so... euthanize the hoi polloi?

Is it important to "awaken" every person on Earth?

To hasten progress? but progress is being hampered every day by "thinking", rational people.

To find all the possible geniuses out there, so they can contribute to science? but a genius may as well be a product of circumstance as of talent.

why not just leave the fools alone?

the Humane way to euthanize a dog viea Hart failure.

God damn deer are stupid. Apparently the only reason deer exist are to be stupid and ruin vehicles and present themselves as food to caged lions. Euthanize all deer.

I've seen this movie several times, and for me this scene has gone from very bizarre to very heartbreaking. I feel like he's euthanizing a good friend who unfortunately has lost his mind. Dave really has no choice at this point, mind you. Still, the machine made me sad. HAL is almost like a tragic hero, in the classical sense. Obviously smart, efficient, and dedicated. Dedicated to a fault, that is. A tragic flaw, if you will.

Where's my drink? *a tear*

Since when is government unfair competition? I can't think of an example of a government-run institution that is "unfair" in any sense to its free market competitors. Consider the United States Postal Service. It's a pretty good deal - you drop a letter in your mailbox with necessary postage and it gets picked up and delivered with an extremely high probability of success. For packages you may have to drive a few minutes to the nearest post office instead (for weighing and labels and so forth), but it is still marginally convenient. The letter/package then arrives a few days later (or longer depending on where you are sending to) at the addressed destination.

Now, there are companies such as FedEx and UPS that ultimately decided to enter the free market/capitalist system of the United States (which is completely within their Constitutional rights and freedoms) with the intent of creating a competing service to that of the USPS. The private sector now provides a valuable service to businesses as well as individuals who have specialized mailing needs, whether that be same day/overnight priorities for time-critical deliveries, extended hours/customized pickup times beyond hours the USPS is bound to (by law), or perhaps other special services (such as prepaid-labels or advanced package tracking) that the USPS simply does not have.

The proponents of privatized health care are all in favor of the free market capitalist system, and find no lack of ways to extoll capitalism's virtues and remind people that the free market ultimately is self-policing and provides for the needs of all people, a la textbook Adam Smith.

To reiterate the point - if privatized health care is such a firm believer in their own infallibility and the power of laissez-faire economics (and how it ultimately provides the consumer with the best possible health care through open competition and supply & demand), why would they be opposed to another player entering that arena regardless of whether it is government- or private-run? Again - if they provide a better service than the government does, why should they be afraid of a mass exodus to the public option? The government SURELY will provide an inferior level of health care, so they have nothing to be afraid of!

Any health care provider that is not saying "Bring it on" is one that knows they are screwing their customers up the wazoo.

Think about what would happen if the public option failed miserably. Let's say the legislation passes and Obama's plan is put into effect. If anyone who joins that plan gets treated like cattle in a slaughterhouse, is denied health care due to so-called "rationing," or a "death panel" euthanizes their grandma in front of them - that is what will frighten consumers into going back to ol' reliable privatized health care. And the government option will inevitably collapse and Obama will look like a worse president than Bush, all while reaffirming the strength and sensibility of a free market health care system. Capitalism 1, "Socialism" 0.

Let them duke it out, and to the victor go the spoils. QED.

>> ^gtjwkq:
^ Because government is unfair competition. People being forced to pay for government healthcare would have less money and incentive to pay for private healthcare.
Government is not really an "option" when it's funded by taxes. You can only choose not to use it, but you can't choose whether or not to pay for it.

>> ^EndAll:
Are you trying to justify these comments - that the word "socialist" is equatable to the n-word in its use by conservatives? The term in itself carries no implications of race. I can understand the points made in that article, and a few by the broadcaster but I think this is mainly just more liberal propaganda (yes it does exist), painting every one in opposition on this issue with a broad brush, as a racist.


I don't think it's 1 to 1, no. We don't think everyone calling Obama a socialist is a racist, but we think there are a healthy number of racists calling Obama a socialist who don't have a clue what a "socialist" is. I think they get more satisfaction out of calling him "Muslim", or better yet "Kenyan" anyways.

It's about trying to maximize the fear of Obama, and the dehumanization of liberals. Racial fear is just a convenient well to draw on. For anti-government militia types, it's a secret plan to take away their guns. For old people, it's a secret plan to euthanize them to cut costs. For others it's a plot to abort more babies. If they can layer multiple fears together, they will.

If you think that's not part of the playbook, and just some story liberals are making up, you seriously need to get out more.

The thing is, it would be such an embarassment for Obama and the US to publicly address these issues. Other nations would read this and be like, "fuck dude! People think you will euthanize them? What is wrong with you? Stupid americans!"

All you have to do is ask these mobs to prove their claims. Provide physical, indesputable, evidence that supports their views. As they're flipping through their webpages, tivo'ing Glenn Beck, leafing through their chain emails, they will realize at some point that everything they have does not count as factual information. Only the bill will do.

How can he be "damn sure" that he will outlive his children? Obviously most father's would desire to see their children live beyond them. How does this somehow invalidate the Christian understanding of an eternal God. Is the argument that only a true loving Father would euthanize himself before seeing one of his children die? What if the child dies unjustly (i.e. is ruthlessly murdered for no reason)? Would the loving father's obligation be to end his own life? Or would a loving father seek justice for his son's meaningless death? If I have misunderstood Hitchens' point here, please explain.

On the matter of the Austrian incestuous and deplorable father, I believe Hitchens' appraisal of the actual crime and situation is well put and accurate. It is nothing short of a heinous and grotesque injustice. Words fail to grasp the depravity. Hitchens' goes on to seem to suggest that Christianity would overlook the injustice of the crime, and that a Christian's response is "that's alright." I believe this reveals a grave misunderstanding by Hitchens of Christianity. Christianity takes justice very seriously, an understanding of the Biblical teaching on evil and sacrifice cannot deny that. The Bible also does not encourage inactivity to injustice. In this lifetime Christians are required to "promote justice" (Micah 6:8). I honestly cannot understand how one can criticize the Bible for taking evil of this nature (or any nature for that matter) lightly. And yet that is exactly what Hitchens appears to be doing.

Tyranny (a tyrannical God) is a logical conclusion to a perception of the Gospel message that is absent of righteousness (to make something right; to right a wrong; to seek justice).

What the hell? Who in this day and age doesn't have a frickin mailbox??? A slot in the door? What is this? 1896?

Also, I would have those fucking untrained, obnoxious, hideous beasts euthanized. >:[

Your video, Seventeen Year Old Champion Gymnast Euthanized After Injury, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Thanks, Kronos. I resubmitted with the youtube embed. I didn't know that Onion embeds weren't working.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Seventeen-Year-Old-Champion-Gymnast-Euthanized-After-Injury

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Also, just discard your original post for this and resubmit it. You've lost a whole day and haven't gotten a single vote, so you have absolutely nothing to lose at this point.

Thanks, Zifnab. I resubmitted with the youtube embed.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Seventeen-Year-Old-Champion-Gymnast-Euthanized-After-Injury

In reply to this comment by Zifnab:
Another bad Onion embed. Try the YouTube version instead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMsLg4jqlJw

Thanks, Zifnab. I resubmitted with the youtube embed.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Seventeen-Year-Old-Champion-Gymnast-Euthanized-After-Injury

>> ^Zifnab:
Another bad Onion embed. Try the YouTube version instead:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMsLg4jqlJw

Thanks, I resubmitted it.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Seventeen-Year-Old-Champion-Gymnast-Euthanized-After-Injury

nwo is euthanizing us.