Palin kicks Demobama Butt !!!

[PubliusInfinitum]

Now, let's look at the whole Leftist argument for "National Healthcare"...

The entire argument is founded upon WHAT?

It is founded upon the premise that the US has people who aren't insured... which is true. But what is NOT true is that those people have chosen to BE INSURED and could not manage to do so... AND that not being insured equates to NO ACCESS TO MEDICAL TREATMENT. Or the most common, that those insured are denied medical care by uncaring bureaucrats...

It's a lie... and what’s more, when you look at the above rationalization you find that the ADVOCATES for National Healthcare are returning to inform you that there will be instances where those 'insured' by national healthcare, will inevitably come to a point where circumstances simply do not provide for medical treatment... and that these instances are based upon 'good reasons'... the reasons of the 'realist'...

Of course, the 'uncaring bureaucrats' that this ENTIRE FIASCO is designed to eliminate, also have 'good reasons' to deny coverage... but the Leftist is telling you that THEIR reasons are morally sound, because their REASONS are founded in the BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE... and not the distasteful interests of the "OTHER PEOPLE."

Here are the facts: The US healthcare system costs more because it treats more... it's not perfect, but it is SUPERIOR... and where you decide to concede your RESPONSIBILITY, you CONCEDE THE RIGHT WHICH THAT RESPONSIBILITY SUSTAINS...

Turn from these liars and reject their looming tyranny.

One US citizens View on Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness; In the context of The Healthcare Debate.

Life- The Inalienable human right to live. All those who live, seek health, for they {are} inseparable and interdependent.

Liberty- The inalienable right to freedom. While no person has the right to live shamelessly, the heavy, solid, chains of debt should not be incurred for the simple act of living and seeking health.

The Pursuit of Happiness- Happiness becomes impossible to obtain in a system where both life and liberty are held ransom. It becomes both the duty of the citizen and his duly elected government to right the system and but both back in the hands of The People.

ROFLMNAO...

Let's take that drivel one point at a time...

#1: Life- The Inalienable human right to live. All those who live, seek health, for they {are} inseparable and interdependent.

Notice however that the Leftists, who comes to the board presenting herself as a Moderate... 'main streamer;' makes NO MENTION of any RESPONSIBILITY which comes with what she 'feels' represents the Human RIGHT that stands as the basis for the Anti-American "National Healthcare." Below we'll see where that becomes problematic.

#2: Liberty- The inalienable right to freedom. While no person has the right to live shamelessly; the heavy, solid, chains of debt should not be incurred for the simple act of living and seeking health.

Well Liberty IS freedom... but we'll set that semantic point aside for the moment. There is no actual correlation between her stated premise: "While no person has the right to live shamelessly;" and the conclusion she draws from that premise: "the heavy, solid, chains of debt should not be incurred for the simple act of living and seeking health."

One presumes she meant "seeking healthcare"

First, the RESPONSIBILITY intrinsic in the RIGHT to pursue the fulfillment of one's life, is to live shamelessly... SO it is true that 'it is not a RIGHT to live shamelessly;' it is the duty which comes with the RIGHT TO LIVE, to live without shame; as shame is a function of dishonor, emoting humiliation.

Secondly,in the current US system, no one is FORCING you to incur debt to seek healthcare; those that DO, do so of their own free will...

Now where National Healthcare comes to pass; the individual citizen IS FORCED TO INCUR DEBT; AS A RESULT OF FEDERAL HEALTHCARE SUBSIDIES; the debt is of course a function of the government spending money which obligates the citizen.

THERE IS NO RIGHT TO FORCE ANOTHER TO INCUR DEBT TO SUBSIDIZE YOUR HEALTHCARE! PERIOD! And this is because YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO INFRINGE UPON THE LIBERTY, THE FREEDOM AND THE VALID AND SUSTAINABLE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER...

Ergo; National Healthcare is a violation of the divine unalienable human rights of which every human being endowed and of which the rights which EVERY American enjoys the protections from such.

And finally...

#3:The Pursuit of Happiness- Happiness becomes impossible to obtain in a system where both life and liberty are held ransom. It becomes both the duty of the citizen and his duly elected government to right the system and but both back in the hands of The People.

There is no one holding Life and Liberty for ransom in the present US HC System... The assertion is absurd on its face. the Right to life does not guarantee LIFE... it gaurantees that where Life is endowed, it is the RIGHT of the endowed to PURSUE THE FULFILLMENT OF THAT LIFE. If you feel that healthcare is inherent in such pursuits... you are ENTITLED TO SECURE SUCH, to the extent of YOUR MEANS!

You decidedly DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO FORCE OTHERS INTO DEBT TO SUBSIDIZE YOUR HEALTHCARE, or any other facet of YOUR INDIVIDUAL LIFE.

The simple FACT IS: Valid and Sustainable Human Rights come with intrinsic RESPONSBILITY; as it is the RESPONSIBILITY which SUSTAINS THAT RIGHT... where an individual concedes the RESPONSIBILITY FOR LIFE, they concede the RIGHT TO LIFE...

To which we, THE AMERICANS, UNANIMOUSLY REPLY:

SHOVE OFF and take your communist bullshit with ya...​

We'll retain OUR RESPONSIBILITY WHICH SECURE OUR RIGHTS and we aren't likely to let you and the other feminized leftist FUCKS strip us of our Rights, so you can 'feel better more secure...'

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

But what is NOT true is that those people have chosen to BE INSURED and could not manage to do so... AND that not being insured equates to NO ACCESS TO MEDICAL TREATMENT. Or the most common, that those insured are denied medical care by uncaring bureaucrats...

That is flat out false.

ROFL... Is it?


Well Let's do this... I see that assertion and a fairly large paragraph where we must presume that you support that assertion; lets see if you manage to do so, or if this turns out to be yet another invalid, unsound rationalization...

I have seen people in both of these situations, repeatedly. I have seen people who can't get medical insurance while trying for years, one of whom is a multi-millionaire.

So what? As noted in my argument, not having medical insurance does not preclude access to healthcare; which is what you're desperate to project. A projection which is PATENTLY FALSE; it is a LIE!

I have seen people denied medical treatment because they were uninsured.

Again... SO WHAT? National healthcare is GOING TO DENY MEDICAL TREATMENT! That is what the entire point behind the secularist argument of the 'Life Boat Drill;' revisited right in this the idiot Australian Diuretic... wherein she explained to you and anyone else that read her drivel that there are simply times when circumstances preclude medical treatment...

You are either ignorant or a liar, and you should be ashamed of posting such blatantly false information.

LOL... that's adorable...

Well what you've just done is made an assertion which you not only failed to support, but ya restated the assertion AFTER having failed to support it.

On the other hand, anyone who bought into the "death panel" thing probably isn't bright enough to do anything other than echo talking points, so I guess I should pity you. Perhaps I'll be able to do that once I'm over being disgusted.

Here we have yet ANOTHER lying sack of Leftist shit coming to deny the absolutely irrefutable...

This entire thread exists because the Senate removed from their bill the segment of the congressional bill which this dinghus is here to demand NEVER EXISTED.

ROFLMNAO...





Leftists...

And again friends... what you're seeing in the desperate idiocy of these 'people' is nothing less thanthe INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF that they are THE PROBLEM... and as such their means to cast a voting ballot is a clear and present danger to culture.

The good news is that once Nature implements her long-standing cure... it'll all work itself out.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

ROFL... and they seemed SO certain didn't they?

But as usual... leftism folds in the face of immutable American principle.

 

[Lumpy 1]

For PubliusInfinitum and the ones that have offered an opposing point of view.
Thanks for the debate. It was mostly like feasting at the table of Kings. I was glad I could get in by merely offering hot dogs and beer. Ahhhh, America, you gotta love it!

 

[DiveCon]

Now, let's look at the whole Leftist argument for "National Healthcare"...

The entire argument is founded upon WHAT?

​

gee, that sounds like the conservative approach and not the dems

 

[KittenKoder]

Now, let's look at the whole Leftist argument for "National Healthcare"...

The entire argument is founded upon WHAT?

​

gee, that sounds like the conservative approach and not the dems

I have always said if people ignored the labels, they'd realize that we all want the same things.

 

[DiveCon]

​

gee, that sounds like the conservative approach and not the dems

I have always said if people ignored the labels, they'd realize that we all want the same things.

well, you notice i didnt say the republicans
lol

 

[KittenKoder]

gee, that sounds like the conservative approach and not the dems

I have always said if people ignored the labels, they'd realize that we all want the same things.

well, you notice i didnt say the republicans
lol

True ... politicians are the exception to the rule.

 

[Gudrid]

ROFL... Is it?

Yes, it is, and you're a nutjob. I almost wonder if you're one of those losers who pretends to be on the right and posts idiotic ramblings just to make the right look bad. Fortunately, from what I've seen no one on this board really takes you seriously, so its all good.

 

[Maple]

the Cap and Trade bill in the senate, this is her area of expertise, she will slaughter them.

 

[Vanquish]

But what is NOT true is that those people have chosen to BE INSURED and could not manage to do so... AND that not being insured equates to NO ACCESS TO MEDICAL TREATMENT. Or the most common, that those insured are denied medical care by uncaring bureaucrats...

That is flat out false.

ROFL... Is it?


Well Let's do this... I see that assertion and a fairly large paragraph where we must presume that you support that assertion; lets see if you manage to do so, or if this turns out to be yet another invalid, unsound rationalization...




So what? As noted in my argument, not having medical insurance does not preclude access to healthcare; which is what you're desperate to project. A projection which is PATENTLY FALSE; it is a LIE!



Again... SO WHAT? National healthcare is GOING TO DENY MEDICAL TREATMENT! That is what the entire point behind the secularist argument of the 'Life Boat Drill;' revisited right in this the idiot Australian Diuretic... wherein she explained to you and anyone else that read her drivel that there are simply times when circumstances preclude medical treatment...

You are either ignorant or a liar, and you should be ashamed of posting such blatantly false information.

LOL... that's adorable...

Well what you've just done is made an assertion which you not only failed to support, but ya restated the assertion AFTER having failed to support it.

On the other hand, anyone who bought into the "death panel" thing probably isn't bright enough to do anything other than echo talking points, so I guess I should pity you. Perhaps I'll be able to do that once I'm over being disgusted.

Here we have yet ANOTHER lying sack of Leftist shit coming to deny the absolutely irrefutable...

This entire thread exists because the Senate removed from their bill the segment of the congressional bill which this dinghus is here to demand NEVER EXISTED.

ROFLMNAO...





Leftists...

And again friends... what you're seeing in the desperate idiocy of these 'people' is nothing less thanthe INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF that they are THE PROBLEM... and as such their means to cast a voting ballot is a clear and present danger to culture.

The good news is that once Nature implements her long-standing cure... it'll all work itself out.

Ok let's tackle these out of order, shall we?

1. The government healthcare plan is going to deny treatment just like the private insurance companies do, therefore it's the same behavior, but now with extra waste of money by bureaucrats.

FALSE.

The insurance companies, motivated solely by profit (profit isn't a bad motive per se, but it doesn't mean motives are pure either) will deny as many claims as possible to keep their bottom line up and discounting the wants and needs of their customers as much as they can.

The government on the other hand will be accountable to the people, have more than a profit motive in mind, and be willing to change for the best interest of the country.

2. The supposed "death panel" language was taken out because the righteous republicans brought light to the issue and shamed democrats into taking out the horrid, horrid policy.

FALSE.

The language was the same stuff that Palin and other republicans tried to get passed in previous iterations of healthcare. Beck even did a paid advertisement for the same type of end-of-life counseling.

You haven't cited to any sort of legislative intent language (you know, that stuff where they write down why they changed the language? Bet you didn't know they kept those kinds of notes) so you're grasping at straws.

I'll give you that the conservatives have bullied and fear-mongered the American people into thinking death panels existed, and subsequently the dems folded because they thought the rednecks would never learn the truth. That's probably why it was taken out. They chose to pick different battles.

3.Not having medical insurance does not preclude access to healthcare.

TRUE, BUT

But for the vast majority of people it will be completely crap heathcare that's WAAAAAY out of the range of reasonable prices. In another thread lots of conservatives have said they agree that healthcare needs reform. Surely you'll agree? And one of the reforms has to do with the prices of healthcare. So just saying that medical insurance isn't necessary for healthcare completely side-steps the issue that what you'll get without insurance is crap care.


BTW, the little part about Nature taking her course...it's unnecessary and troll-like. C'mon, you're better than that, right?

 

[EriktheRed]

BTW, the little part about Nature taking her course...it's unnecessary and troll-like. C'mon, you're better than that, right?

Nope.

 

[Diuretic]

I'm amazed at the power the liberal media has bestowed upon Sarah Palin by hating, fearing and generally disrespecting her so much. All she had to do is mention Death Panels and she gets results, amazing!

Finance Committee to drop end-of-life provision Heh. Palin power.

The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top Republican member said Thursday.

The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by conservatives as "death panels" to encourage euthanasia.

They are dropping the death panel. But frankly, they will drop it back in once the health care rout is passed. It's not enough. NO OBAMACARE.

Obama's Ration Man: Rahm's brother Ezekiel Emanuel (read the whole thing at Political Evidence):

President Obama’s chief advisor on healthcare is Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. In addition to Dr. Emanuel being a trained oncologist, an NIH Bioethicist and a fellow at the nonprofit bioethics research institute, The Hastings Center, he's also an avowed communitarian who advocates healthcare rationing.

In February 2009, he was tapped by the administration to work on the formulation of a national healthcare strategy. Officially, Dr. Emanuel is a special advisor to the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget for health policy. In February Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported that he is "working on (the) health care reform effort." He is "detailed" to the OMB spot and is still officially an employee of the NIH.
In Dr. Emanuel’s writings, he overtly advocates the rationing of healthcare based on age. In January 2009, just one month prior to taking his new position at the White House, Dr. Emanuel co-wrote an article entitled, “Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions”, in the British medical journal The Lancet. In this article he advocates a particular healthcare allocation system which he calls the “complete lives system.” He declared in The Lancet article that in healthcare, “scarcity is the mother of allocation." He explains, “This system (complete lives system) incorporates five principles: youngest-first, prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value. As such, it prioritizes younger people who have not yet lived a complete life and will be unlikely to do so without aid.”

In other words, Dr. Emanuel places a higher value on a young adult's life, than he would the life of a senior. He goes further. He flatly declares that “Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritizing adolescents and young adults over infants.” From his standpoint, society has already made an economic investment in the lives of young adults whereas no significant investment has yet been made in the lives of infants, so therefore it’s only “fair” that resources be allocated toward the young adults and away from the infants. He also applies this standard to those that he deems of “no societal worth” such as people with Down syndrome. Sadly, this mindset is eerily similar to that of German National Socialists (Nazis) for the Nazis rationalized their evil attacks against the disabled and vulnerable of their society by throwing out the false notion of "Das Leben nicht lebenswert" or "the life not worth living." This was coupled with claims that the disabled were a financial burden on society. The propaganda poster below illustrates the point well.
(from Pamella Gellar, Atlas Shrugs)

Government Controlled Healthcare, a Hand that Rocks, Cradles to Graves
“Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism.”
- Vladimir Lenin

Libs have really created their own pretty little nightmare there.

Have you read the article?

 

[Diuretic]

I'm amazed at the power the liberal media has bestowed upon Sarah Palin by hating, fearing and generally disrespecting her so much. All she had to do is mention Death Panels and she gets results, amazing!

Finance Committee to drop end-of-life provision Heh. Palin power.

The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top Republican member said Thursday.

The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by conservatives as "death panels" to encourage euthanasia.

They are dropping the death panel. But frankly, they will drop it back in once the health care rout is passed. It's not enough. NO OBAMACARE.

Obama's Ration Man: Rahm's brother Ezekiel Emanuel (read the whole thing at Political Evidence):

President Obama’s chief advisor on healthcare is Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. In addition to Dr. Emanuel being a trained oncologist, an NIH Bioethicist and a fellow at the nonprofit bioethics research institute, The Hastings Center, he's also an avowed communitarian who advocates healthcare rationing.

In February 2009, he was tapped by the administration to work on the formulation of a national healthcare strategy. Officially, Dr. Emanuel is a special advisor to the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget for health policy. In February Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported that he is "working on (the) health care reform effort." He is "detailed" to the OMB spot and is still officially an employee of the NIH.
In Dr. Emanuel’s writings, he overtly advocates the rationing of healthcare based on age. In January 2009, just one month prior to taking his new position at the White House, Dr. Emanuel co-wrote an article entitled, “Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions”, in the British medical journal The Lancet. In this article he advocates a particular healthcare allocation system which he calls the “complete lives system.” He declared in The Lancet article that in healthcare, “scarcity is the mother of allocation." He explains, “This system (complete lives system) incorporates five principles: youngest-first, prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value. As such, it prioritizes younger people who have not yet lived a complete life and will be unlikely to do so without aid.”

In other words, Dr. Emanuel places a higher value on a young adult's life, than he would the life of a senior. He goes further. He flatly declares that “Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritizing adolescents and young adults over infants.” From his standpoint, society has already made an economic investment in the lives of young adults whereas no significant investment has yet been made in the lives of infants, so therefore it’s only “fair” that resources be allocated toward the young adults and away from the infants. He also applies this standard to those that he deems of “no societal worth” such as people with Down syndrome. Sadly, this mindset is eerily similar to that of German National Socialists (Nazis) for the Nazis rationalized their evil attacks against the disabled and vulnerable of their society by throwing out the false notion of "Das Leben nicht lebenswert" or "the life not worth living." This was coupled with claims that the disabled were a financial burden on society. The propaganda poster below illustrates the point well.
(from Pamella Gellar, Atlas Shrugged)

Government Controlled Healthcare, a Hand that Rocks, Cradles to Graves
“Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism.”
- Vladimir Lenin

Can I just take issue with a few assertions you've made?

In other words, Dr. Emanuel places a higher value on a young adult's life, than he would the life of a senior.

The article is about how scarce medical resources – organs and vaccines – should be distributed. Let me give you a simple example.

There are two people who need an organ transplant to continue to live. One is sixteen years of age and otherwise perfectly healthy. The other is eighty years of age. Who should get the single organ that is available for transplant?

He flatly declares that “Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritizing adolescents and young adults over infants.”

Again, let's say that an infant of three months of age and a person of sixteen years of age both need a vaccine to keep them alive. There is only one vaccination available. Who should be given the vaccination?

He also applies this standard to those that he deems of “no societal worth” such as people with Down syndrome.

There are two infants. Both are three months of age. Both will die within a week unless they receive an organ transplant. An organ becomes available. Which infant should received the organ?

Can you answer those questions?

Well there ya go kids... the entire "national Healthcare scheme is little more than the intellectual rationalization which rests within the old T&V axiom of "Secular Ethics;" commonly known as the "Life Boat Drill..."

In essence it's a lie that advances a series of false chocies; it rolls out a list of people which is designed to project that the numbers are beyond the life sustaining potential of the Life Boat, by ONE... it then lists the races, occupations and genders of the occupants and asks the addled-minded student to determine WHO HAS TO LEAVE THE LIFE BOAT, TO THEIR CERTAIN DEATH... in order to spare the collective; AND WHY...

It's a tool of indoctrination which rests upon a false choice...

Ya see, all human beings are endowed by their creator with EQUAL RIGHTS... thus the teenager has the SAME RIGHTS as the Senior... they're life represents no more a VALUE than the next... as they have the SAME RIGHTS, FROM THE SAME SOURCE and upon the SAME AUTHORITY.

What you see in the Australian sophists position is the deception that hopes to project that the teenager has more potential, that they have more to offer the collective in terms of RETURN on the investment of finite resources, than does the Senior...

It's a lie friends... and it's a lie which stems from the erroneous belief that the STATE; the Government; The ethereal COLLECTIVE... determines what 'right' are... and who has them.

Such is false because ALL OF THOSE NOTED ARE ENDOWED WITH THE SAME RIGHTS AS THOSE TO WHICH THEY WOULD IMPART RIGHTS... AND USUPR RIGHTS! And THEY HAVE NO RIGHT WHICH ENTITLES THEM TO USURP THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER WHO IS NOT OVERTLY ATTEMPTING TO DO THE SAME TO THEM, FIRST! They have no additional rights to impart to ANYONE... ALL they have is POWER; and they have no power beyond the terms of their office to impart rights to anyone of ANY KIND; and they have no means to sustain those rights... beyond the terms of their office. Thus where their terms comes to pass, so pass those false rights; thus their were in truth, no rights...

It's a lie... and it's a lie of the damnable variety; and this is due to it being a lie which only leads away from freedom, even as it claims to be the path TO FREEDOM.

Now, let's look at the whole Leftist argument for "National Healthcare"...

The entire argument is founded upon WHAT?

It is founded upon the premise that the US has people who aren't insured... which is true. But what is NOT true is that those people have chosen to BE INSURED and could not manage to do so... AND that not being insured equates to NO ACCESS TO MEDICAL TREATMENT. Or the most common, that those insured are denied medical care by uncaring bureaucrats...

It's a lie... and whats more, when you look at the above rationalization you find that the ADVOCATES for National Healthcare are returning to inform you that there will be instances where those 'insured' by national healthcare, will inevtiably come to a point where circumstancs simply do not provide for medical treatment... and that these instances are based upon 'good reasons'... the reasons of the 'realist'...

Of course, the 'uncaring bureaucrats' that this ENTIRE FIASCO is designed to eliminate, also have 'good reasons' to deny coverage... but the Leftist is telling you that THEIR reasons are morally sound, because their REASONS are founded in the BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE... and not the distasteful interests of the "OTHER PEOPLE."

Here're the facts: The US healthcare system costs more because it treats more... it's not perfect, but it is SUPERIOR... and where you decide to concede your RESPONSIBILITY, you CONCEDE THE RIGHT WHICH THAT RESPONSIBILITY SUSTAINS...

Turn from these liars and reject their looming tyranny.

Yes, we all know you're a stimulating intellect, but can you answer the questions?

 

[Diuretic]

For PubliusInfinitum and the ones that have offered an opposing point of view.
Thanks for the debate. It was mostly like feasting at the table of Kings. I was glad I could get in by merely offering hot dogs and beer. Ahhhh, America, you gotta love it!

Don't expect any intellectual sustenance from Pub, it's a bit like having Chinese food, an hour later you're hungry again.