Goodbye, America! It Was Fun While It Lasted

[foggedinn]

Ann Coulter is the male Rush Limbaugh.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

What SPECIFICALLY is stupid about it? What do you believe to be untrue out of the repurcussions listed?

It's jillian what do you expect... She just tries to piss people off... just ignore her and maybe she will go to another board.

Sweetheart... feel free to find someplace else if having your BS pointed out bugs you. Maybe you'll find enough morons that no one will notice what absurd lies you post.

I have great relationships with the smart righties. You just happen to be an idiot. And I don't mind calling you on your garbage because it's amusing.

But you didn't point out any 'BS'... what you offered was BS; this where one might have advanced a well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument; of course this presumes one is capable of doing so and you're establishing quite conclusively that you simply are not.

But that seems to be your gift... so it serves reason.

 

[Toro]

I thought we all agreed that Anne Coulter an entertainer rather than a commentator who, like Rush Limbaugh, we shouldn't take seriously.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Most fair minded people today don't consider it {The US Global War on Terror and the Camapign in Iraq within that war} a success. Please show me the data. This war will be as well founded as Vietnam.

ROFLMNAO... 'please show me the data'... NO POGUE... you're claiming the the Campaign in Iraq was NOT a success... It's to you to PRODUCE AN ARGUMENT WHICH SUPPORTS THAT ASSERTION.

As it stands Iraq is, as a result of the US liberation of that nation... a free nation which is governing itself through a democratically elected government which is operating upon a democratic constitution... Now where is this 'FAILURE' to which you're pointing?

BE SPECIFIC... or shut the fuck up.

The Pogue (A groupie of the US Marine Corps... who pretends to be something she neither was... nor will she ever be, in hopes of being associated with that which she could never otherwise attain) will now go about NOT supporting her now throughly baseless 'opinion.'

 

[Skull Pilot]

if you're all having a problem because the information was presented by Coulter, how about Bloomberg?

Bloomberg.com: Opinion

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

Now this is OK but these electronic records should be placed under the same HIPPA regulations that medical records are now protected

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

And here it is. The government will "guide" your doctors in their treatment. Under threat of punishment if they don't comply with government "guidance" I might add.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.

So an unelected, accountable to no one, band of bureaucrats will mete out punishment to doctors who treat their patients using unapproved measures or these same bureaucrats will make the tough decisions for you. In other words and without the vagueness of government language, the government will tell you when it's time for you to die.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

So the government says that new and potentially life saving medicines and techniques should not be brought into use because they cost too much. We should just be like the Europeans and realize that if it costs too much to extend your life, you should just die.

Aren't these the same pols that refuse to make legal assisted suicide? It seems the government deems itself more able to make your life and death decisions for you. Picture a bunch of disheveled bureaucrats making rounds in hospitals and pulling the plug on respirators, injecting "hopeless" cases with beuthanasia or denying people the right to try experimental drugs for cancer. But it's OK the government is helping you by making tough decisions that you are not qualified to make.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

In short we will revive the ancient Eskimo custom of abandoning the elderly on an ice floe.

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.

It's inexcusable and irresponsible to delay the government from extending control into the most private areas of your life. I wonder if the government rationing will apply to abortions. After all the government is going to need more taxpayers and soon.

 

[driveby]

Ann Coulter is the male Rush Limbaugh.

fail ......

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Second, bureaucrats at Health and Human Services will electronically collect every citizen's complete medical records and determine appropriate medical care.

I didn't read anywhere that they would collect all medical records. I read they want to put all medical records on electronic files. That is not the same. But then again, anyone who looks for truth from Ann Coulter is somewhat deluded.

Watch this witch on TV. If anyone disagrees with her, she immedietley goes into the personal attack. She doesn't know what facts are.

Why are so many of the right wing women pundits so frigging anorexic and just nasty?

... Second, bureaucrats at Health and Human Services will electronically collect every citizen's complete medical records and determine appropriate medical care.

Judging by the care that the State Department took with private visa records last year, that the Ohio government took with Joe the Plumber's government records, that the Pentagon took with Linda Tripp's employment records in 1998, and that the FBI took with thousands of top secret "raw" background files in President Clinton's first term, the bright side is: We'll finally be able to find out if Bill Clinton has syphilis -- all thanks to the stimulus bill!

Pogue... state a contest to that position. It's the relevant issue... that you can't is IRRELEVANT; that you DESPERATELY WANT TO, but can't... Still irrelevant... Now by that I mean that just because you really REALLY want to disagree, but can't find the intellectual means to do so, this does NOT make your inane spam RELEVANT to the point.

We know you envy Ann Coulter's savy reparte... We realize that you're helpless to contest it... so when ya try and fail... it falls to us to belittle and berate you for your inadequacies and in doing so, hold your dumbass to the POINT.

Now either advance a congent rebuttle to the argument on the table or shut the fuck up.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Most fair minded people today don't consider it a success. Please show me the data. This war will be as well founded as Vietnam.

And boy, am I glad you dealt with all that pesky talk of boring old stimulus bills quickly, so you could get back to the really meaty, substantive political points of attacking Ann's appearance. Because God knows, women are really only good for looking pretty, right?

Cecilie, my quick to respond without reading, person:

I have dealt with the Stimulus Bill in detail on several other threads. As to attacking Ann, it has nothing to do with her gender. She would be a liar and a person who just uses the hate to make money whether she was male, female or neuter.

So because I point out that you have said jackshit about the stimulus bill on the thread I'm actually reading in favor of trite and juvenile personal attacks that even my 13-year-old would disdain as beneath him, that makes me "quick to respond without reading"? I don't think so. Not my job to go hunting through the board for your posts in the vain hope that one or two of them might be worth polluting my eyes with. It's YOUR job to make all of your posts substantial and meaningful, a job at which you failed miserably.

Oh, and your attack wasn't about her being a liar - a substantiation for which I doubt you're any more prepared to offer than you were concerning the stimulus bill. It was appearance-based, something I doubt you'd aim at a man. So you're not only a sexist jerkwad, you're a lying sexist jerkwad.

As to only believing women should look good, you should only read so good. I attacked Ann and asked a question of why so many right wing women pundits are so anorexic looking and nasty. That is not attacking all women.
That is making a statement based on watching Ann, Laura and several other right wing pundettes.

Does her looks have anything to do with her credibility? No, she is just a liar. I can attack a specific woman like ann without being a sexist, my Sweetie.

What DO her looks have to do with her credibility? I think that was my point. Why are you bringing up anorexia if looks have nothing to do with credibility? How often do you toss remarks like that into disagreements with the positions of MALE pundits? And how often do you condescendingly refer to male debaters as "my Sweetie"?

Thank you for demonstrating once again MY point that you are a sexist, misogynistic blowhard with nothing solid to offer except your bitterness against women who have the gall to open their mouths and have opinions that disagree with your worldview. Call me when you're less insecure about your masculinity and can discuss the opinions of women without the macho posturing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I thought we all agreed that Anne Coulter an entertainer rather than a commentator who, like Rush Limbaugh, we shouldn't take seriously.

Who is "we all"?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I thought we all agreed that Anne Coulter an entertainer rather than a commentator who, like Rush Limbaugh, we shouldn't take seriously.

Who is "we all"?

Since he is neither royalty nor an editorial writer, he must be referring to himself and his tapeworm.