Progressives want to kill the elderly and the sick

reply to post by Matrix Rising


Way to bring back the GOP talking points! DEATH PANELS!!! RATIONED HEALTHCARE!!! FEAR!!!

When you say something is a fact, you really should know what you're talking about. I'm a progressive, yet I don't want to kill the elderly and the sick, which proves your statement is false and inflammatory.

It'd be like me saying that the conservatives only desire is to help special interest and funnel money to themselves, forsaking all others. It's not true, but because it's spouted off as "a fact", it disarms people's critical thinking. It just shows that you have no objectivity and that your argument is one-sided and not open to debate.

In your case, cherry picking statements from a press release just makes you look ignorant to anyone who read the entire thing... Or even the snippets that you posted. Voluntary End of Life Care, with the emphasis on Voluntary. No more controversial than my living will, yet if you could, I have a feeling you'd be calling them death camps complete with gas chambers.

Preying on people's fears is what most conservatives do. Because people that are afraid are easy to control. Smart people aren't afraid when someone hits a panic button.

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Annee

 

That should be your choice. Kept where it belongs, you, your family and your doctor, not with the government.

The government doesn't mandate that you do it, it's just supported as a covered cost under the new plan. End of life planning is typically a legal expense and is very rarely paid for by insurance. The difference between it and a living will is that the living will consultation isn't paid for by insurance.

reply to post by grahag


Well, I guess the WHOLE uproar about the death panels, was that they existed. Since it cause a huge uproar, the legislation was removed.

But of course the head of the CMS puts back in the death panels in the regulations, and when it is brought up, all anyone has to say is..................

Oh, those damn conservative talking points.

I thought they weren't real, then sorry, we will remove them.

Whatever, you folks really got your acts down well. Wooooeee is me.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


No the uproar about "death panels" was caused by Sarah Palin lying, or talking out of her butt, and gullible people falling in line behind her without bothering to research for themselves.

A doctor being able to receive payment for discussing a living will with his patient is NOT a death panel... Well not unless you are a Tea Party nut job who wants to quit her governor gig for profit.

~Heff

for profit.

~Heff

Is that what you got against people on the conservative side? You always bring that up, why is that?

You a commie or something?

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


So you think that a company driven by profit and the bottom line will be more or less likely to pay to keep grandma alive well after she is no longer profitable or will they likely end grandmas care once it starts eating into the bottom line?

I guess you imagine some office somewhere full of executives forgoing their annual bonus because some kid has cancer and was born to poor parents, right?

Originally posted by grahag

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Annee

 

That should be your choice. Kept where it belongs, you, your family and your doctor, not with the government.

The government doesn't mandate that you do it, it's just supported as a covered cost under the new plan. End of life planning is typically a legal expense and is very rarely paid for by insurance. The difference between it and a living will is that the living will consultation isn't paid for by insurance.

I'm saying I do not support medical support from the government if their is no hope of a reasonable life. I just don't support artificial life support for the sake of keeping someone alive - just to keep them alive.

In other words - I would not support another Terri Shiavo type case - - not in a million years. (I don't know if the government paid in that case).

There needs to be a reasonable limit - when you say Stop. That is my opinion.

reply to post by Sinnthia


NO, I see the FACT that if a private company screws someone over on a contract, they can be sued.

Now, in the US the government for ONE is not responsible for the safety or well being of it's citizens, hence it cannot be sued. Scotus decision by the way. Might want to look that up.

Also, suing the government in a government run court is kind of a no brainer.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


Poor poor delusional saltheart, thinking that corporations are gods, and that people should worship and obey them.

I guess it should be "We the multinational organizations" instead of We the People huh?

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

NO, I see the FACT that if a private company screws someone over on a contract, they can be sued.

Now, in the US the government for ONE is not responsible for the safety or well being of it's citizens, hence it cannot be sued. Scotus decision by the way. Might want to look that up.

Also, suing the government in a government run court is kind of a no brainer.

Oh, so some made up contract that does not exist makes it all ok?
Gotcha.

Ask Bernie Madoff's son all about the altruism and responsibility to customers of the corporate giant.

I guess the next time I have a problem with something, I will just imagine a solution too. Thanks.

For what it's worth, some additional perspective:

My impression was this legislation would address an issue that many families do not address until it's too late. The discussion about extended life support and many other critical decisions regarding the dying and elderly. This movement is only to make sure everyone is on the same page, going into the situation, as opposed to trying to let other's determine what is best in the later stages of end of life decisions.

Peace,
spec

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Matrix Rising

 

The Progressives want to kill off the elderly to control costs in order to protect the State and it's Government program.

Why are you repeating this again, even if it has been debunked on page 2? Repeated lie wont become truth.

>> I have to disagree -- we've repeatedly SEEN on TV and movies that there was a single shooter that took out JFK. Even though the senate concluded (after the debunked Magic Bullet theory), that it was the result of a conspiracy.

Repeating nonsense works over and over again -- as long as you promote those who believe the lies. The reason why so many Tea Baggers were well-to-do, is because they are afraid that if it ever came down to MERIT -- they would be out of the executive washroom.

Do you notice the amazing talent and intelligence of the people who get paid 6 and 7 figures on Fox News? ... yeah, neither did I. If you have the RIGHT belief system, and echo what the company PR (which pays the advertising) wants -- then you get promoted.


>> There is a bigger effort to shut down WikiLeaks right now and make it look plausible, then there was to get Bin Laden. And everyone is so SHOCKED at their revelations -- because they have all forgotten what INVESTIGATING the powerful looks like -- or even the role of the media.

There was a concerted effort to effect what gets put in textbooks. There was an effort to take over the evangelical churches. There is an EFFORT to proselytize the military right now.


>> Don't tell someone that REPEATING THE LIES doesn't work -- when it is working fabulously in this country. They blame the economic problems in efforts to stem the disaster -- on SOCIALISM! The only thing I've seen in a LONG TIME that could possibly put a chink in this well executed plan to shut down the power of the people in this country is WikiLeaks and an effort by Dennis Kucinich to force the Government to print money rather than BORROW our money from the Federal Reserve -- which is a group of Banksters who learned how to get paid for nothing. No money is created in this country without first being borrowed into being -- we can therefore, NEVER pay back the Deficit.

Listen to a few people from Fox News and you will learn what caused all our problems --and yet, NO REALIZATION, that all their CURES for the problem have been applied since Reagan was in office. Removing critical thinking from the "religious" in this country and those who just want to get along has been very successful.

Just wear a nice suit and REPEAT whatever you want.

reply to post by speculativeoptimist


The OUTRAGE at the "Death Panels" was crocodile tears to begin with. I've been trying to understand Conservative Republicans for a long time -- and I think it's that it has to come down to their RELIGIOUS indoctrination. They went to a church that nobody enjoyed. And listened to people say "LOVE" and then speak of a God who punished people for eternity. It is saying one thing while doing another. YOU care because you care enough to lie....

I didn't understand that until after I'd seen about 25 "good Christian girls" go to bed with the first guy to say "I'll love you forever and let's pray." And then get them in the sack. It's all about caring enough to lie -- not saying; "hey, let's get to know each other before you try and save my soul, OK?" I didn't have the foreplay down right.


>> The IMPORTANT thing to get on the psychopathology -- I think, of American Christianists, is to get that they HATE Liberals. They hate not being able to lynch the bad people and they really DO THINK, that most problems can be solved by shooting a bunch of bad guys. Now, I've known a lot of self-sacrificing, religious conservatives, but I didn't know any that didn't have a screw loose. When Sean Hannity had a "debate" with Allan Cohlms -- he didn't have to WIN the discussion, he merely had to look more manly and give that smug, sad "I'll pray for your soul" look. It's all the "words don't matter -- look at my disdain" code. I've seen about a thousand times when I misspoke a turn of phrase and seen that "you aren't one of us" look. If I don't blame sinners and have too much compassion, if I think that some people have BAD LUCK -- and it's not DESERVED -- it's a dead giveaway.

The thing freaking out the Conservatives on losing jobs, is not -- I've been forsaken by the American Corporations who took our tax breaks to build manufacturing overseas -- it's "where is the Hippy who did this to me?"

What they Christianists say about the enemy -- is really their own hidden desire. They needed to believe that every terrorist tortured was hiding a nuke -- because they really need a reason for torture. It's the ENDS they want, and they merely have to have a thin veneer of "piousness" to allow them to do it. I saw a chilling show once on Evangelicals -- and I've LIVED with them many years -- they WANT armageddon. Who the heck would think provoking a war in the Middle East would bring back Jesus? Someone who obviously thinks that Jesus wants to grab a machine gun and start shooting Hippies.

Bin Laden didn't hate America for it's freedoms - the Christianists did. And when they say that we had to get the ter'rists because they'd chop your head off or torture you -- it's really what THEY would do. Liberals figure we can talk to the enemy, because we believe most people are good -- and Conservatives fear that what lurks behind the enemies eyes is what is in their own hearts.

>> You cannot DISCUSS and change minds with some people, unless you are in control. Power is what Conservatives respect. They worship a Red-Robed guy who sneaks into homes and brings presents, and they ignore someone who lived like a homeless man and never pushed violence. I'm not religious in the least -- but it's pretty clear to me that the apostle who MOST BELIEVED IN JESUS was Judas -- his betrayal was not pointing him out to the Romans. He was sure that Jesus would bring the wrath of God down on the romans and rescue his son. In the public square, it was not a common thief that Pontius Pilot gave the people a choice between; it was a peacemaker and a well-known rabble rouser. What he heck is wrong with a group of people who read "peace, peace, love, love, share, share" and then act like greedy, whiney, selfish bastards? If they can't get their own philosophy right -- with a million and one churches and priests in this country, then it isn't by any accident.

>> The Christianists were told to hate Clinton. And they were not outraged at his behavior -- they only wanted to win. Their leaders had the Pious look and sneer, and they gave a wink. They cared enough to lie and they showed power. You can't believe that anyone with love in their hearts and a clear head wouldn't figure out that Pat Robertson is a crook, can you? He looks like and acts like an abuser -- an pharisees. AND THAT is why he has influence.

Speak of love, and sneer and ask for someone to be assassinated -- and include some references to people being killed by the weather because they were Gay. It isn't GAYNESS that is hated -- it's people living without shame or FEAR who are hated. I mean, how many boy-loving religious leaders and Republicans have to be outed for it to start to SINK IN, that they demonize all the crap that THEY DO?

This illness is NOT only a problem in the US. In Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia -- where you can get stoned for uncovered hair or getting raped, it's common to molest children. It's MEN LOVING each other that is frowned upon -- NOT THE ABUSE. Equality and love is evil. And if you really want to have a lot of sin to enjoy, you have to be a religious leader or political leader. Anyone, who steps out of line and promotes compassion or understanding or justice -- well, that person gets outed.

>> Religions are designed by oppressors who do not believe in an afterlife to gain control. There aren't many wars on this planet that don't have "faithful" involved, don't have the people making money on the drugs making sure they are illegal, that don't have someone making a buck because someone is starving. Nobody clings to life more than an Evangelical Preacher.

reply to post by whatukno


Good post there.

Ron Paul is merely another Goldstein. He points out the Fed and a few hippocrits, but there isn't anything in his policies that wouldn't just enrich the same robber barons who sponsor his fellow politicians from making MORE MONEY, with his ideas. Either that, or he is just bonkers.

>> Social Security is the last big pot of honey to be stolen. And the Robber Barons would like nothing better than "personal responsibility" to give a few SMART investors money. So what do people do when a market goes down and THAT is when they retire? How about when they pick the wrong pony? I guess allowing for collateral damage is OK -- just as long as it doesn't happen to YOU.

But it will happen to YOU. Eventually, we all get older and are no longer the super smart punk we once thought we were. Someone who is willing to work 80 hours and get paid less, and doesn't have to watch their intake of salt or fatty foods is going to one day be breathing down your neck -- and they only thing that stands between you and unemployment is your LOYALTY to the company. And what does that mean? One day we are all liabilities -- and none of us "bootstrapped ourselves" here, not unless you are an immigrant who taught himself to read.

Does society really need to run on a lottery?

Social Security -- despite what this country has been repeatedly TOLD, is solvent. Despite Bush's best efforts, it still can cover people. Talk of it "going bankrupt" is ignorance or lies -- SS is really a TRANSFER FUND. So the huge sums of money are in trust and not an account the robber barons can steal from -- and when the Baby Boomers ARE DONE RETIRING -- THE ACCOUNT GOES TO ZERO AS IT SHOULD. At that point, there are more working than being in an old folks home, so the trust is getting replenished. But, everybody on TV says otherwise -- that's because they get paid lots of money not to be very inquisitive or know anything but what THEY are repeatedly told.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

Your premise is well articulated and accurate, imo VA. The guys that promote "ridding ourselves of the cancerous progressives" are only making things worse, which is why I despise the perspective.

Jesus wants to grab a machine gun and start shooting Hippies.

funniest thing I've seen all day!
This interview to me, fully embodies the issue and the disconnect with reality, which unfortunately is representative of opinions amongst the masses, more divided we fall fortification.:
www.thedailyshow.com...
www.thedailyshow.com...

spec

reply to post by speculativeoptimist


Actually, zombie had a GREAT article on hippies.

The Electric Tea Party Acid Test

edit to add, I guess I have walked into the twilight zone, so I will SLOWLY attempt to back out.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower

Electric Tea Part Acid Test

I will have to digest this a bit and respond later, but thanks for the provision...very interesting.

spec

Yes, this is death panels and saying it's "voluntary" is like trying to tell the IRS taxes are "voluntary" when they come to confiscate your goods.

Of course it's voluntary but they give Doctors money to push End of Life care over expensive medical treatments for the elderly. This is the way you ration healthcare through medicare reimbursements. This is why Obama wanted reimbursements controlled by the executive branch instead of the legislative branch.

You always have to look for a cause and an effect when it comes to Politicians. The cause will always be wrapped in emotion so the desired effect can remain hidden.

They do this because they see people as stupid. Most people follow politicians blindly based on whether an R or D is next to their name. For instance, Obama has escalated things in Afghanistan and you don't see the hypocrites who were in the streets, wearing fake blood on their shirts and interrupting hearings during the Bush Administration.

Governments have been playing off of peoples stupidity for years. Hitler said "It's a fortunate thing for Governments that the people don't think."

Bush had a desired effect that he wanted. This was going into Iraq and taking out Hussein. He had to wrap the cause in WMD, 9/11 and protecting America.

Obama's desired effect is to ration healthcare to protect Medicare. He wrapped the cause in compassion when it has nothing to do with compassion. It's designed to kill off people starting with the elderly in order to cut costs and protect medicare.

Obama Eyes The Purse Strings for Medicare

Obama administration officials say they are determined to stem soaring Medicare spending, arguing that it is a root cause of the broader health-care crisis that they are trying to address with Congress. Behind the scenes, Obama is pushing for a mechanism that would take Medicare payment authority out of the hands of politicians and invest it in a separate entity, possibly under the executive branch.

www.washingtonpost.com...

Again, cause and effect. Obama wanted control of reimbursement rates in order to ration out healthcare to control medicare costs. This is why Obama talks about reducing the volume in healthcare.

The way you do it is tell Doctors we will reimburse you more money if you give out a pain pill. If you do a lot of tests and the guy/girl isn't sick you will get less money.

So my friend who went to the hospital with a headache and had a tumor would probably be dead because the Doctor had to give him several tests because the Doctor isn't psychic. Under Obamacare Doctors will be better off if they give out less healthcare.

Medicare and Social Security are Pyramid schemes that will crumble as life expectancy increases. So these programs need to be reformed and then phased out over time.

Since we seem to have fear mongering on one side of this debate and complete apathetic ignorance on the other, doesn't it make better sense to approach this issue with caution?

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower

 

Poor poor delusional saltheart, thinking that corporations are gods (nice strawman), and that people should worship and obey them (delusional rhetoric).

I guess it should be "We the multinational organizations" instead of We the People huh? (and totally obfuscational)

At least you are par for the course. Let me see, you should have started with Obama's favorite strawman,

Some People

Like shooting fish in a barrel lately there wuk.