It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Boomer1941
Man...I thought I was on ATS, this thread certainly has it's share of liberal nutjobs...lol
Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by skycopilot
ROFL, I can agree with that, being a victim of "mistake" in Afgan mountains. Those warthogs are scary... evening scarier when you are the receiving end... Buuuurrrrrppppp
Originally posted by nixie_nox
I don't want to see the destruction of the gop, but I would like to see the fear and smear end.
Stop talking about Obama, and start talking about issues.
I must confess my dismay bordering on horror at the amateurism of the White House apparatus for domestic policy. When will heads start to roll? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ... has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down.
There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama's aggressive endorsement of healthcare plan ... makes Washington seem like Cloud Cuckoo Land.
The president is promoting the most colossal, brazen bait-and-switch operation since the Bush administration snookered the country into invading Iraq with apocalyptic visions of mushroom clouds over American cities.
You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you're happy with it, Obama keeps assuring us in soothing, lullaby tones. Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.
As a libertarian and refugee from the authoritarian Roman Catholic church of my youth, I simply do not understand the drift of my party toward a soulless collectivism.
This is in fact what Sarah Palin hit on in her shocking image of a "death panel" under Obamacare that would make irrevocable decisions about the disabled and elderly. On reflection, I realized that Palin's shrewdly timed metaphor spoke directly to the electorate's unease with the prospect of shadowy, unelected government figures controlling our lives. A death panel not only has the power of life and death but is itself a symptom of a Kafkaesque brave new world where authority has become remote, arbitrary and spectral. And as in the Spanish Inquisition, dissidence is heresy, persecuted and punished.
Don't even ask what she thinks of your attitude. So I'll show you anyway:
And what do Democrats stand for, if they are so ready to defame concerned citizens as the "mob" -- a word betraying a Marie Antoinette delusion of superiority to ordinary mortals.
Somehow liberals have drifted into a strange servility toward big government, which they revere as a godlike foster father-mother who can dispense all bounty and magically heal all ills. The ethical collapse of the left was nowhere more evident than in the near total silence of liberal media and Web sites at the Obama administration's outrageous solicitation to private citizens to report unacceptable "casual conversations" to the White House. If Republicans had done this, there would have been an angry explosion by Democrats from coast to coast. I was stunned at the failure of liberals to see the blatant totalitarianism in this incident, which the president should have immediately denounced. His failure to do so implicates him in it.
So, what does this do to you and your kindred's opinions that this is a good idea, and that conservative criticism is unfounded?
You have no idea, do you?
Deny ignorance!
jw
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by centurion1211
What does stalking Bush's car have to do with gop smear and fear?
Are you really comparing an illegal war that has killed thousands of soldiers and 100,000 Iraqi's to health care reform?
While we are at it, I will post a a link of disturbing behavior myself....
congressman hung in effigy
and of course the swastika.
and the sabotaging of town hall meetings.
Originally posted by amazed
This question had to do with why republicans and/or Christians seem to be using the phrase "death panel", when it is obvious that this new proposed bill has nothing in it in regards to a "death panel", it has in it provisions to reimburse the medical community for assisting people with knowing what their options are for when they become very ill. IE: advanced care planning directives.
* * * *
How do you feel about people being allowed to choose how to end their lives? Do you feel a person has the right to choose to gently pass away, being with their family in their homes? Or do you feel, that no matter what, humans should fight tooth and nail to the last breath?
Do you feel that people have the right to create an advanced care planning directive?
Forgive me if you feel this is a derailing of this thread. I feel it is important to understand the underlying emotions of where the concept of "death panel" comes from, and that my question might be able to do so. Possibly helping everyone to understand, that the concept of "death panel" is just a derailing of the real issue, which is peoples right to choose. Is this a religious issue hidden under the fear of "death panel?"
Originally posted by amazed
Last night my husband and I were discussing this issue, and he asked a question which I felt was interesting.
This question had to do with why republicans and/or Christians seem to be using the phrase "death panel", when it is obvious that this new proposed bill has nothing in it in regards to a "death panel", it has in it provisions to reimburse the medical community for assisting people with knowing what their options are for when they become very ill. IE: advanced care planning directives.
He pointed out, that it is possible, that the underlying emotions might really be, that many republicans (neither of us is positive of this and were just thinking) do not feel that we have the "right" to decide how the end of our lives go.
So, let's take out the health care issue for now, and look at just my question, as I feel it might assist us in understanding some of the emotions here.
How do you feel about people being allowed to choose how to end their lives? Do you feel a person has the right to choose to gently pass away, being with their family in their homes? Or do you feel, that no matter what, humans should fight tooth and nail to the last breath?
Do you feel that people have the right to create an advanced care planning directive?
Forgive me if you feel this is a derailing of this thread. I feel it is important to understand the underlying emotions of where the concept of "death panel" comes from, and that my question might be able to do so. Possibly helping everyone to understand, that the concept of "death panel" is just a derailing of the real issue, which is peoples right to choose. Is this a religious issue hidden under the fear of "death panel?"
Harm None
Peace
Originally posted by Avenginggecko
Originally posted by kernalpanic
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
AND, this is different from the FOR-PROFIT Health Insurance Companies denying needed medical care and dropping patients rather than paying claims.....this is different how, again???
Its actually quite simple really, if an insurance company has a tendency to do that, actions can be taken to move to a new insurer. Activism on the part of people who point these things out can force insurers to change their ways, or be forced out of business as people are made aware of what they are doing and dump their policy with them. Remember...vote with your wallet.
Now if this is a government panel, where are you going to move to? Will they exempt themselves from lawsuit like they do for the Pharma companies and their vaccines? This option is unamerican. Plain and simple. So while Palin is using wordsmith tactics, she doesn't appear to be as dumb or clueless as you try to convince yourselves. I personally am on the Ron Paul train, but this snipping between party lines seems to me to be nothing more then a bunch of dopes still buying into the left-right paradigm to oblivion. Sarah Palin wouldn't be my first choice, but she is undeserving of this 'pile on' in this instance.
You can't just drop your insurance coverage one day and go to another one tomorrow. It takes time to switch carriers. Plus, there's this icky little thing called, "pre-existing conditions" that might suck for the patient.
Insurance companies try to discourage people from waiting until they get sick in order to purchase health insurance. One way in which they do this is to impose pre-existing condition exclusion periods. This means that if you have a medical problem which exists at the time you enroll in or purchase your health insurance, the insurance company will deny all claims pertaining to this medical problem for a certain period of time.
Source\
Basically, if you got denied for a cancer treatment under one carrier, you couldn't just "switch" and have it covered.
This is nothing new and has been the case with insurance companies since we've had health insurance. Consumers can't "vote with their wallet" when the insurance industry sets pricings and standards as a whole and not on an individual corporate basis.
Car companies are a good example: ever wonder why car prices are all similar? Economy cars are all priced similarly, regular cars are all priced similarly, and luxury cars are all priced similarly. It's because, like the insurance industry, the car companies are an oligarchy.
Oligarchies and monopolies = not good for the nation.
Honestly, I'd rather have imperfect legislation that lowers medical expenses and covers all Americans than no legislation that keeps medical costs skyrocketing and doesn't come near covering all Americans.