Pilgrim's HR 3200 Must Read Pages

[veritas]

I'm always amazed by just how doggedly CON$ cling to the dumb act.

I'm thinking it's not an act. They seem to have virulent egos, so they wouldn't admit they were stupid when they were just being obtuse.

They're actually stupid.

I still think it's an act, because they have a rationalization that, if you repeat a lie BELIEVING the lie to be the truth, then you are not a liar. So ignorance becomes a license to lie for them.

I believe CON$ play dumb to convince themselves that they are not liars.

That's even stupider than being honestly stupid.

 

[Intense]

I'm always amazed by just how doggedly CON$ cling to the dumb act.

I'm thinking it's not an act. They seem to have virulent egos, so they wouldn't admit they were stupid when they were just being obtuse.

They're actually stupid.

I still think it's an act, because they have a rationalization that, if you repeat a lie BELIEVING the lie to be the truth, then you are not a liar. So ignorance becomes a license to lie for them.

I believe CON$ play dumb to convince themselves that they are not liars.

Like the Nationalization of Our Economy isn't happening? Like the Defense of Life, Liberty, And Private Property is no longer Governments Primary Role?

 

[veritas]

I'm thinking it's not an act. They seem to have virulent egos, so they wouldn't admit they were stupid when they were just being obtuse.

They're actually stupid.

I still think it's an act, because they have a rationalization that, if you repeat a lie BELIEVING the lie to be the truth, then you are not a liar. So ignorance becomes a license to lie for them.

I believe CON$ play dumb to convince themselves that they are not liars.

Like the Nationalization of Our Economy isn't happening? Like the Defense of Life, Liberty, And Private Property is no longer Governments Primary Role?

uh.......what are you talking about?

I see YOU didn't even read the thread..........not that it matters in the scope of the theorem we were just discussing, rather, it serves as a proof.

Amazing.

 

[Bern80]

So you want us to debunk this spam e-mail (this is where it came from correct?) about lies from the bill?

It's hard to even want to when the first few are blatant lies.

I had an idea though last night when I was watching the Stewart / Betsy McCaughey interview (big pharma paid liar - although she honestly seems quite nice, like she almost believes what she's saying) ... which was quite entertaining. I got on the daily show bandwagon late, but have found it funny as of late (especially the entire episode last night). It's like comic relief for the complete insanity that's going on.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Official Website | Current Events & Pop Culture, Comedy & Fake News <-- extended interview on front page.

Any ways... My idea was... why not put a midnight clause on the first run of the reform. Say in 4 years they have to re-vote it in. This will allow the nutballs to see that it will actually work, and if liberals are wrong (which sorry, not being partisan here, but that's rarely the case), then we revoke it and go back to the immoral insanity that is called American health care.

I mean, I know we'd have to fight an onslaught of disinformation and lies from the industry for 4 years, but I think it could be fought off the more people have direct experience with the new system. Thoughts?

That's kind of the problem with the daily show. They are a comedy show first. Yet amazingly people seem to think Stewart and the rest of those twits actually know what their talking about.

 

[Vast LWC]

Yeah, but here's the problem with this thread, and I hope you don't take offense to this pilgrim.

So far, this entire debate has consisted of people on the Right giving false information about this bill, and then people on the left having to give people the correct information.

This of course frames the entire conversation as something like:

"Does Obama want to Kill your Grandmother, or not?"

Obviously this completely diverts the listener's or reader's attention from the actual issues surrounding the bill, and creates a conversation that is based on a false premise.

That's what this thread does. It provides a right-wing interpretation of the facts as a starting premise, leading to a conversation that is based on false information.

Now, given the above, do you really expect the left-wing folks to fall for this every time?

Unfortunately, if people are going to insist on presenting false information as if it is factual, people on the other side of the conversation have to, at some point, start reacting like Barney Frank did at that town hall recently...

...Dismissing anything the opposition has to say out-of-hand because of the long history of false information that preceded it.

I mean, just reading the very first point and comparing it to the actual text, show the reader that the first post is starting out with false infomation.

 

[Vast LWC]

That's kind of the problem with the daily show. They are a comedy show first. Yet amazingly people seem to think Stewart and the rest of those twits actually know what their talking about.

Yeaaaaah....

...Except that Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and the rest of the conspiracy theorist crowd, provide less valid information, and present it as a serious news analysis.

And that's not funny at all.

 

[veritas]

Personally I think Stewart is way ahead of both Hannity and Beck in the brains dept. He does what he wants to do, and tells the truth, and gets paid for it. And he's good at it.

 

[Intense]

Manipulation at it's finest.



"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his surrender.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204683204574358590107981718.html

 

[Vast LWC]

Manipulation at it's finest.

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his surrender.

Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com

Wait OH MY GOD! People are asking people what THEY want to to do if they get sick and can't decide for themselves anymore???

Wow, that's DANGEROUS!

It's such a horrible thing to leave instructions for your family and anyone else about how you would prefer to be treated when the inevitable should happen, isn't it?

Anyone who suggested that must be a NAZI Euthanizing-Eugenicist!!!

 

[Vast LWC]

I know my above response is a bit smarmy and sarcastic (a la Jon Stewart, except he's funnier).

But I just can't bring myself to bring about a point-by-point response to that WSJ Opinion article, as the writer is either lying for a reason, or is just bat-shit crazy.

 

[Intense]

I know my above response is a bit smarmy and sarcastic (a la Jon Stewart, except he's funnier).

But I just can't bring myself to bring about a point-by-point response to that WSJ Opinion article, as the writer is either lying for a reason, or is just bat-shit crazy.

LWC, We just subscribe to different philosophies. I see Nationalism as a threat to Liberty, Voice, and Dignity. I am Anti Totalitarian, Anti Oligarchy, and will Never Substitute government for God. Structured Liberty, Self Determination, Individual Voice, are Means to a Healthy Present and Future. Convince, Reason, instead of mandating what you otherwise have no control over. What do you produce, manufacture, or provide, that you do not first take from others? You argue for the $100 Band aid to be more available to others, no matter the cost. I argue why Anyone would justify that Band aid costing that much. Your side dances around Tort Reform, Liability Insurance, Government Mandate, as if it has no effect on the crisis. I argue that it has very significant effect. I know from your perspective it is all so black and white. The only thing that stands in your way though is private property, which you must confiscate to fund your fantasy.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Manipulation at it's finest.

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his surrender.

Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com

Wait OH MY GOD! People are asking people what THEY want to to do if they get sick and can't decide for themselves anymore???

Wow, that's DANGEROUS!

It's such a horrible thing to leave instructions for your family and anyone else about how you would prefer to be treated when the inevitable should happen, isn't it?

Anyone who suggested that must be a NAZI Euthanizing-Eugenicist!!!

actually the article's references to "Your Life Your Choices" seems to be accurate.

Read it for yourself

http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf

if you dont want to read it all and just want to see the survey skip to page 21.

but i suggest reading it, the language in the bill supports the article's claims.

 

[Vast LWC]

actually the article's references to "Your Life Your Choices" seems to be accurate.

Read it for yourself

http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf

if you dont want to read it all and just want to see the survey skip to page 21.

but i suggest reading it, the language in the bill supports the article's claims.

Ah, but the conclusion he is inferring is false.

It is patently obvious to me that the pamphlet and worksheet were created with the best of intentions... to help family members decide what the patient would have wanted, if a situation arises where that cannot otherwise be communicated.

Not some demonic plot to kill old people, so the government can save money.

Unless you're a crazy conspiracy theorist, that is.

 

[Vast LWC]

LWC, We just subscribe to different philosophies. I see Nationalism as a threat to Liberty, Voice, and Dignity. I am Anti Totalitarian, Anti Oligarchy, and will Never Substitute government for God. Structured Liberty, Self Determination, Individual Voice, are Means to a Healthy Present and Future. Convince, Reason, instead of mandating what you otherwise have no control over. What do you produce, manufacture, or provide, that you do not first take from others? You argue for the $100 Band aid to be more available to others, no matter the cost. I argue why Anyone would justify that Band aid costing that much. Your side dances around Tort Reform, Liability Insurance, Government Mandate, as if it has no effect on the crisis. I argue that it has very significant effect. I know from your perspective it is all so black and white. The only thing that stands in your way though is private property, which you must confiscate to fund your fantasy.

OK, I agree, we have different philosophies, I am someone who believes that there should be some sort of established government to help people when they become ill, defend the country, build highways, etc.

And you are an Anarchist.

One good hyperbole deserves another, don't ya think?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

actually the article's references to "Your Life Your Choices" seems to be accurate.

Read it for yourself

http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf

if you dont want to read it all and just want to see the survey skip to page 21.

but i suggest reading it, the language in the bill supports the article's claims.

Ah, but the conclusion he is inferring is false.

It is patently obvious to me that the pamphlet and worksheet were created with the best of intentions... to help family members decide what the patient would have wanted, if a situation arises where that cannot otherwise be communicated.

Not some demonic plot to kill old people, so the government can save money.

Unless you're a crazy conspiracy theorist, that is.

i'll give you that or else i'll have to retire to the eots zone

 

[Vast LWC]

Actually, Pilgrim I apoplogize for coming into your thread all aggro-like.

Dunno what's up with me, I think I need to go yell at the TV for a while so I can engage in normal debate without snapping... LOL.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

i'm not better.

its an online forum, i never hold a grudge overnight .

 

[edthecynic]

Manipulation at it's finest.



"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his surrender.

Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com

Lying at its finest.
This lie was addressed on another thread.

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."
Pamphlet so you can see for yourself:

http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf

A perfect example of just how CON$ lie by telling just enough truth and then shutting up. The so called "push poll" actually gives you more choices than the one the dishonest CON$ say is "pushed." 4 choices in fact.

From Pg 21:

Life like this would be:

1 - difficult but acceptable

2 - worth living, but just barely

3 - not worth living

4 - can't answer now

The best liar is he who makes the smallest amount of lying go the longest way.
Samuel Butler

 

[Intense]

LWC, We just subscribe to different philosophies. I see Nationalism as a threat to Liberty, Voice, and Dignity. I am Anti Totalitarian, Anti Oligarchy, and will Never Substitute government for God. Structured Liberty, Self Determination, Individual Voice, are Means to a Healthy Present and Future. Convince, Reason, instead of mandating what you otherwise have no control over. What do you produce, manufacture, or provide, that you do not first take from others? You argue for the $100 Band aid to be more available to others, no matter the cost. I argue why Anyone would justify that Band aid costing that much. Your side dances around Tort Reform, Liability Insurance, Government Mandate, as if it has no effect on the crisis. I argue that it has very significant effect. I know from your perspective it is all so black and white. The only thing that stands in your way though is private property, which you must confiscate to fund your fantasy.

OK, I agree, we have different philosophies, I am someone who believes that there should be some sort of established government to help people when they become ill, defend the country, build highways, etc.

And you are an Anarchist.

One good hyperbole deserves another, don't ya think?

I actually Support Representative Government by Consent, unlike you. Government by the consent of the Governed, as opposed to waking up to the talking points of the day, like you.
Structured Liberty does have advantages to Anarchy. I do prefer Anarchy to Totalitarianism though, where Justice at least has a fighting chance, within each individual.

 

[Intense]

Manipulation at it's finest.



"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his surrender.

Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com

Lying at its finest.
This lie was addressed on another thread.

A perfect example of just how CON$ lie by telling just enough truth and then shutting up. The so called "push poll" actually gives you more choices than the one the dishonest CON$ say is "pushed." 4 choices in fact.

From Pg 21:

Life like this would be:

1 - difficult but acceptable

2 - worth living, but just barely

3 - not worth living

4 - can't answer now

The best liar is he who makes the smallest amount of lying go the longest way.
Samuel Butler

Ain't buying your one size fits all solution to the health care problem. It is Totalitarian, it is final. There is no recourse or alternative to the chains you impose. Learn to sell lemon aid, without bankrupting yourself.