Nice! I liked the little bit about caring for people even after they're born Subtle

You truth!

*news

Adding video to channels (News) - requested by NetRunner.

Oh, and more sift-pimping; he was a guest on Rachel's show tonight:

http://politics.videosift.com/video/Maddow-Pot-Meet-Kettle

I always kind of hoped that the elected officials would sound more intelligent, be more informative, and make better points than the everyday radio talk show host. He didn't need to apologize for his bizarre little gag. He needed to grow a pair and say something of worth. It isn't comforting to me that the reps are bickering like children instead of trying to find a solution that works.

>> ^thepinky:
It isn't comforting to me that the reps are bickering like children instead of trying to find a solution that works.


That assumes both sides want health care to improve for Americans in general. One side sees that goal as contrary to the goals of their campaign donors, friends and selves so they bicker to stall for their lives. The other side wants what you want.

This has *quality to spare.

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by radx.

Nice! Grabbing attention and headlines through yesterdays provocative "die quickly" stunt, and following that up today by hammering in the points he actually wanted to deliver in the first place. The republicans and their "manufactured outrage" is so predictable .. walked right into this one.

That assumes both sides want health care to improve for Americans in general. One side sees that goal as contrary to the goals of their campaign donors, friends and selves so they bicker to stall for their lives. The other side wants what you want.

Not true. Once again it is my pleasant duty to trouble the self-delusional groupthink of the neolib left wing.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

Only 41% want Obama-style socialized medicine. 56% do not. When you look at Rasmussen internals, the only people who really want Obama's plan are Democrats. 72% of unaffiliated voters do NOT want the plan. 79% of Republicans do NOT want the plan. Shock you silly - 42% of the UNINSURED do not want Obama's plan.

What people WANT is insurance portability and legal tort reform. Two things glaringly absent because they (A) don't require a massive government system and (B) would screw over the trial lawyer lobby (big Democrat donors).

Regardless, I reject the propogandistic attitude that Republicans 'want' people to die. Preposterious. The only people who could possibly believe that tripe are neolibs who really have gone absolutely insane and drunk the Flavor-Aide. I could very easily make the case that Democrats want people to die too because social systems also have stories of people dying due to neglect, non-coverage, and delayed care. But that's balderdash. There is no perfect system, and to imply that people who favor a different approach want people to 'die' because their system isn't perfect is pure demagougery and anyone who finds themselves cheering along with that kind of sentiment should really take a good hard look at themselves because they are about 1 centimeter way from being Timothy McVeigh.

^Timothy McVeigh? Flavore-Aide? Socialized Medicine? Self-delusional group-think? Neo-Libs?

Love the cliches and hollow invective, penny. Keep it coming.

^What are you talking about, "hollow invective?" That tirade was full of content. And cliches, yes.

"Obama-style socialized medicine" <- hollow invective.

Hollow invective? Nope. It is an accurate description of what is being VOTED for in the United States congress, and what is being proposed to the American people as the 'only choice'. If you're a neolib like this vid jackass, then your perspective is simplistic... "If you vote against the Democrat plan then you're a murderer."

You can whine to me about 'hollow invectives' after demagougery like this BS stops getting upvotes from sifters. This stuff should be condemned by every sifter who still has two gangleon to rub together. But it isn't. Some of you are cheering it, saying it is 'truth', 'about time', yadda yadda yadda. For people who like to claim how enlightened, logical, and 'fair' you are - for shame. If that's what you really think, then you really are just a mosquito bite & a freckle away from being the next James von Brunn, or Harlan Drake.

Winstonfield_Pennypacker:Regardless, I reject the propogandistic attitude that Republicans 'want' people to die. Preposterious. The only people who could possibly believe that tripe are neolibs who really have gone absolutely insane and drunk the Flavor-Aide. I could very easily make the case that Democrats want people to die too because social systems also have stories of people dying due to neglect, non-coverage, and delayed care. But that's balderdash.

Preposterous, yes!! What kind of crazed nut would ever try to argue that someone in politics would want a citizen to die. That's ridiculous!

http://www.videosift.com/video/GOP-HealthCare-Plan-Don-t-get-sick-If-you-do-Die-Quickly
Winstonfield_Pennypacker: This coming from the party whose President said - quote - "We can let doctors know and your mom know that, you know what, maybe this isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery but taking the painkiller."

Oh maybe you did.. yesterday. NM

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Hollow invective? Nope. It is an accurate description of what is being VOTED for in the United States congress, and what is being proposed to the American people as the 'only choice'. If you're a neolib like this vid jackass, then your perspective is simplistic... "If you vote against the Democrat plan then you're a murderer."
You can whine to me about 'hollow invectives' after demagougery like this BS stops getting upvotes from sifters. This stuff should be condemned by every sifter who still has two gangleon to rub together. But it isn't. Some of you are cheering it, saying it is 'truth', 'about time', yadda yadda yadda. For people who like to claim how enlightened, logical, and 'fair' you are - for shame. If that's what you really think, then you really are just a mosquito bite & a freckle away from being the next James von Brunn, or Harlan Drake.


Jesus Christ. I'm covered in freckles. What do I do in the face of a damned if you do damned if you don't situation? Assassinate an anti-abortionist or a pro-abortionist? I'm so confused... What did mom always say? Never put salt in your eyes.

Preposterous, yes!! What kind of crazed nut would ever try to argue that someone in politics would want a citizen to die. That's ridiculous!
http://www.videosift.com/video/GOP-HealthCare-Plan-Don-
t-get-sick-If-you-do-Die-Quickly
Winstonfield_Pennypacker: This coming from the party whose President said - quote - "We can let doctors know and your mom know that, you know what, maybe this isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery but taking the painkiller."
Oh maybe you did.. yesterday. NM


Hahaha, that is what we call OH HYPOCRITICAL SNAP!

I have no belief that Obama or Democrats want to let people die. That would imply active MALICE and I don't think that any such malice exists. I never ascribe to human malice that which can more easily be explained by human stupidity. All that is going on here is a philosophical difference in methodology. Mr. Dufus says that malice DOES exist, and that it ONLY exists on the Republican side. My quote of Obama was not a serious attempt to say Democrats want people to die, but an example of blatant Democrat hypocrisy.

Mr. Dufus' line of reasoning is based entirely on the fact that he believes that Republican POLICY = death. I.E. People are dying NOT because they are sick, but because Republicans are actively PREVENTING them from being well. He is out and out saying that 400K+ died not because of illness, but because Republicans deliberately stopped them from getting medical care that WOULD have saved them. Bull.

Accidents, incurable diseases, cancer, obesity, smoking, drinking, drugs, advanced age... No treatment can stop everyone from dying. To imply people died (or even went untreated) because of a difference of opinion in policy is completely ludicrous. They would have died under socialism, capitalism, or any other "ism". Diamonds to dollars almost every one of them was getting treated to boot despite being 'uninsured'. But to Mr. Dufus any 'uninsured' person can ONLY die because they were denied medical treatment because of Republicans. Again - bull.

If you really want to accept that line of thinking, then you also have to accept the correlary. If people die under DEMOCRAT health care, then they are dying BECAUSE of Democrats. See how stupid that sounds? Would Mr. Dufus apologize to the families of the millions of people who would die under Obamacare?

Republicans aren't tenting thier fingers in smoke-filled cloak rooms with insurance lobbyists and calculating out how many dollars they can make this year if they let another 0.04% of the population die in screaming agony. They're just guys who don't beleive that socalized medicine is the right solution. They think other options would be better. The implication that people who have an approach other than "massive socialism" are by logic responsible for people who die is proposterous - and anyone who agrees with it really needs to take a step back because they've lost perspective.

^They think other options would be better.

So what are those options? I really am curious. I am not a really informed follower of the ins and outs of the health care debate.

What are the Republicans ideas for providing health care to the uninsured?

Hey. I just listened to the clip.

The description and the caption need to be changed. They both say "health care." The study he quotes is about lack of "health insurance." That is a very different thing than health care. Penny says folks would die of obesity, diabetes, etc anyway.

That is not what this study is saying. It is saying SPECIFICALLY that lives would be saved if they had health INSURANCE.

Big big BIG difference. It is interesting to me that the importance of the statistics quoted has been mis-stated in the comments here.

77% of Americans support Choice of Public option.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Once again it is my pleasant duty to trouble the self-delusional groupthink of the neolib left wing.


My kingdom for a silver star or whatever I need to downvote you.

The truth behind Rep Grayson's statement is that ignoring this problem that is causing people to die preventable deaths is like wanting them to die. Saying "We don't need to make sure that everyone has health care" is like wanting the uninsured to die. Tort reform and health care portability is just the new corporate line that Republicans (<----see that word? Full name, no name-twisting smug BS) tow with enthusiasm. Are you really suggesting we do another trust fall with private industry standing behind us? They don't care about improving their product, their business, or their industry, their only aim is getting the biggest bonuses for their top managers, and if you want proof of that all you have to do is read some financial news articles dated within the last year.

Pennypecker, whether you are aware of it or not, you are carrying out the bidding of the richest 1% of America. You aren't a maverick, or a rebel, or a dissenting opinion. You are just another manipulated Republican. I know telling you this will do you no good, in fact, it will more than likely just harden your resolve, but why not take a moment to question why you belong to a party that has given trillions away to corporations, but cries bloody murder when we attempt to actually do something helpful for a large number of people? Have you thought about how out of whack and immoral your priorities are, where money is more important than human lives?

Why do you support a political party that does nothing but harm - both financially and socially - and believe there is some virtue in it?

>> ^thepinky:
^What are you talking about, "hollow invective?" That tirade was full of content. And cliches, yes.


Well miss pinky, I just so conveniently happened to have posted the knowledge you seek in the self-same comment that you responded to. Here is an encore (Now with 500% more bullet points for added clarity!!!).

-Timothy McVeigh?
-Flavore-Aide?
-Socialized Medicine?
-Self-delusional group-think?
-Neo-Libs?

-I didn't really know about Grayson until I read this. Seems he is on a roll.

Title: "Rep. Alan Grayson May Just Fuck Your Shit Up"
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2009/10/rep.html

What are the Republicans ideas for providing health care to the uninsured?

Conservatives (not necessarily Republicans) want to reform health care by implementing tort reform and removing the government imposed barrier of across-state competition for insurance - thereby lowering costs. Major medical insurance is affordable by anyone who can work at even a part time job, so they do not need to be 'provided'. Everyone else already qualifies for Medicare or Medicaid. Any loose ends can be managed at the state, municipal, or individual level.

It is saying SPECIFICALLY that lives would be saved if they had health INSURANCE.

That was already understood. Mr. Dufus is saying No Insurance = No medical treatement = Death. Bull. Everyone in the US receives medical care - insured or not. It is very likely that the vast majority (if not every single person) he references in his conveniently non-detailed 400K was being treated by any number of doctors for unspecified periods of time despite being 'uninsured'.

The truth behind Rep Grayson's statement is that ignoring this problem that is causing people to die preventable deaths is like wanting them to die.

What Mr. Dufus is doing here is taking shameful advantage of statistics. People die. It cannot be stopped. All he did is say that every uninsured person that died in "X" period of time died because of 'Republicans'. He's saying, "correlation equals causation" and you agree with him. He's an idiot and denies logic, reason, and simple statistical facts.

Correlation does not equal causation. If I totalled up the number of INSURED people who died in the same time frame, simple statistics would prove incontrovertably that far more insured people died than uninsured people. Using his moron logic, we must therefore conclude that being insured KILLS you. Therefore, Obama's plan to insure more people will result in more deaths. Therefore Democrats want people to die. You really should know better than this. I'm doing my best to put it simply, but I can't help you if you stubbornly refuse to accept common sense and facts.

You are just another manipulated Republican.

Your tirade is a miscast spear, because I'm not a Republican. I'm unaffiliated. I vote for people who will decrease goverment, lower taxes, cut programs, reduce spending, balance the budget, and in all respects decrease the size & scope of government. Sadly, that leaves me with very few people to vote for.

Why do you support a political party that does nothing but harm - both financially and socially - and believe there is some virtue in it?

I believe that question is more appropriately posited to you yourself.

^So, basically, the 'Republican solution' is to give the corrupt insurance industry more power and autonomy. Sounds like a brilliant plan. I'd expect nothing less from the party that exists solely for the purpose of serving corporate greed.

^It is saying SPECIFICALLY that lives would be saved if they had health INSURANCE.

That was already understood. It is very likely that the vast majority (if not every single person) he references in his conveniently non-detailed 400K was being treated by any number of doctors for unspecified periods of time despite being 'uninsured'. 3

Well, Penny, you are saying it is understood, but I don't see that in fact you do see that. "Mr Dufus" as you so charmingly minimize him is holding a report from HARVARD UNIVERSITY which has studied how many people die because they DON'T HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE. Your response is to say that Mr Dufus is playing with statistics and talk about obesity and diabetes and all sorts of diseases that kill people that some personal responsibility on the part of the patient would at least minimize. THAT IS NOT WHAT HARVARD UNIVERSITY SAID.

As for the Republican plan, I have read reports that (1) tort reform has had no effect on health insurance rates in the states that have it (2) some experts think that the cross the line thingy won't have an effect. Both of those conclusions can be manipulated -- by either side -- to support their desire. So who is right? Would those two things have an appreciable effect on health insurance, enough to bring down rates?

I suspect no -- but that is just my opinion. And it is of equal to yours, unless you have actually worked in detail on any of the projects that look at these topics.

You know that we are all just blowing smoke out of our asses, reading media reports and political statements that are all slanted in some way or other, and thinking that we really do know something.

I don't know what you think is affordable health insurance. I am over 55, don't smoke, no pre-existing conditions, and I pay $258 a month for catastrophic insurance. I never made any claims on it, since I have been healthy so far and what little ailments I had, I paid out of pocket. If I didn't do the catastrophic, I would be paying $500 a month for something I never use. That doesn't make sense to me. So I have catastrophic. And I wonder what they will really pay if I do get sick for the first time in my life. After paying for health insurance for 25 years, never making a claim, ever.

I suspect they won't cover much.

You think $500 a month is affordable on a part time salary? May I ask how old you are? Is your health insurance paid for by your employer? Do you have children, a spouse?

How much do you pay out of pocket for health insurance?

I suspect you are out of touch with what it really costs.

Sidebar -- I wonder how folks would feel about what you have to say if they could hear your tone of voice? I know you get jumped on alot around here. We seem to be pretty liberal around here, with a strong streak of libertarianism. I have long thought that things devolve into nastiness in emails and blogs because the words aren't conveyed the way we are actually saying them. The reader creates the tone of voice, and I wonder if your voice comes across much much harsher than it really is, if we could hear you. I find your liberal use of smiley emoticons an odd choice for a voice that I often hear as offputting and judgmental. So who are you, Penny? Smiley Emoticon with some strong opinions, or the douchebag that goads some readers into laying into you big time? I really can't tell.

Ah this thread is fun, half the comments in here I have on ignore. I'm fairly certain everyone knows who those are.

Republicans currently in office suck.

/begin the LULZ

It's laughable to me that this debate is still going on. This is how the NHS works....

I get sick, i go to the doctor, she/he makes me feel better and i continue with a healthy life.

My nan's 86, she's been to the NHS recently because she had cataracts and also problems with energy levels which were as a result of some hormonal imbalance. Over a period of 1 year, she visited the doctor many, many times and went through dozens and dozens of different attemps. (She actually hindered her own progress by taking MORE of 1 tablet or LESS of another tablet in order to 'even them up' in the packet - seriously.)

They never told her she was too old, it was never too much effort, she also had her cataracts done, and now she's as fit as a fiddle because they eventually worked out a solution to the elusive problem. My nan also is capable fiscally of attending private medical care (bupa, over here) if she wanted to. But there was no need.

Just keepin it real, guys. Just keepin it real for you.

If it so suits you, please continue to eat up any lies about "being left to die because it's cost effective." You're being tricked by lies and deceit into voting to NOT save the lives of the poor because it suits the pockets and the schemes of the rich.

PLEASE stop voting for a word - "republican" "democrat" "liberal" "conservative" - and vote for what's right. I'd express my frustration by saying jesus h christ, but if i ever wanted to become the first foreign president that would hold me back. America - fuck yeah.

I wonder if he'll apologize to the nearly 5000 soldiers dead in Iraq, and the countless number of dead Iraqis. It would be nice to take up greater issues than healthcare.

^I wonder if he'll apologize to the nearly 5000 soldiers dead in Iraq,

This sort of changing the subject is not helpful and distracts from the conversation. Keep to the topic, please.

"Pennypecker, whether you are aware of it or not, you are carrying out the bidding of the richest 1% of America..."

The term is useful idiot.