Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Olbermann Slams Palin

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

Alxandro, you can't possibly believe that, can you??


"euthanasia"???


You really shouldn't downplay it either.

We already know he thinks babies are nothing more than some sort of punishment and a mistake, why shouldn't we be surprised of what he thinks of the elderly.





posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


When I heard him speak, putting it in context with other speeches it sounded like he was speaking of birth control, not abortion. And...well...to a preteen (which his daughters were) a baby would be a punishment, not a joy.

And shouldn't all babies be joys?

There is a lot he's said you can hang him on, I just don't think this ought to be one of them.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
I won't be able to judge the video, because I wouldn't be able to stomach KO for 14+ minutes. The very few times I have watched him, he has never changed his tune of "Obama is so great" mantra.

Of course there is no 'Death Panel' per se. But Obama did allude to rationing of health care by a panel of 'specialists' today. They would make decisions of what care a patient would receive (which patients, not sure, b/c as usual Obama doesn't want to deal with details...he wants us to trust him).

So that could definitely equate to a "Decision Panel", or whatever you want to call it.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Of course there is no 'Death Panel' per se. But Obama did allude to rationing of health care by a panel of 'specialists' today. They would make decisions of what care a patient would receive (which patients, not sure, b/c as usual Obama doesn't want to deal with details...he wants us to trust him).
So that could definitely equate to a "Decision Panel", or whatever you want to call it.


Comments by Howard Dean on the issue:

The Media's Treatment of Palin's Outrageous "Death Panel" Claims
...My wife and I have practiced medicine for over forty years combined. There is no truth now, nor has there ever been any truth to the idea that the government encourages euthanasia or infanticide.

Our country is in trouble. Claims like these are routinely refuted by people who know better, but they are recirculated because they are sensational, and the MSM purports to take a balanced position without a thoughtful assessment of the facts. Fox News actually has people on in support of these outrageously false claims.

In fact, these kinds of claims are lies. There is no nice way to say it. This kind of stuff is far beyond the usual politicians' tricks of shading words and imputing meanings that aren't there. To quote a famous American who began the process of ending the McCarthy era in the fifties I address the MSM: "At long last, Have you no sense of decency?" www.huffingtonpost.com...


How well this all factors in to SO's thread on "getting Obama"

[edit on 11-8-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   
id like to see olbermann make a 15 minute tirade against lord high master obama. I can guarantee that will never happen



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 



Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by jsobecky
Of course there is no 'Death Panel' per se. But Obama did allude to rationing of health care by a panel of 'specialists' today. They would make decisions of what care a patient would receive (which patients, not sure, b/c as usual Obama doesn't want to deal with details...he wants us to trust him).
So that could definitely equate to a "Decision Panel", or whatever you want to call it.


How well this all factors in to SO's thread on "getting Obama"

[edit on 11-8-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]


You may continue to deny that there is no talk of rationing care in Obama's plan, or camp of advisors. You may attempt to show that my post somehow is an attempt to "get Obama", and you may attempt to reference SO's thread as 'proof'.

But you are wrong. I can back up my statements with facts. You can only try to cast aspersions on my intent. You defend Obama with such vigor and zeal that one might think you lived in the US. But I think you are stuck with socialized medicine up there, and want us to suffer under the same plan.

Here is some very troubling and revealing info from Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Rahm Emanuel, and a senior medica advisor to Obama:


“Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously.”

“Allocation by age is not. . .discrimination.”

—Ezekiel Emanuel




And if that is not troubling enough, read more of his words:


This civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good provides both procedural and substantive insights for developing a just alloca- tion of health care resources. Procedurally, it suggests the need for public forums to deliberate about which health services should be considered basic and should be socially guaranteed. Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future genera- tions, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Conversely, services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia. A less obvious example Is is guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason.


wizbangblog.com...

The last sentence of that paragraph shows that Sarah Palin has a very valid concern over how Obama views her son Trig, and other mentally-challenged children and adults.



This is who Obama listens to for advice?

"Get Obama"? I doubt it. Just the facts, plain and simple.


[edit on 11-8-2009 by jsobecky]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobeckyBut I think you are stuck with socialized medicine up there, and want us to suffer under the same plan.


My cancer was cured for $32 out of pocket. My provincial health tax...which is subtracted from the annual credits runs about $400 annually. Our standard of living is...I'll be generous...equal to yours.

Your patronizing is quite misplaced.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by jsobeckyBut I think you are stuck with socialized medicine up there, and want us to suffer under the same plan.


My cancer was cured for $32 out of pocket. My provincial health tax...which is subtracted from the annual credits runs about $400 annually. Our standard of living is...I'll be generous...equal to yours.

Your patronizing is quite misplaced.


Anecdotal evidence is not a reason to adopt socialized medicine. How about the long lines people must endure to get basic tests? Thousands of stories about those people exist.

And your claim of patronizing is amusing. I notice you failed to address the rest of my post. Not surprising, since you cannot refute the facts.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I thought it was pretty good. It's important that those who are buying this fear-mongering look under the surface instead of having the knee-jerk reactions that are ill-informed and don't contribute to a solution.


Like the knee jerk fear mongering over the banks and auto companies.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by jsobeckyBut I think you are stuck with socialized medicine up there, and want us to suffer under the same plan.


My cancer was cured for $32 out of pocket. My provincial health tax...which is subtracted from the annual credits runs about $400 annually. Our standard of living is...I'll be generous...equal to yours.

Your patronizing is quite misplaced.


Anecdotal evidence is not a reason to adopt socialized medicine. How about the long lines people must endure to get basic tests? Thousands of stories about those people exist.

And your claim of patronizing is amusing. I notice you failed to address the rest of my post. Not surprising, since you cannot refute the facts.


Ok, at first glance we are dealing with a nut-job politico...Bachman...and a report dated from 1996. And the long lineups? Poop...I trust you don't mind me accepting my own anecdotal evidence as acceptable to me. Question of illness to full treatment in 2 months. Fine by me. $32. Fine by me too.

Do what you want, but like I said, I'm not going to quietly watch Americans get screwed out of health care by seeing Canada put forward as a bad example.

$32 parking fee for 2 trips to the cancer centre. Anecdote me arse!



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 



Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Ok, at first glance we are dealing with a nut-job politico...Bachman...and a report dated from 1996.


This is one of the weakest cop-outs that can be used. You ignore the words said by Emanuel, and try to deflect by attacking the messenger.

There are plenty of other sources for this same info, if Bachman is too much for you. Research them.


And the long lineups? Poop...


No, not poop, but fact. You may choose to deny it, but it doesn't change the facts.

Read this chilling indictment of the Canadian health care system:


Canadian health insurance is compulsory, monopolistic, and administered by the various provincial governments under strict control of the federal government. It is illegal for a Canadian citizen to carry private insurance coverage for any health care services covered by the government. Physicians are told by the government how much they can charge for their services; drug prices are set by the government. The supply of medical services in Canada is completely rationed, with no significant private alternative.

The alleged "low cost" of Canadian health care is thus no less a fraud than it was in the Soviet Union. Canadians may not pay the price in dollar terms ... but they pay a steep price indeed in terms of care denied or delayed and the poor quality of service provided by unhappy medical practitioners whose incomes do not match their skill and training.

Take a Number and Wait

Long waiting lines are the worst flaw in the system. The Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, calculated in 2003 the average Canadian waited more than four months for treatment by a specialist once the referral was made by a general practitioner. According to the Fraser Institute's work, the shortest median wait was 6.1 weeks for oncology (cancer) treatment without radiation. In some provinces, neurosurgery patients waited more than a year. A simple MRI requires, on average, a three-month wait in Canada.

www.heartland.org...

And something that you should be embarassed about: Canadians that can afford it choose to come to the US for timely, superb treatment. Canada's 3-tiered system has the US as one of it's components:


Three-Tier System
In his Wall Street Journal article, Lemieux quotes Professor Livio Di Matteo of Lakehead University in Ontario describing a three-tier system of health care in Canada. The very rich, DiMatteo pointed out, can go to the U.S. for rapid, personalized, high-tech treatment. A second tier, consisting of well-informed, aggressive Canadians, knows how to navigate the government system to gain every possible advantage, like getting to the head of the queue.

The third tier are the unconnected citizens, who make up the vast majority of patients in the Canadian health care system. They must suffer the slings and arrows of a system notoriously oblivious to anguish, discomfort, humiliation, and other affronts perpetrated by unfeeling bureaucrats on patients whose pain is most definitely not felt by those in charge.


The problem is, if the Canadian system is the only one you've ever experienced, you can be fooled into thinking it is the best.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I won't discuss the Canadian system anymore in this thread, since it is beginning to go off-topic.

However, my posts on Ezekiel Emanuel are definitely on topic. They show that Sarah Palin has a definite concern, and that KO was completely off-base with his attacks.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:43 PM
link   
It is a well known fact that listening to Keith Olbermann will give you face cancer, cause rashes on your dog, and cause turtles to bite.

Listening to Palin, however, will cause peace to break out all over the world, Buddah to apologise to her, and kittens will giggle.

Ok, silliness over?

Olbermann is a die-hard leftie would would fall on his sword for our current POTUS.

Palin is the strawman of the year. Need an enemy? Attack Palin. Palin not there? Attack a tea party person. They all gone? Attack someone who doesn't like the healthcare plan.

The left needs an enemy. I've said this before, and I'll say it again. They cannot exist without something to hate. Whether it be christians, whites, smokers, carbon, etc. . .

They can only justify their existence by contrasting themselves to others whom they despise.

There is no ideology. If there was one, it would be of HATE.

Really. They have become more rabid since they've won the House, the Senate, the White House.

Why aren't they happy? Why can't they celebrate? They won. We hear it over and over again, but they still insist on being so damn angry.

-sigh-

Someone needs to slip some zoloft into the drinking water in DC.

Juuuuuuuuust my humble little opinion, though . . . .

[edit on 11-8-2009 by mikerussellus]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Are u serious JsoBecky? Michelle Bachmann?????????? That chick is more Looney than Bugs Bunny strung up on coc aine laced carrots doing an all nighter at the WB.

That chick has completely lost her marbles! I'm not sure if she had any marbles to begin with in the first place.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I thought it was pretty good. It's important that those who are buying this fear-mongering look under the surface instead of having the knee-jerk reactions that are ill-informed and don't contribute to a solution.


Wow. I felt the same thing upon listening to Olbermann. I stopped at the 5:38 mark but just from that 1/3 of the video, I heard:

1). Clear and present danger to safety and security of this nation.
2). Panic, chaos, bash skulls.
3). Mob/Mob rule.
4). Murder.
5). Innocent bystanders will be hurt.
6). Orgy fantasizing about violence.
7). Fantasizing about murder.
8). Carnage.

Did you not hear that? I'd say Olbermann is just as guilty of fear mongering. Pretty blatant, too.

 


On a side note I laughed at the irony of Olbermann criticizing Beck. They BOTH take orders from Washington. It's a set up. They attack each other, as they're told. It's like pro wrestling. Olbermann and Beck are shills on the same team who are only acting like they're opponents.

I have no respect for Olbermann or Beck. I can even understand some of the criticism against Palin in this case and I will not defend her. But Olbermann, as usual, takes it so over the top with propaganda I could never describe any of his government-organized rants as 'good.'

I beg everyone to REALLY listen to Beck, Olbermann, and the like. Look at the clues and you'll see it. Whether liberal or conservative, drop your bias and pay close attention to the pundits and you'll see what a constructed joke they really are.

Olbermann gets a big fat
from me. He, too, is using fear mongering tactics. Why accuse one side of this without acknowledging the other?


Wow! Great Avatar Ashley.
I like your Near Death Experience post. It reminds me of Betty Eadie.
Back to this post. Clearly, Olbermann, NBC and MSNBC have
stopped being journalists. They are 100% in the tank for Obama.
For the next few years Olbermann and his cohorts will simply be
cheerleaders for the White House and attack dogs for anyone
who dares to attack Obama and his administration.
The truth has leaked out. ObamaCare intends to throw old people
under the bus. Sarah Palin is speaking the truth.
The truth shall set us free from ObamaCare.
I think as of today we have a 50/50 chance of killing ObamaCare.
Pelosi is just throwing gasoline on the fire with her un-american
statement.
Don't they know they are committing political suicide?
Old people vote.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alxandro
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Actually, it's called the 'End Of Life' counseling, aka euthanasia.

Obama wants to reimburse doctors for consulting patients every five years about end-of-life issues, leaving room to abuse the system for the sake of convenience.



A provision in the House health care bill would provide Medicare coverage for an end-of-life consultation, leading some to believe that the Obama administration is looking to save money by pressuring insurers to provide less coverage to seniors in the later stages of their lives.

link


This End of Life counseling is creepy.
Is someone from the U.S. government going to walk into my hospital room
when i'm 80 and try to convince me to just take a pain pill and go home
and wait for death?
Our forefathers must be rolling over in their graves.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


I can never decide if Olberman is a giant douche or just a turd sandwhich. He is the craziest person I have ever heard speak about anything. I am pretty sure that his man-love for Obama is so great that the President could eat Olbermans entire family and then Olberman would ask him if he needed a cool drink to wash it down.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 01:15 AM
link   
It's all game and do yourself a favor: Stop playing it.

Take the labels and toss 'em in the trash.

I used to like Olbermann but now I think he's full of crap. Never liked Faux Noise and their crew of thugs either.

I guess I'm a level-headed fellow.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 02:02 AM
link   
I find it hilarious that those lefties that scream and hollar and shout and yell how bias fox news is cant see the forest through the trees when it comes to their own propagandists...

If you really can not see that msnbc is the cheerleader for the liberal democrat party and fox news is the mouthpiece for right wing neo cons then here is a big hint to help you out.

take a look at each and everyone of the anchors, hosts and reporters ties...

blue = dems

red = republicans

that oughtta help...



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
I won't discuss the Canadian system anymore in this thread, since it is beginning to go off-topic.
However, my posts on Ezekiel Emanuel are definitely on topic. They show that Sarah Palin has a definite concern, and that KO was completely off-base with his attacks.


Well, the latest Time discusses that issue, and it doesn't take a lot of looking to see that the "Death Panel discussion is patently Bravo Sierra.


In her Post article, McCaughey paints the worst possible image of Emanuel, quoting him, for instance, endorsing age discrimination for health-care distribution, without mentioning that he was only addressing extreme cases like organ donation, where there is an absolute scarcity of resources. She quotes him discussing the denial of care for people with dementia without revealing that Emanuel only mentioned dementia in a discussion of theoretical approaches, not an endorsement of a particular policy. She notes that he has criticized medical culture for trying to do everything for a patient, "regardless of the cost or effects on others," without making clear that he was not speaking of lifesaving care but of treatments with little demonstrated value. "No one who has read what I have done for 25 years would come to the conclusions that have been put out there," says Emanuel. "My quotes were just being taken out of context."http://


You and I aren't going to agree, and that's ok. And despite your admonition about me attacking your sources, you'll have no qualms in attacking mine..hell, that starts with the original post. If you look long enough you can find rationalization for just about anything and I'm about as interested in chipping away at your conservative bias as I imagine you are at my liberal one.

So...I suggest we stop taking shots, and I'll stick to my Universal Health Care, and you do what you want.


Originally posted by HotDogNoBun
I can never decide if Olberman is a giant douche or just a turd sandwhich. He is the craziest person I have ever heard speak about anything. I am pretty sure that his man-love for Obama is so great that the President could eat Olbermans entire family and then Olberman would ask him if he needed a cool drink to wash it down.


...and how does that factor into whether or not he is right? 'Cuz it seems to me that is the only issue.

-------------------


Originally posted by Eurisko2012
This End of Life counseling is creepy.
Is someone from the U.S. government going to walk into my hospital room
when i'm 80 and try to convince me to just take a pain pill and go home
and wait for death?


I submit the following for clarity. The same Time article cited above says the following:

One provision allows doctors to be reimbursed for voluntary discussions of so-called living wills with patients, but does not in any way threaten to deny treatment to dying patients against their will.


Once again, my butt is covered in Canada...this has no bearing on me beyond taking offense at the hooey being tossed around in order to milk y'all for what I consider to be a basic human right. And I have a living will...and I can get any kind of consultation without even thinking about cost. Ok, some doctors will charge for a note or to fill out an insurance form...mine doesn't.

KO is a lefty...that much comes out in his editorial. But I agree with him here.

-------------------


Originally posted by open_eyeballs
take a look at each and everyone of the anchors, hosts and reporters ties...
blue = dems
red = republicans
that oughtta help...


Perhaps, but if you look at the recent 'Three Amigos' pics:



Obama and Calderone are wearing Red(ish)...neo-con Harper is wearing good ol' Tory Blue.
Which is to say, ya just can't win!

[edit on 13-8-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]






top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution