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.

 

Tired Talking Points Taken Apart

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
A couple of months ago I sent an article titled "The Five Biggest Lies in the Health Care Debate" www.newsweek.com... to a Republican friend of mine. He replied with a slew of tired Republican talking points. Well I wasn't going to allow him to spew them unchallenged. The following was our exchange I submit for you amusement:

hey (names have been changed) 12 Gauge,
where in the hell do you think the money for this ''free health care''is going to come from?do you know what the national debt is currently?we are bankrupt!obama has spent more in his few months than all past presidents.what happens when the goverment gets involved?more red tape,more goverment offices,more governent taxes.look at social security,medicare,the us post office.give me a break.why is it my responsibilty to pay for some other sorry asses health care?why should health care be free?cut taxes and personal .spending goes up,debt goes down.i can sit here all night and go on about this but the bottom line is,medical care costs.if you are going to smoke cigs and get drunk,be prepared to have health problems.and don't expect someone else to pay for your lifestyle...Jethro




Hey Jethro. Thanks for responding. I never get to hear from you. I am going to try to address each question and observation, but I am not sure if I can.

where in the hell do you think the money for this ''free health care''is going to come from?
I am with you in that health care is not going to be free. I have heard estimates, based on European countries public health insurances, and they pay around $70 a month for family health insurance that is cradle to grave, full coverage, no co-pay plans. My family currently pays around $200 a month with a $25 co-pay per visit, and a $1,000,000 cap, so we would save $130 and $25 per visits, and have much better coverage if we had a similar plan. Some people pay a whole lot more, and some pay less. In Europe and Canada everyone pays the same price.

do you know what the national debt is currently?
As of today the national debt is at $11.7 trillion. Let's remember that it was at $10.6 trillion as of Jan.20 '09. And when Bush took office we had a SURPLUS of cash, but he gave it away in tax cuts for the rich.
www.nytimes.com...
money.cnn.com...

And then got us into 2 wars to the tune of $1.2 trillion.
costofwar.com...
www.nytimes.com...

obama has spent more in his few months than all past presidents.
And had a SERIOUS mess on his plate left over from the previous administration. Let's remember that the economy collapsed BEFORE Obama took office. What should he have done, ignore it all? Although, it made me sick how we bailed out the fat cats.

what happens when the goverment gets involved? Let's remember that the government is COMPLETELY involved in things like law enforcement, fire fighting, our military, and teaching our kids for 12 years. There is always room for improvement in those areas, but the government seems to have a handle on it.


more red tape,more goverment offices,more governent taxes.
Have you ever heard of All Kids? It's a government run health plan for kids when parents can't afford to take the kids to the doctor. After my divorce I was forced to sign up my 3 kids up on All Kids. I didn't have to sign any extra paperwork than regular doctor's office stuff. I didn't have a monthly premium at all and NO co-pay. It truly was totally free health care for the kids. It was a needed bit of help that got me through a really hard time. I loved it. And as soon as I could get some affordable insurance, I did.
www.adph.org...

.look at social security,medicare,the us post office.
There are a huge number of elderly that count on social security. It means the difference of life or death every month. Medicare ALSO means life or death to them as well. You are on the side of the elderly, right? I mean, do you want to pull the plug on my grandma? And finally the post office. Show me another place where for just 44 cents you can send a letter from New York to L.A. first class and it arrives in a couple of days? They have operated since 1775 without interruption. A testament to efficient, streamlined government programs.

why is it my responsibilty to pay for some other sorry asses health care?
First of all, you already do. As I said above, all our old people use Medicare. A lot of impoverished familes have their kids on All Kids. That leaves the in betweens (us) buying from insurance companies. We all pay a ridiculous price for the uninsured. All the uninsured go to the emergency room for which we all pay, only that it cost several times more than if the uninsured could go to the doctor instead. Have a look at this report by The Commonwealth Fund in 2003. www.commonwealthfund.org... 18,000 people die each year as a direct result of not having insurance. If our fire department were health insurance, some peoples 911 calls would go unheeded and their house would burn down. That is immoral, and unfair.

why should health care be free?
60% of bankruptcies are from medical bills according to CNN: www.cnn.com...
and Science Daily: www.sciencedaily.com...
It was only at 46% in 2001 according to The American Journal of Medicine: www.pnhp.org...
We all pay for others bankruptcies in higher cost in the markets and insurance premiums.www....

cut taxes and personal .spending goes up,debt goes down.
Taxes are what we use to PAY the national debt, so that statement is a wash from the git-go. You can read all about it here:
en.wikipedia.org...

i can sit here all night and go on about this but
This translated means "I have nothing else to say"
I am sure you can, but can you produce data?

but the bottom line is,medical care costs.
No argument there. We totally see eye to eye, crystal clear, no doubt. I would rather pay less for more though. Who wouldn't?

if you are going to smoke cigs and get drunk,be prepared to have health problems.and don't expect someone else to pay for your lifestyle.
Does that include driving fast? Does that include incurable diseases? Does that include children born with Multiple Sclerosis? Should they not expect any compassion?

In summation, I would recommend getting more information from sources that don't have a political affiliation or a vested financial interest. Look at this site for starters. They research these kind of topics. It's called Factcheck.org: www.factcheck.org...



if this passes you can say good bye to medicare and social security.people that sit on their asses and don't contribute don't deserve a hand out.i understand if you are retarded or mentally ill.but if you are fully able to work and don't,that is what pisses me off.people come to americia for health care.canada and europe have a waiting list for care.they also make decisions on who gets what.need a new heart?too bad,your 68.as obama said,just take the pain pill.i have talked to people about this at the hospital.the docs and nurses i talked to when i had surgery do not want the nationalized or socialist health care.my whole surgery cost me 50.00.i am not rich,just good insurance.the gov't is doing the same thing with general motors and chrysler.taking over.they couldn't even run cash for clunkers,how can they run my health care?we have the stupidest kids comming out of goverment run schools.i deal with them all the time.can't add or do the basic things.talk like they just rolled out of the ghetto. look where you are getting your info.ny times,cnn.both are in obama's back pocket.liberal groups that want the u.s. to be like europe.always blaming bush.why don't we hear anything about war anymore?it was on the news every night when bush was prez.we are
still in iraq.we are still in afghanistan.soldiers still dying.i don't see it all over the place anymore.why is that?our rights are being taken away right under our noses and one notices. as far as giving tax breaks to rich people.you ever got a job from a poor person?if you run a small buisness people think you are rich.don't get me wrong,i hate rich people too,but by no way does that give me the right to take money from them to give to some slacker lazy ass bum.how can you give a tax cut to someone that doesn't pay # for taxes anyway.the rich or well to do are the ones who give jobs.wait and see who pulls the plug on grandma...as far as driving fast,don't wreck-oh and i have good insurance.you won't have to pay for it if i do get hurt.think cnn and ny times doesn't have any political connections?.




Hey Jethro,
I certainly appreciate the opportunity to hear another viewpoint. However, some things you said indicate that you are misinformed. I thought you might also appreciate another viewpoint as well, so here it is.


"if this passes you can say good bye to medicare and social security."
Can you produce ANYTHING that will prove Medicare and Social Security will go bye-bye if health care reform passes? Or is this just something that you have heard? Where did you hear it? What mathematical or scientific report states that? I need to see it to get behind it.

"people that sit on their asses and don't contribute don't deserve a hand out."
While I agree to that statement on the surface, I believe as far as health care is concerned, it should be a basic human right. Not something that only people with money or jobs deserve. Just because someone is a total loser, sorry ass, lazy bum, do they deserve to die of a sinus infection? Children don't work at all, but EVERY child deserves health care, even if the parents can't afford insurance. Would you agree?

"i understand if you are retarded or mentally ill.but if you are fully able to work and don't,that is what pisses me off."
Laziness is no excuse, period.


"canada and europe have a waiting list for care.they also make decisions on who gets what.need a new heart?too bad,your 68."
Waiting list? Yes, you are correct. But it isn't bad and never for life threatening procedures. Here is some info from the American Heart Association on how the wait affects heart patients. www.circ.ahajournals.org... It's not the scary story you have heard, which by the way, was from where? What documents can you produce that show scary wait times? As far as a 68 yr old patient being told no, that simply isn't true. It's a falsehood that was circulated in a chain email. I know you won't look, but I am offering some FACTUAL info on the that very subject, not some story equivalent to the wolf boy from Jupiter sees Jesus in his Alpo.
www.factcheck.org...



"i have talked to people about this at the hospital.the docs and nurses i talked to when i had surgery do not want the nationalized or socialist health care."
I have no doubt that there is some Obama hating doctors and nurses around here. But when you start looking around, outside your normal sources, you can find other opinions. You probably won't read this either but here is a couple of places to begin looking.
Physicians for National Health Program www.pnhp.org... Perhaps they can shed some light on this subject.
And an article from the American Medical Association www.ama-assn.org...
You see, when people without insurance come to the emergency room, doctors don't get paid, and they don't like that, would you? If everyone was insured they would get paid. Win-win.


"my whole surgery cost me 50.00.i am not rich,just good insurance."
We have decent coverage as well, thank God. Leigh's 2 neck surgeries last year cost $90,000. For us, it was $150 for the night stay in the hospital. However, if physical therapy and chiropractic care was covered for her, at $3000, she might not have needed surgery at all. Can you imagine what we might have to do if we didn't have any insurance? Our only reasonable course of action would be to file bankruptcy and let everyone else absorb that cost. Believe me it would be a lot cheaper on all of us if we all had cradle-to-grave coverage. Then Leigh could have gotten her preventative care for $3000 instead of $90,000 surgeries, resulting in lower premiums for everybody. Insurance companies (BCBS) don't cover such precedures, but in Europe and Canada and elsewhere they focus on preventative care for overall cost savings.

"the gov't is doing the same thing with general motors and chrysler.taking over."
It hurt me deep in my soul to watch all the bailing out that has happened since last September. Those Wall St. Execs keep on getting there multimillion dollar bonuses though. And there business doesn't even create anything. Then, GM, the fourth largest American industry (Fortune 500, 2008) and Chrysler was sinking. As far as I am concerned, they did it to themselves when they only wanted to build SUVs when gas prices were going up. As the only alternative we could have sat back and watched a gigantic American industry fold up. Along with all the peripheral business. The big three car companies directly employ 266,000 people. But then there is the dealerships that employ another 740,000, and the suppliers that employ 610,000. So that would be 1,616,000 people with out jobs, not paying taxes, and using up the emergency rooms for their health care. 1.6 billion more people broke, and living off of us. Or as you put it, "fully able to work", and "sit on their asses and don't contribute". I stand behind that bailout WAY more than the bankers who created this problem.

"they couldn't even run cash for clunkers,how can they run my health care?"
Cash For Clunkers was a resounding success. They threw $1 billion at it, and it was gone 4 days later. Car sales rose, car makers rehired workers, dealerships reopened, and it took nearly one million polluting gas guzzlers off the road. And the only reason you don't know that, is because of your sources of information don't want you to know that. And I bet you refuse to check with somebody else.
Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., wrote in a letter to House leaders on Wednesday requesting additional funding for the program. "This is simply the most stimulative $1 billion the federal government has spent during the entire economic downturn," Miller said Thursday. "The federal government must come up with more money, immediately, to keep this program going."
You can read the rest of the article on FoxNews.com:

www.foxnews.com...

Here is what Consumer Reports had as a final report:
Cash for clunkers: The final results
Final numbers are in for the so-called “cash for clunkers” program, and by most measures, the program looks like a roaring success:


* 690,114 cars were purchased under the program; two-thirds of those bought by consumers were passenger cars

* The average rebate was $4,170.18, for a total of $2.878 billion. The rest of the $3 billion budget will cover administrative expenses.

* The average new car bought with the rebates got 9.2 mpg more than the average clunker traded in, for an annual average fuel savings per driver of 277 gallons of fuel or about $720.

* The Department of Transportation credits the program with saving 42,000 jobs in the auto industry and says it expects those jobs will be sustainable, because automakers have ramped up production to meet the clunkers demand.

* Notably, 690,114 older cars were taken off the road, including 450,778 SUVs and other light trucks that likely lacked electronic stability control and other modern safety equipment. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has estimated that making ESC standard on new cars would save as many as 10,000 lives a year. This program has taken a significant step toward that goal.


blogs.consumerreports.org...



Consumeraffairs.com liked it: www.consumeraffairs.com...



"we have the stupidest kids comming out of goverment run schools.i deal with them all the time.can't add or do the basic things.talk like they just rolled out of the ghetto."
He misspelled two words in that quote. There is a total of 5 misspelled words in his email, one of them being America. There are 8 grammatical errors. Can you spot them? I tried to count all the errors but I lost count at 40.
I agree that our education system lags behind others in the world. We seem to have a large section of our population that are really stupid. What's more is our popular tv shows, like Jerry Springer and Flavor of Love, put them out there for our entertainment and it breeds more like them. They turn out irrational, violent, and they can't spell or speak worth a damn. But I ask you this, How many stupid, ghetto talking rich people are there? Could it be that being wealthy can afford you a better education? Could it be a problem not with "government schools" but with access to better schools and higher education? Case in point, you and I went to Johnson because our parents level of wealth. Or lack thereof.


"look where you are getting your info.ny times,cnn.both are in obama's back pocket."
NYTimes was founded in 1851, Chaired by Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. since 1997, yet is somehow aligned with a president who has been in office for 8 months? If that were to be true, than an argument can be made that they were in Bush's pocket 8 little ol months ago. And then they suddenly and discreetly switched to Obama?
CNN is owned by parent company Time Warner, and the U.S. news network is a division of the Turner Broadcasting System.
As of Ted Turner, a Republican. A companion network, Headline News (originally called CNN2) was launched on January 1, 1982 and featured a continuous 24-hour cycle of 30-minute news broadcasts. Headline News broke from its original format in 2005 with the addition of Headline Prime. The added Headline Prime programs featured confrontational personalities like radio talk-show host Glenn Beck and former Fulton County, Georgia prosecutor Nancy Grace.
en.wikipedia.org...
Where are you getting your info? Fox?
Fox News Channel (FNC) is an American cable news and satellite channel owned by the Fox Entertainment Group, a subsidiary of News Corporation. The channel was created by Australian-born American media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who hired Roger Ailes as its founding CEO. I found this at Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...

Reading about Rupert Murdoch is states:
Later in 1964, Murdoch launched The Australian, Australia's first national daily newspaper, which was based first in Canberra and later in Sydney. The Australian, a broadsheet, was intended to give Murdoch new respectability as a 'quality' newspaper publisher, as well as greater political influence. The paper had a rocky start that was marked by publishing difficulties and a rapid succession of editors who found it impossible to cope with Murdoch's persistent interference. Touted as a serious journal that was devoted to covering the affairs of the nation, the paper actually veered between tabloid sensationalism and intellectual mediocrity until Murdoch found a compliant editor who was able to tolerate his frequently unpredictable whims.

"I don't run anything for respectability," Murdoch was quoted as saying in William Shawcross's biography, Murdoch (1992).

“For better or for worse, our company (The News Corporation Ltd.) is a reflection of my thinking, my character, my values.” Rupert Murdoch


In 2003 Fox News won a court case to be able to legally LIE on air. In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States. Here is that story:
www.projectcensored.org...

Perhaps your news source scrutiny was misplaced?

"always blaming bush."
If you think the world is going to hell in a hen-basket, don't try and pretend it all fell apart 8 months ago. I challenge anyone to name something Obama is dealing with now, that started since Jan. 20th, 2009.

"why don't we hear anything about war anymore?it was on the news every night when bush was prez.we are
still in iraq.we are still in afghanistan.soldiers still dying.i don't see it all over the place anymore.why is that?"
What are you trying to say with that statement? It sounds like what you are saying is Bush had something to do with what we were being fed through our media? Then yes, I completely agree. And those two wars were trotted out every night on TV to keep the population in a constant state of fear. Terrorist threat levels were going up and down all the time, and we were all told it was about WMDs and Osama Bin Laden. Neither of which were produced 7 years and 1.2 trillion dollars later. Is that somehow Obama's fault?

"our rights are being taken away right under our noses and one notices."
On Oct. 17, 2006 Bush sign into law the repeal of our right to writ of habeas corpus to ANYONE deemed "enemy of the state.
www.projectcensored.org...
www.truthout.org...
Then there is the Patriot Act (H.R. 3162) It has stripped so many of our rights away including warrantless wiretapping of American citizens, among others.

"as far as giving tax breaks to rich people.you ever got a job from a poor person?"
Have you ever gotten rich from a rich person? Your question was meant to imply that rich people create jobs, or "Trickle-down Economics". That concept has been proven a failure since it was conceived. The top .1% in America now own 49.6% of all the nations income according to a study done by UC Berkley. It has doubled since 2001. From 2002-2007 the top 1% captured two thirds of the economic growth. Think about that. The top 1% captured 66% of economic growth. Leaving the rest of us in the dust. Let's see how they "created jobs" with all the wealth they accumulated. Since "trickle Down Economics was conceived in the early eighties, private sector job growth was at 31%. In 2001 the private sectors were creating only 23% of the jobs, by 2009, it is at 1.1%. But wait, I thought rich people create jobs. No, they don't. They took their tax breaks and kept all the money, all while saving a few more bucks by shipping American jobs overseas. Want me to tell you where the job growth has been? The public sector. That's right, the government. While the private sectors job growth was at 1.1%, the government was at 2.4%. In the last 10 years manufacturing has shed 5.3 million jobs. They are the ones that make things. So, you see, numbers don't lie, and they care what party affiliation you have. They are just plain facts. See for yourself:

images.google.com...://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/longjobs1.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.businesswee k.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2009/06/a_lost_decade_f.html&usg=__Sk8cRlTEynGMHhN7WFCyrCdIN3E=&h=455&w=477&sz=9&hl=en&start=3&um=1&tbnid=i fRLCeUApvKADM:&tbnh=123&tbnw=129&prev=/images%3Fq%3D10%2Byear%2Bjob%2Bgrowth%2Bstatistics%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26um%3D1


"if you run a small buisness people think you are rich."
One of the ost prominent definitions of small business is: A business that is independently owned and operated that is not dominant in its field of operation, provided it has annual receipts not in excess of $500,000 and has fewer than 500 employees. Someone with the kind of operation making a half a mil a year is not worrying about money, ever! I wouldn't say that they are struggling like me and you.

"i hate rich people too,but by no way does that give me the right to take money from them to give to some slacker lazy ass bum."
I can't respond to this one because it is so ridiculous I don't know how. I'll try it for fun though. Nobody is asking to take money from the rich and give it to the lazy. Is this a jab at welfare? If so, let me tell you that at one time lazy people were allowed to be lazy and receive a check, forever. The 61-year American tradition of guaranteeing cash assistance to the poor came to an end with the signing of legislation in August 1996, by Bill Clinton.



"how can you give a tax cut to someone that doesn't pay # for taxes anyway."
Again, I not sure where you are going with this. Perhaps you are trying to say either poor people, illegal immigrants, or tax evaders are getting tax cuts? Sounds to me like you worded a conservative hot topic and republican talking point wrong. It was supposed to say, "The rich are over taxed and carry too much of the tax burden." To that I say, let's take a walk in history. The 1950's were undoubtedly the best economic time America has ever seen. The GDP growth literally went off the chart. See for yourself: www.j-bradford-delong.net...
The tax rate for the top 1% between 1918-1921 stay above 73%. Then when it dropped to 25% in 1925 it help trigger The Great Depression. The tax rates for the super rich were raised again starting in 1932. And then between 1951-1963 at the height of America's greatest economic boom it was at 91%. Then Reaganomics and conservatism were born in the 1984, but the rate stayed around 50% till 1986 when it began dropping. By the time G. W. Bush took office it was at 39.6%. He lowered it even to 33%. The Obama wants to raise it 2% to 35% and eone wants to say he's redistributing wealth and call him a socialist. Do you see how ridiculous that is now? The redistribution of wealth definitely happened. It went to the top. And those people looked like what they are...stupid. If you have been keeping up and looking at the data I'm presenting you then you saw the chart. Numbers don't lie, and that talking point about the rich peoples' tax burden is a dreamed up fallacy , and yet conservatives parrot it regularly, to get folks that don't know better to repeat it. Then they fooled poor people into protesting against rich peoples tax hikes. (Tea-baggers) That was sick. And those people looked like what they are...stupid. www.taxpolicycenter.org...

"the rich or well to do are the ones who give jobs."
I have sufficiently debunked this above. Again this is another myth that conservatives repeat over and over, but the numbers don't lie, and don't care who you are, or what agenda you are trying to push. They are just numerical facts.

"wait and see who pulls the plug on grandma."
Haven't you heard? This lie was exposed last week. Well, maybe not on Fox. This controversy was started by Betsy MCCaughey when she said the bill stated it was "absolutely required" for Medicare recipients. Let's go look at FactCheck:
www.factcheck.org...
Wow! Politifact gave it their worst rating of "Pants On Fire" Rating:
www.politifact.com...
You know who makes a profit from their REAL "death panels"? The FOR PROFIT health insurance companies.

But here it is, the notorious H.R. 3200:
energycommerce.house.gov...

Go and read the infamous page 425 yourself and use your "government school" trained brain to interpret it yourself. It's not hard to understand. It states that if a doctor gives end-of-life, or "living will" counseling to a patient they will be compensated for their time. And furthermore, They MUST obey the wishes of the patient set forth in said will. And if you want to try and rail against living wills, you will have to take on none other than Rush and Hannity because they both advertise for LegalZoom.com.
From RUSH LIMBAUGH’s , RADIO SHOW: “People at a certain age with certain diseases will be deemed not worth the investment, and they will just-as Obama said-they'll give them some pain pills and let them loop out until they die and they don't even know what's happened.”

LIMBAUGH AD: “August is national make a will month. Visit NationalWillMonth.com or better yet, set aside 10 minutes, go to LegalZoom.com and get started. Do it for yourself, do it for your family, take control. Now, LegalZoom is not a law firm, it was started by top attorneys to provide self-help services at your specific direction. LegalZoom.com. That's LegalZoom.com.”
HIs hypocrisy knows no bound.

"as far as driving fast,don't wreck-oh and i have good insurance."
While we are on that, did you know that the CEO of United Health Group makes $340,000 a DAY, and has 3/4 a billion dollars in stock options. Yet his company is being sued by The American Medical Association for a scheme to defraud patients. Last year hospital executives survey have given them the lowest favorable rating of 8%. They made a profit of 5 billion dollars last year while denying 40% of their customers claims. Then they call procedures like bone marrow transplants that have had 12 years of success, "experimental". There is your "death Panel" and, unlike ANY government plan, it's in the name of PROFIT!! And Family premiums have risen 130% from 1996-2006. This is one of the MAIN reasons we have to have reform. Perhaps we wouldn't need reform if the money would quit migrating to the top.
blog.prospect.org...
www.norcalblogs.com...
www.vlogolution.com...
facts.kff.org...


"think cnn and ny times doesn't have any political connections?."
I believe ALL of our media has political connections. I am not so naive that I think we still have a free, open, and unbiased press. They all have their parent companies and corporations. But I do try to stay away from the ones that fabricate stories that are soooo easily fact checked with very little effort. That would be like me reading a Globe story about wolf boy who sees an image of Jesus in his Alpo and me arguing with my friends the next day that it is true. If they concoct disinformation on a regular basis, I don't listen to them. And if they obviously slant stories to push an agenda and not expect me to check, but just BLINDLY go along with them, that makes me feel like they are try to use me because they believe I am stupid. And that definitely pisses me off.

Now, I like reading about good conspiracy theories. They are fun and interesting. I can see government cover up of UFOs, bankers setting up the Federal Reserve to monetarily enslave the people, and 911 being an inside job. I can because of the overwhelming amount of data to support their claims, and the amount of research from reliable people that I read. I also spend a lot of time researching political tactics used to either support or destroy certain agenda. The people most likely to fall for fabricated illusions are the ones who either can't, or refuse, to look up the information for themselves and rely on only the one source. Then they make these falsehoods repeatedly until it is believed and their propaganda is parroted by their viewers. Let me get to my point. Someone of the economic level of you and me, shouldn't be standing up for policies that empowers the rich and powerful to continue to milk the underclass at the expense of our labor, our county's economic stabilty, and most importantly, our health and that of our children. It is the same as a chicken fighting for the right of Col. Sanders. It makes absolutely no sense for a poor person to be a republican. And if all this makes you mad at me, I am not surprised, because that is how Fox News viewers are expected, and taught by example of the republican leaders, to react to an opposing viewpoint, or factual data; with contempt and hostility. And finally, I may have voted for Obama, but I don't blindly believe everything he has done is wonderful. I too have been disappointed, as of late, with his performance in certain areas. My criticism is not just for the "other side". Now go and find some data that can support your statements and send it to me forthwith and without haste.

Here's some jokes:
"The President held a press conference tonight in prime time. All the major networks carried it, except Fox. They ran the show 'Lie to Me' instead. -Jimmy Kimmel
"And, of course, it was a huge celebration over at Barack Obama headquarters, otherwise known as MSNBC." --Jay Leno



12 Gauge,
i see you have a lot of time to spend on this,but i will be brief.i will not change my mind on this no matter how may liberal websites you research.i have two jobs and cannot list every thing i read or see,i simply don't have time.why is it if you disagree with the messiah lord obama you are a hater?nothing you send will convince me otherwise. you can read the bill and see for yourself.it is 1000+pages.i have seen bits and parts.enough to make my mind up.you will not change it. ..Jethro

[edit on 15-11-2009 by 12GaugePermissionSlip]




posted on Nov, 15 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip
 


Talk about long winded.

You sure can "take apart" those tired old talking points.

First and foremost, I doubt your conversation even took place.

You seem all chummy with him at times and in the same paragraph you're condescending to him. Then as a personal gratification for yourself you ridicule him publicly on a forum website? Either your a liar or you're a bad person. Take your pick.

Second, You also talk a lot about politically charged sources like fox news. You should know that CNN is just as politically charged. Fact checking an SNL skit sound about right?

Specifically did you notice what you linked from CNN is pretty politically motivated? Lets take a snippet... from the first paragraph.

"but a new study suggests that more than 60 percent of people who go bankrupt are actually capsized by medical bills."

This new study "suggests" what they want to look like a fact.

"Woolhandler and her colleagues surveyed a random sample of 2,314 people who filed for bankruptcy in early 2007"

This quote from the author says that the 2,314 people surveyed (note. 2314 people is a fraction of people filing bankruptcy source: www.thebankruptcylawyer.net... ) were randomly selected.
That would be fine and all except for this tidbit from the representative of the survey group.

"That was actually the predominant problem in patients in our study"

This eludes to the fact that the people chosen to be surveyed were people who had medical procedures done.... not random Americans who filed bankruptcy.

I could pick your post apart a million times over, if you weren't a blowhard.

Btw you talk pretty high and mighty about spelling and grammar.... You should note, then, that you should never begin a sentence with "And"

"And the only reason you don't know that, is because of your sources of information don't want you to know that. And I bet you refuse to check with somebody else."

Funny both sentences are grammatically incorrect. This would be a proper response; The only reason you don't know is because your source doesn't want you to know. I bet you refuse to check with someone else.

Climb down from your high horse.

[edit on 15-11-2009 by conspiracyrus]



posted on Nov, 15 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Well I do have time to pick one more point apart. Cash for Clunkers!

Yes it got alot of gas guzzling suv's off the road, but what exactly replaced them?

blogs.consumerreports.org...

From your blog source.

Take a look the number 6 most popular car was the PRIUS! Those hybrids sure are fuel efficient but are they environmentally friendly? I divert you to a thread from a chap here on ats

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This poster did a little digging into that and the facts are surprising.

"* The Department of Transportation credits the program with saving 42,000 jobs in the auto industry and says it expects those jobs will be sustainable, because automakers have ramped up production to meet the clunkers demand."

Funny how an artificial, short term, burst in auto sales is going to make those jobs "sustainable". That just makes me laugh and laugh.

Don't worry bud, I'll only pop in every few days to trash another one of your responses.






[edit on 15-11-2009 by conspiracyrus]



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 01:08 AM
link   
what happens when the goverment gets involved? Let's remember that the government is COMPLETELY involved in things like law enforcement, fire fighting, our military, and teaching our kids for 12 years. There is always room for improvement in those areas, but the government seems to have a handle on it.


wow,,,, i would take that statement back


schools are failing our kids miserably

hurricane katrina


is osama in jail or detained yet???? how many years and billions later???

how long do we stay in Afghanistan,,,, did we not learn it's impossible to win there,,, remember russia


how many controlled fire burns have run rampant and out of control


the post office

medicare being defrauded of over 60 billion according to 60 minutes special


gov't should be there to protect us,,,,,in our borders,,, not around the world and to enforce laws and uphold the constitution,,,, that's it

the rest,,, leave it to the states and there voting public,,,,, that way we citizens can move to a state that most closely reflects our values

gov't intrusion and stifling ,,,, limits all our choices across the board



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   


First and foremost, I doubt your conversation even took place.


So you have already made up a conspiracy theory that I didn't have this conversation with a person I have known for 25 years? Wrong. This is merely an attempt to discredit what I have stated by denying any of this "conversation even took place." That is a common grade school tactic.





You seem all chummy with him at times and in the same paragraph you're condescending to him. Then as a personal gratification for yourself you ridicule him publicly on a forum website? Either your a liar or you're a bad person. Take your pick.


This is a friend I have known for 25 yrs. He is a bit naive, and he had it coming for trying to act like he could debate me using statements that had no basis in fact. I felt it necessary to save him from ignorance as a friend who cares. Yes I posted it in a public website that he'll never visit. Do you or anyone here know who he is? No, you don't. I changed the names so as to protect him from public humiliation, unlike I am going to do for you. So, either you are dumb or stupid, take YOUR pick.






This eludes to the fact that the people chosen to be surveyed were people who had medical procedures done.... not random Americans who filed bankruptcy.


"This eludes to the fact"? Says who? Where is the link? Prove it or don't touch it.




I could pick your post apart a million times over, if you weren't a blowhard.


Yea that sounds just like, "I could go on all day about..." which I have already translated to mean, "I have nothing else, I'm done." "if you weren't a blowhard." So I get the blame for your ineptitude. It's my fault of being a blowhard that keeps you from slaying me with your vast amounts of knowledge? (makes obscene hand gesture)




Btw you talk pretty high and mighty about spelling and grammar.... You should note, then, that you should never begin a sentence with "And"


Thanks for that. And I'll be sure not to do it while I scrape you off my shoe. Can I start a sentence with AND? Here is Wikianswers: wiki.answers.com...
Answer: Yes. You have to be careful with it, because your writing can get that run-on sentence feeling if you do it too often.

Some old-school grammarians still preach against it, but usage-wise, many, many good writers have done it, and it is perfectly acceptable. As long as you avoid overuse, and there is a purpose behind the choice and not just ignorance of sentence structure, it can be done well and to good effect.
And so there! Na na ney boo boo. BTW, I found some grammatical errors and misspelling I made in thos emails, and you didn't? All you could find was "AND"? For shame. You made it out like you were superior and you weren't.




Climb down from your high horse.


I can't because you are in my way. Now if you would please move around back.

Take a look the number 6 most popular car was the PRIUS!


So the Prius has environmental issues and that equates to the Cash For Clunkers was BAD? Wrong again. That car's problems doesn't in any way tarnish the numbers the CFC program turned in. Deflection is also a tactic and your attempt at it was transparent.




Funny how an artificial, short term, burst in auto sales is going to make those jobs "sustainable". That just makes me laugh and laugh.

Once again you are trying unsuccessfully to use a embarrassing tactic. What does it mean when someone doesnt deny something you have questioned instead they just laugh it off?
wiki.answers.com...
Answer: It could mean they think its funny because it is true and they don't know how to reply, it could mean that it is not true and they find it funny that you are accusing them and not going to dignify it with an answer or it could mean they have no idea what your talking about and just find it funny.

[edit on 16-11-2009 by 12GaugePermissionSlip]

[edit on 16-11-2009 by 12GaugePermissionSlip]



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 01:53 AM
link   
That would only prove my point earlier that you have nothing. Come on, where is the data that makes you laugh and laugh.




Don't worry bud, I'll only pop in every few days to trash another one of your responses.

Or you could save face and pretend you got busy or sidetracked on another thread.



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by shortywarn



wow,,,, i would take that statement back



Yea you're right, I do.



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip
 


Oh dear I'm either dumb or stupid?

You sir are a wordsmith...

Oh and please explain to me how Cash for Clunkers saved 42 thousand jobs that would be sustainable? I laughed because you believe a crock of spit saying that a temporary program is going to sustainably save 42,000 jobs. Merely saying that I'm wrong is a far cry from taking my talking point apart.

Just a thought, if the 6th most popular car that was sold is an environmental nightmare, how did cash for clunkers help said environment?

As the previous threads source said 1 prius has the environmental footprint of 2 hummers on the road for life.

So lets start talking facts shall we?


""This eludes to the fact"? Says who? Where is the link? Prove it or don't touch it."

www.cnn.com...

Yes that does indeed and its from your source bud. The thing is all those studies are word games. As well your beloved CNN didn't provide a link to the findings of that study... unfortunately they are just trying to cover their behinds.

Another funny coincidence about your use of biased information Steffie Woolhander, shes been campaigning for UHC since 2008 and this new study she authored just so happens to prove it? yeah right.

Ahh Wiki answers because the buck stops at other random people surfing the internet. I will say that, in creative writing, the use of and to begin a sentence is perfectly ok. It is not ok for factual writing or for when you feel like making fun of someones spelling and grammar.
Oh and sources, yeah, sorry I don't use blogs and opinion pages to prove things. All it takes is good old fashioned common sense.

My advice for you?

Audit a few classes, Statistics ... Economics... English Comp... It'll do you wonders , Oh and I even hear that seniors get free coffee.

Maybe it will open your eyes a bit. Maybe it won't.



[edit on 16-11-2009 by conspiracyrus]

[edit on 16-11-2009 by conspiracyrus]



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   
"where in the hell do you think the money for this ''free health care''is going to come from?
I am with you in that health care is not going to be free. I have heard estimates, based on European countries public health insurances, and they pay around $70 a month for family health insurance that is cradle to grave, full coverage, no co-pay plans. My family currently pays around $200 a month with a $25 co-pay per visit, and a $1,000,000 cap, so we would save $130 and $25 per visits, and have much better coverage if we had a similar plan. Some people pay a whole lot more, and some pay less. In Europe and Canada everyone pays the same price."

Jeez do you have to go on forever about speculation on what health care will cost?

Lets start with those countries that have Universal Health Care.

Canada-pop. 33 million
en.wikipedia.org...

UK- pop 60million
www.cia.gov...

Wow big numbers huh... man and you say they pay 70 dollars a month totaling around 800 per year. Wow now tell me how that's supposed to work in America....

Population 307 million

With free health care you will see a rise in hospital visits from every last one of those 307 million people... ultimately driving up costs rather than alleviating them.

Believe me. I wish that more people meant less money paid out ... but it doesn't work that way for UHC. The more people with access the more that has to be paid.

[edit on 16-11-2009 by conspiracyrus]



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   
".look at social security,medicare,the us post office.
There are a huge number of elderly that count on social security. It means the difference of life or death every month. Medicare ALSO means life or death to them as well. You are on the side of the elderly, right? I mean, do you want to pull the plug on my grandma? And finally the post office. Show me another place where for just 44 cents you can send a letter from New York to L.A. first class and it arrives in a couple of days? They have operated since 1775 without interruption. A testament to efficient, streamlined government programs."

I think your friend was referring to the fact that because of how those programs were run that they will soon be bankrupt.

www.garynorth.com...

Though I do agree with you about the Post Office. Great bunch of folks. But I wouldn't call them streamlined.

www.timeswv.com...

They aren't really making money off the services provided.


[edit on 16-11-2009 by conspiracyrus]



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
"more red tape,more goverment offices,more governent taxes.
Have you ever heard of All Kids? It's a government run health plan for kids when parents can't afford to take the kids to the doctor. After my divorce I was forced to sign up my 3 kids up on All Kids. I didn't have to sign any extra paperwork than regular doctor's office stuff. I didn't have a monthly premium at all and NO co-pay. It truly was totally free health care for the kids. It was a needed bit of help that got me through a really hard time. I loved it. And as soon as I could get some affordable insurance, I did.
www.adph.org..."

All Kids a great program... unfortunately though it is not run by the federal government. Its a state run with federal aid (money), www.cga.ct.gov... , or for Alabama aspe.hhs.gov... .

So, you know, give credit where credit is due ... to those fine states that used federal funds they received to cover children's medical expenses.

Once again bud I have to leave for today. Don't Worry I'll be back tonight to discredit your pathetic attempt at reason and logic.

Once I get done with all the discrepancies in your post then I will start with why healthcare is doomed to fail from inception.



[edit on 16-11-2009 by conspiracyrus]



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Reply to conspiracyrus: I need to tell you ahead of time that I really enjoy what me and you are doing here, but I have 3 kids and don't know how much time I can invest in your education. I will try to educate you, but I doubt you are willing to be educated based on your responses so far.

"Oh and please explain to me how Cash for Clunkers saved 42 thousand jobs that would be sustainable? I laughed because you believe a crock of spit saying that a temporary program is going to sustainably save 42,000 jobs."

The 42,00 sustainable jobs was a quote from Consumer Reports. Most people feel they are reliable, however you don't. If you feel they are wrong, look it up yourself. It isn't my responsibility to prove Consumer Reports wrong or right. Sometimes we have to believe somebody. It's a choice.

"Merely saying that I'm wrong is a far cry from taking my talking point apart."

You should listen to what you told me here. The same holds true for you. BTW, I never said you were wrong.

"Just a thought, if the 6th most popular car that was sold is an environmental nightmare, how did cash for clunkers help said environment?"

Just like Jethro, you obviously refuse to read the articles that are the basis for my position. Read the Consumer Reports article and get your answers from that. Don't look to me to do all the research then expect me to spell it all out so you can "trash" me and not the source.

"So lets start talking facts shall we?"

I have been, and have been backing it all up with references and sources. You are using the ol' "insinuate the other person is lying to discredit their argument" tactic. Again, my points are backed up by articles, numbers, graphs, and reports. Talk to the authors about your opinions, not me.

""This eludes to the fact"? Says who? Where is the link? Prove it or don't touch it."

www.cnn.com...

"Yes that does indeed and its from your source bud. The thing is all those studies are word games. As well your beloved CNN didn't provide a link to the findings of that study... unfortunately they are just trying to cover their behinds."

So let me get this straight. You are going to provide a link to "my beloved CNN" to prove YOUR point, then turn around and discredit them? You only discredited yourself. Are you schizophrenic? (I haven't watched CNN since 2003)

"Another funny coincidence about your use of biased information Steffie Woolhander, shes been campaigning for UHC since 2008 and this new study she authored just so happens to prove it? yeah right."

STEFFIE WOOLHANDLER, MD, MPH, Boston, (Co-Editor, PNHP Newsletter) Dr. Steffie Woolhandler is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard and co-director of the Harvard Medical School General Internal Medicine Fellowship program. She has articles published in the JAMA and the New England Journal of Medicine. She is a recipient of the 2008-2009 A. Clifford Barger Excellence in Mentoring Award from Harvard.
Perhaps she has been campaigning for UHC because she knows a hell of a lot more about health care than a mouth-breather like you. Do have any credentials to give your opinions merit? No? Than I suggest your listen to the pros.

"Oh and sources, yeah, sorry I don't use blogs and opinion pages to prove things. All it takes is good old fashioned common sense."

Translation: I don't read things with big fancy words by people who have researched the subject. I know everything I know by listening to my gut, like ol' Dubya.

I love this one...
"Jeez do you have to go on forever about speculation on what health care will cost?"

Then you go on forever speculating on how much health care will cost.

"With free health care you will see a rise in hospital visits from every last one of those 307 million people... ultimately driving up costs rather than alleviating them."

First, There will be NO "free health care". Second, once again no references to back up your retarded claim. Even my 3rd grader knows there won't be 307 million people in a public option plan



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
"With free health care you will see a rise in hospital visits from every last one of those 307 million people... ultimately driving up costs rather than alleviating them."

Did you ask your magic eight ball if there would be a rise in hospital visits, or did you read someth.., er, oh yea you don't read stuff. I'll ask it this way, what Republican figure told you to go around spouting that senseless idea? He makes you look completely foolish.

"Believe me. I wish that more people meant less money paid out ... but it doesn't work that way for UHC. The more people with access the more that has to be paid."

So by that logic, health insurance, car insurance, home-owner's insurance companies all are loosing their asses because the more customers they get, the more money they lose? You are so disconnected with reality. If what you say is true then SHOW ME THE DATA!!! You can't because that was another baseless claim. An opinion. You know what, I just about done with you. You aren't debating me, you're just like Jethro. I tore him a a new one because he can't debate someone who reads. When I am done with this post, I will no longer respond to you, UNLESS you can back up your claims with facts. Onward...

"Though I do agree with you about the Post Office. Great bunch of folks. But I wouldn't call them streamlined."

Finally, and I agree with you that Medicaid is in serious poo poo. You provided something for me to read, and it was educational. Thank you.


"All Kids a great program... unfortunately though it is not run by the federal government. Its a state run with federal aid (money), www.cga.ct.gov... , or for Alabama aspe.hhs.gov..."

We agree again!! Will this be a trend?


"Once again bud I have to leave for today. Don't Worry I'll be back tonight to discredit your pathetic attempt at reason and logic."

New rules: Provide articles or reference material to back up your statements or we can't play. Otherwise you won't be discrediting anyone but yourself. Knuckle-dragger!



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join