school for what was on the sign, EVEN THOUGH HE WASN'T IN SCHOOL AT THE TIME. How about people in a park in DC attacked for putting up posters (something that happens all of the time here) for the antiwar march? I've got plenty, son...

You haven't provided anything...a neocon trait I've noticed...

Oh and I am sure these fine Americans have now been stripped of their constitutional rights and are interned in a concentration camp outside Detroit? Please Loin, your updating me from the daily news from some leftist nut website does not impress.

As usual, your attempt to change the subject from your lovely group (I believe we were talking about your gal Hillary's healthcare proposal?) to something you mimic expertise in with "examples" is very transparant blindrat.

Free speech is alive and well in America, blindrat,and your scary emotional examples are just about as convincing as OJ's latest escuses, ma'am.

Between the dumbshit and the bovine
Between liberal weenie Mike
Between Keefie and his infected diseased appendage

This "bored" blows lately,

Hey dumbass,

Getting arrested strips you of your freedom. Just because a court lets you go later or you get out on bail doesn't mean that everything was hunky-dory, jackass. Do you even know what rights are, son?

As for Hillary, I have no plans of voting for her. She is Bush-lite: Pro-war, pro-insurance company, pro-patriot act...

I'm tired of making you look stupid, child. I've got a bus to catch...

wannawipe...listen carefully now.....

Tenets are not a part of sports...determining truth, deep issues of what is right and wrong, the existance of suffering, pain and death, what happens after life....these are questions answered by religions....secular humanism has specific ideas about these while the NFL rule-book does not. Please try to think before you post.

Public schools use concepts, literature and other sources realted to secular teachings to teach about these things. They should not be if Chrsitanity or any other religion expression of ideas is restricted. Stop using strawmen, wannawipe...prayer in school was not brought up by me, try being honest. I have never said mandated school prayer is the subject of my disdain for the current values being taught.

Public schools are a failure in so many ways yet you decide to erect the strawman of prayer to try to change the subject. Sad, wannawipe.

I wonder if that taser did something to our brain?

Cecelia:

"So there we have it....giving tax breaks to people so they can have a choice as to where they can send their kids to school, what insurance policy they can purchase for themselves, and to opt out of a mandated system of retirement benefits that may or may not be available for the next generation, is tantamount to DENYING them schooling, health care, and retirement..."

NO! There we DON'T have it!

I don't know if you were attempting to paraphrase MY position, or Cee' position, but you did neither! You turned my words completely around to imply something was said that wasn't - AGAIN!

I don't know why you keep doing this Cecelia, but you do. In fact, you're famous for doing that on this blog. In the beginning, I thought it must be me...that I just wasn't being clear enough...but I know now that is not the case.

Now, If you want to start a NEW debate, beginning with my correction of your complete and total misinterpretations of all of my words, as well as Cee's, we can do that when I can make the time.....But to charge in here and completely misinterpret EVERY single argument I just made is wrong, because NONE of what you paraphrased above represented either my words, OR my thoughts.

Cecelia, I really don't know whether you actually BELIEVE your interpretations of my words or not, but in my case at least, you are dead wrong at least 95% of the time. I would expect that from Jeff, but not from you.

No she's not wrong, Mike. She summarized my post correctly, as usual....after you accuse me of being an uncompassionate fascist for not wanting the government in every aspect of my life.

Again, my opinion....but Cecelia got it right on the mark.

Wannawipe, you are simple minded. The idea that teaching such deep truths in a government paid environment is not an endorcement of a particular religion then you have accepted the fiction that is secularism.

I would like to send my children to a school that specficially teaches the values I believe are right, but my property taxes 100% support a school where my choice of values are prohibited. Is that freedom, wannawipe? No. The local school is mandated to teach secular religious values and you can call it whatever you like, wannawipe...it is semantics and a worthless position to take.

You even proclaimed your truth in your post......in caps of course....

FAIRY TALE

You do not see this as "preaching" dear wannawipe?....claiming someone else's religious views are fairty tales means what you believe IS TRUTH.

I am very tolerant of your views, wannawipe....have the school you choose to send your children teach them there is no Jehovah, right and wrong can only be rationally constructed, etc. etc. But I should not be forced to pay for it when you are not forced to pay for a school teaching from the sources I find inspiration and truth from.

How about that, wannawipe?....do you wanna bet there would be more students attending a quality "traditionally relgious" school in today's USA as opposed to your wonderful secularist system that has a drop-out rate higher in some places than the graduation rate?

This is why the NEA and their democrat party thwart vouchers and school choice at every turn.....control.

WIKIPEDIA IS DOWN!!!! I REPEAT!!! WIKIPEDIA IS DOWN!!!! SOCIETY IS LOST!!!! WHAT WILL WE DO!!!! HOW WILL WE OBTAIN SEMI-FACTUAL INFORMATION FOR OUR ARGUMENTS!!!!

Cee:

"No she's not wrong, Mike. She summarized my post correctly"....Well, she sure did summarize MY post incorrectly. And then, in my opinion, she added some things into YOUR positions that you clearly didn't say.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- "after you accused me of being an incompassionate facist for not wanting the government in every aspect of my life."

Here are the things your lack of concern for others is making you miss Cee:

1) - Its NOT all about YOU!

2) - It's about those 50 million uninsured Americans.

3) - It's about those 50 million or so seniors who need a little help at the end of life despite your self centered view that they made their own bed and should be forced to lie in it.

4) - It's about the majority of school children who don't have a silver spoon in their mouths who deserve and equal start in life.

5) - It's about that working stiff who has an unexpected medical crisis like Olbermann just had, but unlike Keith, he either ruins himself and his family financially, or he chooses to die instead.

6) - It's about the millions of honest, hard working Americans who did the best they could but still need help occasionally.

7) - It's about the millions of equally hard working older folks who also spent a lifetime doing the best they can, but still need help at the end of life. We owe them that.

Take your self - centered blinders off for a change Cee, and maybe you will become both a better Christian, as well as a better human being.

Guess what? mike's back and he's claiming someone is wrong with nothing to back it up, shocker. Patsy is still drunk, another shocker.

"this is why the NEA and their Democrat party thwart vouchers and school choice at every turn....control."

I see you're finally addressing the point I tried to raise much earlier today.

Voucher's are still another form of publicly funded education....ie. a form of socialism. So, why should others be forced to pay to educate YOUR children?

So why is it you favor THIS form of socialism while you vehemetly oppose others such as Social Security and shared Health Care responsibilities?

WIKIPEDIA IS DOWN!!!! I REPEAT!!! WIKIPEDIA IS DOWN!!!! SOCIETY IS LOST!!!! WHAT WILL WE DO!!!! HOW WILL WE OBTAIN SEMI-FACTUAL INFORMATION FOR OUR ARGUMENTS!!!!
Posted by: at September 18, 2007 4:30 PM

Calm down anon---it's back up, here is another new Wikipedia entry for Sir "daddy bigbucks" Olbermann (I think we can safely say he did not get 4 million a year, seems his agent likes to spin, just like him):

In 1988, Olbermann's KTLA/Channel 5 salary reportedly was about $80,000 a year, according to the Los Angeles Times. Olbermann had joined KTLA in 1985. Sources said at the time that he received a five-year contract worth about $250,000 a year. His agent had reportedly been approached by many stations, including ESPN.

Does anyone think the phrase DUMBFUCK actually works.

I've fucked lots of dumb women and lots of smart ones. There is little difference.

As for doing the act in such a way for it to be considered dumb? How is that even possible?

I mean you stick your cock in her pussy and start sliding it. After that the male hard wiring takes over and its all over but the excuses to get out and get on with your life.

Why is DUMBFUCK an effective slur?

Mike,

What if the older folk in question spent their working days marketing tobacco products to children?

"It's about those 50 million uninsured Americans

This statistic, Mike....how many choose not to arrange for catastrophic coverage if they or their family have an illness?....They have the money for the insurance, but choose to take their chances? Spend the money on something else. Do we know that number, Mike?

"It's about those 50 million or so seniors who need a little help at the end of life despite your self centered view that they made their own bed and should be forced to lie in it."

Again, millions of people from all walks of life, levels of income and retirement incomes that makes them very comfortable. How many choose not to invest in commercially available plans for catastrophic disability and even long-term care insurance? How many Mike?...can anyone answer these specific questions?

"It's about the majority of school children who don't have a silver spoon in their mouths who deserve and equal start in life.

Whoa.....all children deserve an equal start in life....this actually ever happened? It didn't happen for me, lower middle class, my parents never took vacations or had expensive cars or homes while we grew up and SACRIFICED to increase our education so that opportuinites would be available. I have many collegues who had that silver spoon and are doing well and many not so well.

Also, I am not saying that schools should not be funded...I think parents should be given the money from the government and choose where they send their children and pay for it with the money. Why not?

"It's about that working stiff who has an unexpected medical crisis like Olbermann just had, but unlike Keith, he either ruins himself and his family financially, or he chooses to die instead."

Again it is about choices. Catastrophic coverage is available and if one chooses not to pursue these safety nets and they get away without needing it, great, they gambled and won. There are more cases like that than what you mention. Also, health insurance through an employer costs money and is a part of the compensation...it motivates people to strive for jobs that provide a great benefit and brings about great potential. If it is automatic, no one will value these compensations because it is an entitlement....why strive to improve oneself to achieve a secure career that provides health insurance coverage and other benefits if the government is just going to give it to you? No Mike, the answer is to have help for those who need it.... and I can assure you, it ain't 50 million people....if it was then we would need a lot more doctors and nurses to treat all of these sick people!

Universal care should will have a price....taxes and/or quality of care. It is simple economics.

"So why is it you favor THIS form of socialism while you vehemetly oppose others such as Social Security and shared Health Care responsibilities?"

###
Because democracies need an educated and well informed population. Also, children need basic skills to achieve economic independence and productivity to support their familes when they become adults and there would not be a need for government entitlements like Social Security and Health Care, Mike.

This is how it used to work except for some tragic circumstances, but we decided to throw away the baby with the bathwater and treat everyone as incapable to secure their coverage for healthcare through work and construct a reliable retirement income.

Interesting article on healthcare in S.F.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/09/18/BAE6S7URU.DTL

Hillary's "plan" that isn't really a "plan"

DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN) — At a press briefing after Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's health care rollout Monday, senior policy advisers said the New York senator's plan does not currently include any details on whether illegal immigrants will be covered.

Senior policy adviser Laurie Rubiner–while acknowledging that undocumented immigrants are a "huge issue" in this country–said, "That's one we're going to have to think through a little bit."

"We have not dealt with every single detail with this plan," Rubiner continued.

When asked if it would be safe to assume that the Democratic frontrunner, at this point, has no position on coverage for illegal immigrants advisers answered "yes" and said the plan does not "at this point" deal with that issue.

With regards to your 5:36PM post, rk.... I guess the morality of the "Universal" coverage is being formulated by the Hillary for Prez campaign....give it time.

Cee: "This is how it used to work except for some tragic circumstances, but we decided to throw away the baby with the bathwater and treat everyone as incapable to secure their own healthcare through work and costruct a reliable retriement income."

"This is how it used to work."....So "how it used to work" is best eh, Cee? Why don't we go all the way back to Victorian times when it was every bloke for himself, dmaned the torpedoes, eh, Cee? Lets bring back debtor's prison and all that other stuff to punish those evil deadbeats and misfits.

"except for some tragic ciorcumstances"....Those "tragic circumstances" are exactly what I am talking about Cee. It happens far more than you care to admit. Just let em lie there in their own excrement, eh Cee? Shouldn't be YOUR problem. Not really your brother's keeper like your bible says, are you Cee?

"But we decided to throw away the baby with the bathwater."....When did we do that Cee? SS has worked beautifully for many years...the perfect safety net. Furthermore, there would be NO crisis whatsoever today if money taken in for SS had been invested as the original charter mandated....instead of being mixed with the general tax fund.

"and treat everyone as incapable to secure there own healthcare through work"....No Cee, everyone CAN'T do that, for various good reasons: Cost - age - self - emplyment - pre - existing conditions - etc. - etc.

"and construct a reliable retirement income"....And what about all those hard working folks who just couldn't do it, despite their best efforts? A healthcare crisis? Low wages that barely paid the rent? An unexpected disaster? Just let em lie in their own excrement Cee. After all you pick and choose which parts of the Bible you want to follow. "I am my brothers keeper' & "take care of the widows and the orphans"....are ones you choose to discard it seems.

Blinders Cee, blinders. Take them off! It's not all about YOU!

RC it time to take charge of your site again!

Robert Cox, like Elvis, seems to have left the building....

Does anyone know if the ever so classy poster known as "SLOB" rebarred somebody while in in D.C.? The peaceful fellow he seems to be is non-existent since the protest where "several hundred thousand people" (actually several hundred protesters) embarrassed themselves, again.

When I go to the castle later today on the night shift I will look in the dungeon for Meat.

Why don't you think: They're not socialists who encourage a nanny state. Here's a good health care plan: go to school, study hard, graduate, study more, get a degree or vocation and get a job. Employers offer health care insurance, which is a fact that escape unemployed libnuts who live in their parents' basements.

escapes, I meant.

SLOB must have gotten taken away by the Gestapo or something. I hope he isn't getting tasered.

"Employers offer health care insurance, which is a fact that escapes unemployed libnuts who live in their parents basments."

Thanks for yet another clueless right wing talking point, Shawn Hannity!

"Employers offer health insurance,"...Most of them still do, but it's a benefit that's going away in dribs and drabs. Some of them don't....And if you try to chase the American Dream by becoming self - employed.... you might just have to do without. Think about how many budding entrepenuer's dreams have been squashed because of fear of going without health insurance? And you argue that this is a good thing?

Another inconvenient FACT for you: Over 50% of personal bankruptcies are a direct result of medical problems...and the vast majority of them WERE insured when the crisis began. So don't think that just because you have insurance that everything is hunky dory for you!

And finally, when are you clueless wingnuts going to drop this REALLY, REALLY stupid "parent's basement" argument?

Mike,

My mother declared bankruptcy, primarily for medical expenses, just before the changes in the law took effect. She breezed through the process. On the surface, these are the facts: she was diagnosed with cancer, was covered by insurance but with a large deductible and little coverage, and was going through a divorce. I love my mother, but every problem she encountered is the result of her own bad choices, including refusal to have a colonoscopy when she exhibited signs of a health issue because she refused to submit to the test. Colon cancer has a very high survival rate when addressed early. The financial problems from her divorce were also the result of her own bad decisions and are too personal to relate here. Because she is my mother, I was thankful that she was able to declare bankruptcy. Statistically, it looks like another case of a poor cancer patient who went under financially because of cancer, but in reality, her choices were the underlying problem. I am not suggesting that she or others like her should be punished. I know someone who publicly demeans obese people because her husband's insurance costs rose. She attributes it to the cost of poor health related to obesity. I was embarrassed by her loud behavior, even accusing the instructor of a community program called ballet bunnies of teaching the class for money given "the number of fat girls signed up." Because I have young children who like McDonald's Playland, I go there probably too often and see the place filled with people eating the fare who clearly should not be. My children are slim and active. I feel guilty that they go there as much as they do and try to teach them to moderation. The problem is complex. I can see Cee's point of view but also think of what in the world my mother would have done if she could not have declared bankruptcy under the old system.

I also agree with the voucher system for education. As you probably know, I home school. It is frustrating to pay school taxes but at least the Governor of my state signed into law the requirement to permit home educated children participate in after school activities. Mine don't at this point (they are involved in community based programs), but the option is there. We are not isolationists as some home school families are. My friend uses a classical education approach and home schools through 8th grade and then the kids go to high school. Her two oldest do well socially. The oldest designed the web page for a local candidate running for office. He attended the pro-life march in D.C. last year with his 15 year old brother. They both have long hair and play in a band. Not that any of that matters for the issue.

You're one cold, hard woman, and you ned to get over yourself. This country isn't run for your personal convenience. You don't usually find such an ego in a skirt.

Seriously, who's DUMBFUCKed?

Think about how many budding entrepenuer's dreams have been squashed because of fear of going without health insurance? And you argue that this is a good thing?

Posted by: Mike at September 18, 2007 10:20 PM

I have never met anyone who used health insurance as an exuse for not starting their own business. Lame, at best. Lazy, is more like it.

Seriously, who's DUMBFUCKed?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Royal King. When he was picked up on the lewd conduct charge. Holding cell in San Diego. Plea Bargain. Hoping for a long sentence. Got probation. Been screwed up ever since.

I have never met anyone who used health insurance as an exuse for not starting their own business. Lame, at best. Lazy, is more like it.
___---___---___---___---___---___---___---___
Then you know as much about business as you do everything else. Not a damn thing. But thanks for sharing Dipshit.

(+)(+)(+)___||||__||////\\\\\{}{}{}{}{}

Thanks for that very insightful post, patsy!

11:50

I read over my response and probably did sound cold hearted. It wasn't my intent.
I am grateful that my mom fared well under the old bankruptcy law. The consequences would have been dire. Objectively, should everyone pay the price for others' mistakes? (Not every case is a case of bad judgment but unavoidable circumstances). I couldn't be objective in her case because I didn't want to see her suffer. Edwards wants to force preventative care. Is that the answer? Can you force people into making the correct choices for their health? I wish someone had forced my mother to take preventative action. She lives a life of constant testing and doubt.

Also, it can't be denied that obesity is a major health issue of our time and it does affect the health care system. Adult onset diabetes is rampant. Something radical has to be done to educate children about weight. It is difficult enough for adults to appreciate consequences and even more so for children. B. Clinton is bringing attention to the issue but that is not enough. Even Olby at one time made his weight a public issue from what I understand. Now he just makes jokes about people like Nicole Ritchie.

This country isn't run for your personal convenience. You don't usually find such an ego in a skirt.

Posted by: at September 18, 2007 11:50 PM

Must be the reason Hillary won't wear one. Well, one of the reasons, anyways........

We already know strong women scare you Dipshit. That's bad enough but to sing it out over and over makes you sound like a real nutless wonder. Of course, that's just what you are.

Obama/Edwards '08

Why don't you think (which you don't) and anon libnut: I accepted responsibility for my health and my financial situation and that prompted me to place myself in a situation in which I have health insurance. The cost of not even having an inexpensive catastrophic health policy is steep. I do not trust my health or finances to the government. Why should I pay for those deadbeats or unemployed who do not accept responsibility for their lives? My state offers health care to children, the elderly and welfare recipients.

Because you live in a society Twit - not a cave in the wilderness. Why is that so damn tough for you people to understand?

6:58,

Just as 6:58 says, my state offers health care to children. If my husband didn't have a second job, they would qualify for free care.

I wouldn't call the attitude lack of humanity; I would call it acting out in frustration when your family is suffering trying to make ends meet, and part of that suffering is paying for health care that some expect without making the same sacrifices. Ultimately, most people don't find satisfaction in watching others' suffer. It is being human that causes the frustration. Why can't you understand that?

Boy Sharon you're a real Mother Theresa.

Someone gets sick,
put 'em right down!
Someone's in pain,
kick 'em around.

You seem to have found the answer to the age old question WWJD?

Well I really hate to interrupt you moment of self-adoration, but you got the answer wrong.

Shut anon. Sharon is 100% right in her personal evaluation of what it truly means to be charitable.

The average American has outsourced charity to the federal government. Supporting the funding of a government program is a cop-out. You are typical of the use of "WWJD" and misapplying it....just like Mike's self rightousness yesterday.

Individuals being compassionate, soathing the suffering of people and helping substantively person to person was Christ's mission....not an endorcement of government run health care. In fact, I do not remember Christ invoking secular institutions for the helping of those suffering and the poor...he called his followers to do it individually and as a body.....themselves.

Farming the hard work and time it takes to help the poor and ill to the US government is cynical and lazy....but what else would I expect from the left?

I support an orphan in Guatemala; what do you do anon? I give to the local food bank. You didn't even read the context of my comment, saw Sharon, and put a negative comment. Where is the self adoration in talking about people being frustrated? Keep bringing up Jesus. At least that will be one time today you probably think of Him.

At least that will be one time today you think of Him.

Your self-adoration pales to your self-righteousness, Sharon.

Someone gets sick,
put 'em right down!
Someone's in pain,
kick 'em around.

Your attitude demonstrates that very well. Look in the mirror. Instead of engaging in a discussion that reasonable people can disagree about, you try to strike at a place that you think will hurt. Think again, mr.ms charitable. The opinion of an anonymous person on a board means nothing.

Boo hoo boo hoo.

The only reason you can make the comments that you do ANONYMOUS is because I have identified myself here. You are vindictive as hell.

I assume you must mean St. Sharon the Sanctimonious? When is your Feast Day? Bitter Herbs and Gall, I assume?

I assume you must mean St. Sharon the Sanctimonious? When is your Feast Day? Bitter Herbs and Gall, I assume?

Posted by: at September 19, 2007 11:57 AM

Actually, that fare sounds like it would be more appropriate for you.

It's amazing that you call it sanctimonious for Sharon to have said that there are natural repercussions for bad behavior and that health care will never be "free" even if it's nationalized and that the price of that attempt to insulate everyone from bad luck and/or bad behavior may be too high or too costly in other ways.

I don't think you can get more sanctimonious than to argue that's it's solely a moral choice between buying into nationalized health care or saying "Let them eat cake" to everyone else.

Does every discussion have to be an occasion for moral preening? If you're for the war-- you want people dead... if you're not for nationalized health care-- you want people dead... sheesh!

Does every discussion have to be an occasion for moral preening?
Posted by: Cecelia at September 19, 2007 12:39 PM

Considering that is what you seem to do in any given comment, seems so.

A feast day is an actual day, not a food item. I am not dead yet. I'll let you know when I die and then you can pick a good date to be my feast day. Good clarification, Cecelia.

Let me get the cauldron out of the shed and the 2 of you can brew up something for those of us not fortunate enough to be on Medicare or running up the costs at the county hospital.
)*()*()*(
Thanks for letting me know about the Feast Day. Is a Fast Day 1 that passes real quick?

Let me get the cauldron out of the shed and the 2 of you can brew up something for those of us not fortunate enough to be on Medicare or running up the costs at the county hospital.
)*()*()*(
Thanks for letting me know about the Feast Day. Is a Fast Day 1 that passes real quick?

Posted by: at September 19, 2007 1:33 PM

The anonyloon above is probably one of the people here who greet any criticism or cracks about Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi with some sort of accusation that they are made because "you're afraid of strong women" ... :D

There ARE alternate plans for expanding health care coverage, you know. No, none of them are a complete panacea.... but neither is nationalized health care.

Before you argue that nationalized health care is the "best" plan, let me add that that is a matter of debate. It's not an issue you can boondoggle by suggesting that others don't care because they don't see it EXACTLY as you do.

Frankly, if Sharon and I could fix you via mixing something in a cauldron, I'd opt for making you less of a close-minded drama queen.

I'm sure Sharon would agree.

Does every discussion have to be an occasion for moral preening?
Posted by: Cecelia at September 19, 2007 12:39 PM

Considering that is what you seem to do in any given comment, seems so.
Posted by: at September 19, 2007 1:00 PM

Since I haven't accused anyone here of not giving a flip about the uninsured, the poor, the downtrodden, the illegal immigrant, the soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan, women, children, and puppy dogs... but have argued that it possible for people to care about all the above AND not agree with particular would-be political solutions for particular issues------- how so, anonyloon?

Frankly, if Sharon and I could fix you via mixing something in a cauldron, I'd opt for making you less of a close-minded drama queen.

}{}}{}}{}{}}{}{{}{{}{{}

High comedy! Did you write for Soupy Sales?

High comedy! Did you write for Soupy Sales?

Posted by: at September 19, 2007 2:44 PM

No, but the soup's on sale... Mix in the anti-moron potion out, Sharon. This one's in dire need of it....

No, but the soup's on sale... Mix in the anti-moron potion out, Sharon. This one's in dire need of it....

---+++===+++---

You will warn us if you 2 old broads decide to strip down to your panties and bras and have a tickle fight, won't you? I'll need time to turn on Hannity & Colmes for a welcome diversion.

You will warn us if you 2 old broads decide to strip down to your panties and bras and have a tickle fight, won't you? I'll need time to turn on Hannity & Colmes for a welcome diversion.

Posted by: at September 19, 2007 2:58 PM

Keep your fingers crossed and maybe H & C will put out a calendar you cab hang above your bed.

You're no Jessica Fletcher. I'm not a taxi driver.

You're no Jessica Fletcher. I'm not a taxi driver.

Posted by: at September 19, 2007 3:30 PM

But you're certainly Travis Bicklesque....

I will not support a nanny state. If the government wants to sell low-cost catastrophic insurance to those who want it, maybe I could be convinced to support it (but that would take a LOT). The government does not know what is best for me or my health, so I do not support universal health care.

"The government does not know what is best for me or my health, so I do not support universal health care."

Apparently they think placing your fate entirely in the hands of for profit and underegulated insurance companies with very little oversight is what's best for you.

For YOUR sake, lets hope YOU never end up in the unenviable position of being unable to buy insurance because of age, pre-existing conditions, income, or anything else the insurance companies dream up that they fear will make you a threat to their precious bottom line.

As long as you don't, I'm sure you'll continue to be blissfully unconcerned about those who will continue to fall through the cracks through no fault of their own.

In other words....a typical self-centered republican!

"Since I haven't accused anyone here of not giving a flip about the uninsured, the poor, the downtrodden, the illegaql immigrant, the soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan, women, children, and puppy dogs... but have argued that it is possible to care about all of the above AND not agree with would-be political solutions for particular issues.".............

Action speaks louder than words.

"Since I haven't accused anyone here of not giving a flip about the uninsured, the poor, the downtrodden, the illegaql immigrant, the soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan, women, children, and puppy dogs... but have argued that it is possible to care about all of the above AND not agree with would-be political solutions for particular issues.".............

Action speaks louder than words.

Posted by: Mike at September 19, 2007 9:25 PM

Since "words" are the only thing you see in this sort of format this makes absolutely no sense, as usual.

On the other hand, you routinely accuse others of all the above, except maybe the bit about puppy dogs.

"On the other hand you routinely accuse others of all of the above, except maybe the bit about puppy dogs."

But what about kitty cats?

For YOUR sake, lets hope YOU never end up in the unenviable position of being unable to buy insurance because of age, pre-existing conditions, income, or anything else the insurance companies dream up that they fear will make you a threat to their precious bottom line.

As long as you don't, I'm sure you'll continue to be blissfully unconcerned about those who will continue to fall through the cracks through no fault of their own.

In other words....a typical self-centered republican!

Posted by: Mike at September 19, 2007 8:59 PM

Has Michael Moore's Sicko gotten these folks sounding as though the tradition has been that insurance companies originally were rendering a holy sacrament rather than a commodity, but of late have strayed into pernicious avarice.... or have they always been so stupid as to think this?

As for it being selfish to decide for yourself that govt as payee is not in your best interest, as I pointed out earlier, the same people who interpret things this way are the very ones who have no problem voicing the worst sorts of suspicions that govt is entirely capable of wiretapping all and sundry due to changes in the law.

They easily jump from the pragmatic to the abstract in these cases and are the first to shoot down any argument that it might catch a terrorist or two. They are completely able in these instances to reason that the price to be paid in other ways, is too extreme.

Selfish bastards...

Doing a little S T R E T C H I N G there, aren't we Cecelia?

My point on healthcare is, and always has been.....that the essential delivery of catastrophic and chronic health care cannot be a for profit endeavor, especially as long as exclusion is an acceptable option.

Doing a little S T R E T C H I N G there, aren't we Cecelia?

My point on healthcare is, and always has been.....that the essential delivery of catastrophic and chronic health care cannot be a for profit endeavor, especially as long as exclusion is an acceptable option.

Posted by: Mike at September 19, 2007 11:12 PM

No, that's not entirely the case. While putting forth your opinion you also find it necessary to call other folks selfish for having a different opinion about what is good for themselves and the country.

Many people here may feel that coverage cannot be SOLELY provided by one means or another, but are open to expanding Medicare and Medicaid, etc. You don't bother to ask-- you go straight to calling them selfish.

As anyone here ever disagreed with you about anything where you have NOT called them that?

Cecelia: "you go straight to calling them selfish."

I called Cee "selfish".... because I believe Cee is selfish. I called that anon poster earlier this evening selfish, because his post conveyed that he/she believed it was all about them.

I don't recall calling everyone who disagrees with me "selfish".

For example, where have I called YOU selfish?

YOU have at least given lip service to the fact that there IS a problem. I haven't seen that concession at all from the ones I have labeled as such.

YOU have at least given lip service to the fact that there IS a problem. I haven't seen that concession at all from the ones I have labeled as such.

Posted by: Mike at September 19, 2007 11:27 PM

I doubt any of these people believe it's not a "problem" that there are uninsured people in the world. No, you wish something more than that admission from them and you must see it within in three or four lines otherwise you're insulting them.

"I doubt any of these people believe it's not a "problem" that there are uninsured people in the world."

Well, they clearly don't see it as enough of a problem so that no sacrifices need be made by THEM in the pursuit of a solution.

Well, they clearly don't see it as enough of a problem so that no sacrifices need be made by THEM in the pursuit of a solution.

Posted by: Mike at September 19, 2007 11:46 PM

You can certainly tell quite a lot about these people in the four lines they write.

Also, instead of going completely with your own presuppositions in any debate, why not consider that your context of "personal sacrifice" to them might be an unreasonable expectation for something they think will make matters worse in the long run.

BTW-- what sacrifices are you asking everyone to make?

"BTW-- what sacrifices are you asking everyone to make?"

Whatever sacrifices are necessary in order to help right a universal wrong.

Regrettably, America has become a 'me first' place more than ever before in it's history (and yes, thats just my opinion).... Greed is treated as virtue.... Winning is believed to be everything by many. It wasn't always this way...not to this degree anyway.

hatever sacrifices are necessary in order to help right a universal wrong.

Regrettably, America has become a 'me first' place more than ever before in it's history (and yes, thats just my opinion).... Greed is treated as virtue.... Winning is believed to be everything by many. It wasn't always this way...not to this degree anyway.

Posted by: Mike at September 20, 2007 12:04 AM

If you don't specifically know of the sacrifices nationalized health care will require, why are you condemning a guy for not being willing to make any sacrifices?

Regrettably, America has become a 'me first' place more than ever before in it's history (and yes, thats just my opinion).... Greed is treated as virtue.... Winning is believed to be everything by many. It wasn't always this way...not to this degree anyway.

Posted by: Mike at September 20, 2007 12:04 AM

Yeah...back in the days when hospitals kept patients there for five days after an appendectomy.... and folks never asked questions because they weren't paying for it....

"If you don't specifically know of the sacrifices nationalized health care will require, why are you condemning a guy for not being willing to make any sacrifices?"

You are referring to the very same guy who is this blog's leading cheerleader for George Bush and his war, as well as this blogs leading denagrator of those who oppose it, or him.... A war that is being fought on credit.

Yet, this very same character is unwilling to entertain any thought of even a simple tax increase in order to help support it.

And I'm supposed to respect this character's reluctance to make any personal sacrifices in pursuit of a common good?

"and folks never asked questions because they weren't paying for it...."

Actually, in most cases they were. Those were the good old days when most medical treatment (and hospital rooms) was actually affordable.

Health insurance through employment is a relatively new thing that is the way it is only because it evolved that way.

You are referring to the very same guy who is this blog's leading cheerleader for George Bush and his war, as well as this blogs leading denagrator of those who oppose it, or him.... A war that is being fought on credit.

Yet, this very same character is unwilling to entertain any thought of even a simple tax increase in order to help support it.

And I'm supposed to respect this character's reluctance to make any personal sacrifices in pursuit of a common good?

Posted by: Mike at September 20, 2007 12:26 AM

The guy is posting anonymously, but if you believe him to be someone who has voiced all that, perhaps you could consider that the reason he doesn't want a tax increase is because he's afraid it will slow down the economy.

Did you ask him, or did you jump right to "selfish"?

Actually, in most cases they were. Those were the good old days when most medical treatment (and hospital rooms) was actually affordable.

Health insurance through employment is a relatively new thing that is the way it is only because it evolved that way.

Posted by: Mike at September 20, 2007 12:30 AM

You see any sort of connection there?

"You see any sort of connection there?"

Absolutely....What's your point?

You see any sort of connection there?"

Absolutely....What's your point?

Posted by: Mike at September 20, 2007 12:37 AM

To spell it out for you, what you've seen that did work was an essentially consumer driven system that you say existed in the past.

When businesses were used to provide insurance policies that they own rather than employees owning the situation changed completely. Also add in the fact that service providers started charging all patients what Medicare and Medicaid agreed to pay for certain services, rather than what they had done for individuals and individual communities in the past.

It's completely erroneous of you to say that no other system will work and will bring costs down but nationalized health care. Allowing the same tax deductions to individuals for their premiums could certainly do this, could allow all sorts of groups --- church, civic, etc. to band together for coverage even for people with pre-existing conditions AND keep a mult-tiered system that does not involve handing everything over to politicians.

That's a fair argument. And Mr Anonymous is not selfish for believing that nationalized health care is not good for him or anyone else.

You may consider hiim to be mistaken but cut the "selfish" crap. It may make you feel good about yourself, but it doesn't help your argument.