A Measure Of Insanity

[Flanders]

insanity (noun)
plural insanities

1. Persistent mental disorder or derangement.

2. Law. a. Unsoundness of mind sufficient in the judgment of a civil court to render a person unfit to maintain a contractual or other legal relationship or to warrant commitment to a mental health facility. b. In most criminal jurisdictions, a degree of mental malfunctioning sufficient to relieve the accused of legal responsibility for the act committed.

3. a. Extreme foolishness; folly. b. Something that is extremely foolish.​

People are committed to insane asylums because they are more insane than everybody else. Obviously, a lot of people in Colorado belong in an insane asylum:

If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, the promoters of Amendment 69 — popularly known as ColoradoCare — are certainly crazy.​

May 31, 2016, 5:00 am
Centennial state voters will soon decide whether to trade in Obamacare for single-payer.

Colorado, Single-Payer, and the Definition of Insanity | The American Spectator​

 

[irosie91]

Psychosis is ----marked by "bizarre" ideation. which is, simply, belief in REALITIES---that are not real. Recognized faith based (religious) beliefs
are excluded from "bizarre" but psychotic persons do not get their hallucinations
and delusions from "nowhere"-----they are often ROOTED in their religion

 

[DGS49]

No cogent person ever said that "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." What has been said is that one indicator of insanity might be doing the same thing over and over again...

What PJO'Rourke actually did say was, "If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's 'free.'"

There is nothing inherently "wrong" with "single payer." It works reasonably well in most western democracies where it has been implemented. As with any other broad-based program to meet a global need (e.g., mass transit), it has some things it handles very well and some things it handles very badly. Any legal subdivision moving from market-based provision of healthcare to single-payer will have glitches and growing pains, and it will have to be adjusted from time to time as more experience is gained.

But it is folly to suppose that you can superimpose a single-payer paradigm on a health care delivery system that has been created and thrived on the profit motive (ignoring for a moment the meaningless expressions "non-profit" and "not-for-profit"). It cannot work. The profiteering that follows Government paying all the bills will be monstrous - look at Medicare.

Keep in mind that the other Western Democracies that have implemented single-payer have not had to deal with the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits the Federal Government from getting into the Healthcare business. Also, those countries made the decision to go with socialized medicine quite a while ago, while their health-care delivery infrastructure was not anywhere near as developed as the US healthcare delivery infrastructure is now.

Consider: to have a true single-payer system, the GOVERNMENT MUST EMPLOY ALL THE DOCTORS and other practitioners. They must become "employees," and they inevitably will form unions who will limit hours, maximize benefits, and otherwise gum up the system. Government must own and run the medical schools, hospitals, clinics, labs, rehab facilities, and assisted-care facilities. And in order to do this, government must impose a substantial dedicated tax to pay for all of it, similar to the FICA and Medicare taxes that we have now.

And everyone must be compelled to use the government's healthcare system, otherwise, the best doctors will simply opt-out, demanding higher fees from wealthy private clients, and everyone else will be left with bupkis. This was the single issue that killed Hillary-Care in the early 90's. Doctors were prohibited from operating outside the system.

A single state trying to go with single-payer is idiocy, on steroids.

 

[irosie91]

O'Rourke took the words right out of my fingertips------it was my original objection
to Obama care because I know what happens when people PREVIOUSLY on
MEDICAID-----get a job----with medical insurance-----and have to deal with -----
co-pays---etc ----"I was better off on welfare"

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The thread title ... and yet, people actually vote Republican.

As for the true cost of "free" health care, we already pay much more than many realize. The difference between the US and other countries is that we don't get much for it.

O'Rourke took the words right out of my fingertips------it was my original objection
to Obama care because I know what happens when people PREVIOUSLY on
MEDICAID-----get a job----with medical insurance-----and have to deal with -----
co-pays---etc ----"I was better off on welfare"

"... better off on welfare"

In fact, that did not start with Obama or ObamaCare.

 

[irosie91]

The thread title ... and yet, people actually vote Republican.

As for the true cost of "free" health care, we already pay much more than many realize. The difference between the US and other countries is that we don't get much for it.

O'Rourke took the words right out of my fingertips------it was my original objection
to Obama care because I know what happens when people PREVIOUSLY on
MEDICAID-----get a job----with medical insurance-----and have to deal with -----
co-pays---etc ----"I was better off on welfare"

"... better off on welfare"

In fact, that did not start with Obama or ObamaCare.

so true----and-----you know very little about the quality of health care in OTHER
COUNTRIES. We get quite a bit

 

[Flanders]

psychotic persons do not get their hallucinations
and delusions from "nowhere"-----they are often ROOTED in their religion

To irosie91: Interesting take, but I hold a different view. Permit me to elaborate:

That a half-black sewer rat, and a middle-class white feminazi, ended up with the same moral compass can only be explained by their innate attraction to slaughterhouses. Politics does not explain it. Political belief is nothing more than their method of getting to the slaughterhouse. Basically, decent people are decent because they are. Evil people are evil because they are. Both remain true to their personalities irrespective of external forces.

Proof: A great many evil people can be found in every religion. Ditto every political belief.

Obama associates one of history’s bloodiest Communist butchers with Thomas Jefferson​

Obama’s Ho Chi Minh Trail
By Daniel Greenfield
May 31, 2016

Obama’s Ho Chi Minh Trail​

What is it with the sewer rat and Hillary Clinton? Answer: They are determined to justify their own love of cruel butchers by tying them to Thomas Jefferson:

In April 2009, Congressman Jeff Fortenberry dialogued with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on foreign policy At 4 minutes 25 seconds into this video, Hillary Clinton compares the eugenics advocate and racist Margaret Sanger to Thomas Jefferson. Clinton even seems to say that Sanger is superior to Jefferson.​

​

Hillary Clinton: I Admire Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger

 

[irosie91]

I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer---she was
a product of her hard childhood-----irish poor big family

 

[Flanders]

I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer---she was
a product of her hard childhood-----irish poor big family

To irosie91: That is absurd. If you are correct every kid born poor is justified whenever they commit murder for any reason. I gather you would punish kids born with a silver spoon in their mouths.

In any event, millions of disadvantaged children did not grow up and follow through on the brutality Margaret Anger set in motion:

“The key to understanding the HIPAA and consent violations that we’ve referred to HHS is that there’s a business contract between StemExpress and the abortion clinics under which both sides make a profit from the baby body parts inside the young woman’s womb,” Ms. Blackburn said in the letter.

“The contract changes the way both entities view the young woman: her baby is now a profit-center,” she said. “This betrayal of a young woman’s trust should disgust us all. It takes financial advantage, obtains consent through coercion, and deceives the woman, all in violation of federal privacy laws.”

House investigation: Planned Parenthood broke federal law in fetal body parts trafficking
By Bradford Richardson - The Washington Times - Wednesday, June 1, 2016

House investigation: Planned Parenthood broke federal law in fetal body parts trafficking​

 

[irosie91]

I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer---she was
a product of her hard childhood-----irish poor big family

To irosie91: That is absurd. If you are correct every kid born poor is justified whenever they commit murder for any reason. I gather you would punish kids born with a silver spoon in their mouths.

In any event, millions of disadvantaged children did not grow up and follow through on the brutality Margaret Anger set in motion:

“The key to understanding the HIPAA and consent violations that we’ve referred to HHS is that there’s a business contract between StemExpress and the abortion clinics under which both sides make a profit from the baby body parts inside the young woman’s womb,” Ms. Blackburn said in the letter.

“The contract changes the way both entities view the young woman: her baby is now a profit-center,” she said. “This betrayal of a young woman’s trust should disgust us all. It takes financial advantage, obtains consent through coercion, and deceives the woman, all in violation of federal privacy laws.”

House investigation: Planned Parenthood broke federal law in fetal body parts trafficking
By Bradford Richardson - The Washington Times - Wednesday, June 1, 2016

House investigation: Planned Parenthood broke federal law in fetal body parts trafficking​

oh----I see------no arguing with you-----I am anti abortion AND pro-choice. I have seen far more of REAL LIFE than have you. My story-----My mom was---by age 32---the mother of five kids---the two youngest twins. She is also afflicted with a "sickness"----which made her being a mother-----VERY DIFFICULT. Age 35---when I was seven------she was PREGNANT AGAIN-------way back in the time when abortion was illegal------Her doctor went to work with the POWERS and got her a waiver-----the pregnancy was aborted ----her "tubes tied" as she explained to my baby mind---along with --THEY KILLED THE BABY. Thus I am anti abortion-------from an early age. Fact is-----she probably SHOULD have been aborted of the first five------she was really incapable

 

[Flanders]

oh----I see------no arguing with you-----I am anti abortion AND pro-choice. I have seen far more of REAL LIFE than have you. My story-----My mom was---by age 32---the mother of five kids---the two youngest twins. She is also afflicted with a "sickness"----which made her being a mother-----VERY DIFFICULT. Age 35---when I was seven------she was PREGNANT AGAIN-------way back in the time when abortion was illegal------Her doctor went to work with the POWERS and got her a waiver-----the pregnancy was aborted ----her "tubes tied" as she explained to my baby mind---along with --THEY KILLED THE BABY. Thus I am anti abortion-------from an early age. Fact is-----she probably SHOULD have been aborted of the first five------she was really incapable

To irosie91: Neither your personal reasons, nor all of the tragedies about back-ally abortions, justifies the slaughter of 55 MILLION babies in the womb in this country alone. The total number of individual horror stories is minute compared to number of murdered babies since Roe v. Wade:

I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer-

To irosie91: Margaret Anger is the mother of slaughter as well as the patron saint of Kermit Gosnell and the others who did not get caught, as well the baby-body-parts industry. Other solutions to personal tragedies were, and are, available, but you and your kind cannot see past sanctioning GOVERNMENT murder.

Put aside every other reason for abortion and this reason remains immutable:

Never, never, never, under any circumstance give the government the authority to kill their own people.

 

[irosie91]

oh----I see------no arguing with you-----I am anti abortion AND pro-choice. I have seen far more of REAL LIFE than have you. My story-----My mom was---by age 32---the mother of five kids---the two youngest twins. She is also afflicted with a "sickness"----which made her being a mother-----VERY DIFFICULT. Age 35---when I was seven------she was PREGNANT AGAIN-------way back in the time when abortion was illegal------Her doctor went to work with the POWERS and got her a waiver-----the pregnancy was aborted ----her "tubes tied" as she explained to my baby mind---along with --THEY KILLED THE BABY. Thus I am anti abortion-------from an early age. Fact is-----she probably SHOULD have been aborted of the first five------she was really incapable

To irosie91: Neither your personal reasons, nor all of the tragedies about back-ally abortions, justifies the slaughter of 55 MILLION babies in the womb in this country alone. The total number of individual horror stories is minute compared to number of murdered babies since Roe v. Wade:

I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer-

To irosie91: Margaret Anger is the mother of slaughter as well as the patron saint of Kermit Gosnell and the others who did not get caught, as well the baby-body-parts industry. Other solutions to personal tragedies were, and are, available, but you and your kind cannot see past sanctioning GOVERNMENT murder.

Put aside every other reason for abortion and this reason remains immutable:

Never, never, never, under any circumstance give the government the authority to kill their own people.

I have never under-estimated the HORRORS of legal abortion------or the HORRORS of back alley abortions---or, LIKE YOU, attempted to
JUMP ON THE BANDWAGON of either POLAR albeit, shallow POV. In today's world----OUR government cannot FORCE
abortion-------I am not actually sure that Margaret Sanger was on that POLE either.
I consider her motives pure ----her approach---very rash and ill-conceived (ie--she did not know)

 

[Flanders]

I have never under-estimated the HORRORS of legal abortion------or the HORRORS of back alley abortions---

To irosie91: That makes you the only person on the planet who claims to be anti-abortion at the same time you justify the slaughter.

or, LIKE YOU, attempted to
JUMP ON THE BANDWAGON of either POLAR albeit, shallow POV.

To irosie91: Pro life is not a bandwagon. Coming down on the side of life is never shallow. Both are legitimate opposition to a heinous practice.

In today's world----OUR government cannot FORCE
abortion-------

To irosie91: Not yet.

I will not cite Communist China, but I can say that sanctioning abortion is the first step toward population controls —— the end game for every 21st government, and certainly the United Nations.

Incidentally, the private sector money behind abortion is astronomical. Sad to say that every penny given to abortion “charities” is passed on to everyone else by the charitable tax deduction. In short: At least 50 percent of Americans who oppose abortion end up paying for them:

In 2004, after the death of his wife, Susan Thompson Buffett, the foundation he started to manage his charitable giving was renamed for her. Just how much of Buffett’s fortune has gone to promote these deadly endeavors? By examining the foundation’s tax returns, Mike Ciandella and Katie Yoder reported that, between 2001-2012, Buffett gave over $1.2 billion to abortion groups worldwide, which is enough money to abort a population the size of the city of Chicago.

There is more: Before 2001, through the foundation, Buffett funneled at least $21 million more to these groups, which include Planned Parenthood, NARAL, the Population Council and the National Abortion Federation.

XXXXX​

To say that his personal life was unconventional is an understatement. Susan left him in 1977. They never divorced but remained close. His enormous love for her was apparent even though he and Susan’s friend, Astrid Menks, became a couple and married two years after her death.

XXXXX​

Everyone assumed it was Susan who championed abortion and population control. Now we know that Mr. Buffet also supported the same dirty business, even giving to groups that have been accused of forced abortions and sterilizations in the Third World, such as EngenderHealth.

Warren Buffet: The abortion king
Exclusive: Jane Chastain asks, 'Just how smart can the smartest man in the world really be?'
Published: 05/14/2014 at 7:11 PM
by Jane Chastain

Warren Buffet: The abortion king​

Bill Gates is also big on abortions in addition to promoting vaccinations as a way to achieve population controls. He is not alone. The pseudoscience of eugenics has been around for more than a century. Many of the wealthiest Americans, including Teddy Roosevelt, were eugenicists before the beginning of the twentieth century. As near as I can tell, legal abortion as a means of population control sprang from eugenics. Twenty-first century eugenicists include:

Software billionaire Bill Gates, who previously has advocated the reduction of the human population through the use of vaccines, and his wife Melinda marked the 100th year since the First International Eugenics Congress in London with a “family planning” summit with abortionists and the United Nations.

XXXXX​

In addition to Gates, the meeting included some of the biggest names in the “billionaires club,” according to the London Times, including David Rockefeller, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey, Warren Buffett, George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.​

Bill Gates: World needs fewer people
Joins abortionists for 'family planning' conference on eugenics
Published: 08/19/2012 at 4:36 PM
by BOB UNRUH

Bill Gates: World needs fewer people​

In case you did not know it the woman you and Hillary Clinton adore was a eugenicist:

Sanger shaped the eugenics movement in America and beyond in the 1930s and 1940s. Her views and those of her peers in the movement contributed to compulsory sterilization laws in 30 U.S. states that resulted in more than 60,000 sterilizations of vulnerable people, including people she considered “feeble-minded,” “idiots” and “morons.”​

GROSSU: Margaret Sanger, racist eugenicist extraordinaire
By Arina Grossu - - Monday, May 5, 2014

GROSSU: Margaret Sanger, racist eugenicist extraordinaire​

Note that eugenicists simply want to kill to reduce the population. All of the political and legal reasons they cite is nothing more than widow dressing. You might also consider the number of human beings that will have to be killed in order to make population controls make a dent. My guesstimate is at least THREE BILLION for starters.

I am not actually sure that Margaret Sanger was on that POLE either.
I consider her motives pure ----her approach---very rash and ill-conceived (ie--she did not know)

To irosie91: Now you went too far. Altruist motives is the one thing Margaret Anger is not guilty of.

 

[irosie91]

wrong-----I am anti abortion for routine use as simple contraception on ESTHETIC grounds.
In fact----abortion is so used in RUSSIA----in just that manner. Russian women report----stuff like-----"I had four abortions" on medical history------an idea that I find repellent. Of course, I am anti FORCED abortion---or simply coerced. HOWEVER I do know that there are many circumstances which justify CHOICE ---as a matter of the welfare of the mother based on HER circumstances of life.

 

[irosie91]

wrong-----I am anti abortion for routine use as simple contraception on ESTHETIC grounds.
In fact----abortion is so used in RUSSIA----in just that manner. Russian women report----stuff like-----"I had four abortions" on medical history------an idea that I find repellent. Of course, I am anti FORCED abortion---or simply coerced. HOWEVER I do know that there are many circumstances which justify CHOICE ---as a matter of the welfare of the mother based on HER circumstances of life.

PS----lots of my colleagues agree with me

 

[Flanders]

HOWEVER I do know that there are many circumstances which justify CHOICE

To irosie91: The CHOICE argument has was exposed as a fraud years ago:

But Kerry has gone what in better days would have been universally held to be one bridge too far. In a speech last year to the NARAL Pro-Choice America Dinner, he gave an intellectually suicidal summary of his views.

He began by saying that "there is no overturning of Roe v. Wade." He went on: "There is no outlawing of a procedure necessary to save a woman's life or health." That statement of course begs the question on which the entire Congress and the state legislatures and the Supreme Court have been stalled for years, namely, Is the invocation of "health," if made by the woman alone, conclusive in authorizing abortion? If so, Roe v. Wade, which did not authorize willful third-trimester abortions, stands to be revised as the Roe-Wade-Kerry decision.

Kerry continued: "There (shall be) no more cutbacks on population control efforts around the world."

This endorses abortion Chinese-style. Too many people? Too few abortions.

But the eye-popper was still to come: "We need to honestly and confidently and candidly take this issue out to the country and we need to speak up and be proud of what we stand for."

But Kerry says he personally opposes abortion. Where is he exhibiting his pride in what he stands for? Whom has he counseled against abortion? A nun somewhere, out of earshot?

Crooked thought
William F. Buckley
February 26, 2004

William F. Buckley - Crooked thought​

 

[irosie91]

Wrong again----I specifically opposed---in my post----the CHINESE MODEL---forced abortion. As to the "health" issue-----that one is the STICKIEST of all. Who gets to decide the "HEALTH" issue? My mom could have carried-----but her doctors testified that a sixth
child would destroy her ----"mental" health and they managed to win that one in the mid fifties.
The model to legalize abortion if stated as-----
terminating a pregnancy likely to result in a
"not well" child-----or likely to damage the health of the mother (that is the Israeli model) ----is----actually CHOICE. as in any woman who says>>>
" I will kill myself if I have to have another child" That is the model I do support.

EDUCATION in the pitfalls of abortion----both physical and emotional damage-----should be
supported. Girls should never imagine that an abortion is simple contraception. If you want to add the SPIRITUAL issues---fine with me

 

[Arianrhod]

The possibility of making contraception available, affordable, and educable doesn't ever seem to enter these conversations...

 

[irosie91]

The possibility of making contraception available, affordable, and educable doesn't ever seem to enter these conversations...

educable?

 

[Arianrhod]

The possibility of making contraception available, affordable, and educable doesn't ever seem to enter these conversations...

educable?

Is there a word you'd prefer for "Every child over the age of___should understand how pregnancy happens and how to prevent it when it's not wanted"?