NationStates Jolt Archive

Browsing some blogs this morning, I came upon this lovely story...

But the numbers are misleading, said John Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis, a right-leaning Dallas-based think tank. Mr. Goodman, who helped craft Sen. John McCain's health care policy, said anyone with access to an emergency room effectively has insurance, albeit the government acts as the payer of last resort. (Hospital emergency rooms by law cannot turn away a patient in need of immediate care.)

"So I have a solution. And it will cost not one thin dime," Mr. Goodman said. "The next president of the United States should sign an executive order requiring the Census Bureau to cease and desist from describing any American – even illegal aliens – as uninsured. Instead, the bureau should categorize people according to the likely source of payment should they need care.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/27/22326/5277/714/576952

There's a lovely comment posted that tickled my ribs...

We should all start showing up in the ER for regular medical care and take copies of this jerk's statement and Bushes that said the same thing. Make sure that everyone in the waiting room and all the hospital personnel you come in contact with know you are there because that is where the Republicans think you should go.

As the lines go out the door and down the street, local media at least would cover it.

When I was visiting my Grandparents in Arizona last spring, the local papers front pages were all about how illegal immigrants, who almost always have no option other than the ER, are causing increased wait times for all ER visitors, increased strain on hospital staff, increased costs of providing care, and subsequently, higher costs for all who seek that care.

McCains plan apparently consists of taking the bad situation currently ongoing in his own state, and export it to the other 49.

This point ought to be reiterated by Democrats every day from now until Election Day. People who want decent medical care in this country had better think long and hard before casting a vote for John McCain.

Browsing some blogs this morning, I came upon this lovely story...



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/27/22326/5277/714/576952

There's a lovely comment posted that tickled my ribs...



When I was visiting my Grandparents in Arizona last spring, the local papers front pages were all about how illegal immigrants, who almost always have no option other than the ER, are causing increased wait times for all ER visitors, increased strain on hospital staff, increased costs of providing care, and subsequently, higher costs for all who seek that care.

McCains plan apparently consists of taking the bad situation currently ongoing in his own state, and export it to the other 49.

This point ought to be reiterated by Democrats every day from now until Election Day. People who want decent medical care in this country had better think long and hard before casting a vote for John McCain.

WHy doesn't Mr. Goodman just suck the healthcare industry's dick on national television and get it over with? :p

WHy doesn't Mr. Goodman just suck the healthcare industry's dick on national television and get it over with? :pThey wouldn't want to further alienate the Republican base.

I think the average Republican knows the difference between homosexual oral lust and intimate acts of networking between representatives of their political party and the healthcare industry. Remember, hypocrisy goes a LONG way in making wrong things right.

A graphic representation of the similarities between the two on national television may be too much for the average voter to handle, though.

A graphic representation of the similarities between the two on national television may be too much for the average voter to handle, though.

It's only wrong if it takes place in an airport bathroom.


...or in the privacy of a loving relationship. *nod*

This has been the way they've done things for a while, isn't it? Want to change unemployment figures? Change the way we count the 'unemployed.'

I love that in this day and age people in charge still try out 'let them eat cake.' Awesome.

I think the average Republican knows the difference between homosexual oral lust and intimate acts of networking between representatives of their political party and the healthcare industry. Remember, hypocrisy goes a LONG way in making wrong things right.

They'd simply use their IOKIAR cannon.

wow mccain has some topnotch advisors.

i guess we are just WHINERS who want a better option than rushing to the emergency room just before we die only to rack up an unpayable bill that will leave our families destitute.

mccain has a health insurance solution. you should read up on it. it is distinctly different from obama's proposals.

wow mccain has some topnotch advisors.

i guess we are just WHINERS who want a better option than rushing to the emergency room just before we die only to rack up an unpayable bill that will leave our families destitute.

mccain has a health insurance solution. you should read up on it. it is distinctly different from obama's proposals.

Y'know, the Democrats should grab this statement and play it for all it's worth. Let's dissect Johnny on health care!

WHy doesn't Mr. Goodman just suck the healthcare industry's dick on national television and get it over with? :p
And when he's done taking their corporate splooge, he can eat my ass, and then he can die and go to hell and wait in line at their emergency room, the scumbag bastard.

My only hope and dream for all these evil bastards is that they will develop Altzheimer's and end up strapped to a wheelchair, wearing a dirty diaper, helplessly dependent on the health care system they created. Then we'll see how much their corporate donors, and their voting base, and even their own families love and care for them, once they've burned through all their money.

What actually happens, is that you go to the ER, and then they send you bills. Then more bills. Then collection calls. Then threats. etc.

At what point does McCain's plan say the government kicks in as this 'payer of last resort'?

And when he's done taking their corporate splooge, he can eat my ass, and then he can die and go to hell and wait in line at their emergency room, the scumbag bastard.

My only hope and dream for all these evil bastards is that they will develop Altzheimer's and end up strapped to a wheelchair, wearing a dirty diaper, helplessly dependent on the health care system they created. Then we'll see how much their corporate donors, and their voting base, and even their own families love and care for them, once they've burned through all their money.

I personally prefer locked-in syndrome. The victim is AWARE.

This point ought to be reiterated by Democrats every day from now until Election Day. People who want decent medical care in this country had better think long and hard before casting a vote for John McCain.

The problem is pinning this to McCain. He has a clear healthcare policy and this isn't it. It would be easier to attack him on issues where he is fuzzy and stupid comments like this have more weight.

I personally prefer locked-in syndrome. The victim is AWARE.
Is it time to play "Wish the cruellest fate imaginable on people we consider 'not like us'" once again?

They'd simply use their IOKIAR cannon.

what the hell is the IOKIAR cannon?

what the hell is the IOKIAR cannon?

The It's OK If You Are A Republican cannon.

Is it time to play "Wish the cruellest fate imaginable on people we consider 'not like us'" once again?

Apparently so. One has to wonder about the mental health of someone who wishes debilitating illness on people who disagree with them.

Is it time to play "Wish the cruellest fate imaginable on people we consider 'not like us'" once again?

What can I say, I'm good at this game.

Also, this isn't the cruellest fate IMAGINABLE, this is the REALISTICALLY imaginable. If you want, I can give you a better one, assuming full possibilities.

Apparently so. One has to wonder about the mental health of someone who wishes debilitating illness on people who disagree with them.

Oh, it's not about disagreeing with me - so much so that I don't wish ill upon, say, Smunkee, who I'm sure disagrees with me. (I wish cookies upon her).

It's about being a douche.

I AM pretty unhinged, though, yes.

Apparently so. One has to wonder about the mental health of someone who wishes debilitating illness on people who disagree with them.

They could probably get those mental conditions treated, but the emergency rooms are too overworked. ;)

They could probably get those mental conditions treated, but the emergency rooms are too overworked. ;)

Brazilian here, and it would take a psychologist. Unfortunately, of my last psychologists, three killed themselves, one went to Saudi Arabia "to escape", and two I sometimes visit in the asylum.

They could probably get those mental conditions treated, but the emergency rooms are too overworked. ;)

In that case, they shouldn't wish for the diversion of medical resources to long term care ;)

My only hope and dream for all these evil bastards is that they will develop Altzheimer's

Im stopping the quote there just to point out I think McCain already has it. Its really the least damning excuse I can think of as to why he cant remember how many houses he owns.

Im stopping the quote there just to point out I think McCain already has it. Its really the least damning excuse I can think of as to why he cant remember how many houses he owns.

I forgot my age (27) for a brief instant once.

Though I'd NOT mind seeing McCain shitting himself during a debate.

EDIT: And once again now. :p

Brazilian here, and it would take a psychologist. Unfortunately, of my last psychologists, three killed themselves, one went to Saudi Arabia "to escape", and two I sometimes visit in the asylum.

Impressive. Your record rivals mine. :)

Impressive. Your record rivals mine. :)

That's because I didn't include the four psychiatrists that now work with insurance sales, and uncontrollably suckle their thumbs and cry when they see me.

Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney's so-called health care plan is being hailed yet again as a rousing, trumpet-blaring success, with claims that Mass has the highest number of insured people.

REALITY:

> The Massachusetts plan does NOT provide health insurance to anyone. What it does is force private citizens to buy insurance from private companies as single payers, if their employers do not provide insurance or enough insurance, as an increasing number do not.

> If you do as Mr. Goodman suggests and just show up at an emergency room for care, and you do not have insurance, you'll get care. Then you'll get the bill, and that bill will have a hefty surcharge added to it by the State because you do not have insurance. So even having enough cash to pay the actual bill in full will not help you, because you will be immediately penalized for not paying a monthly premium to a corporation which donated a shitload of money to Romey's various campaigns.

> If you are one of the millions of struggling working middle-class people in the state, but you have good health, you still cannot get out of this trap, because Massachusetts requires you to include what they call "proof of credible coverage" with your state tax returns. Failure to do so will result in a fine, the amount of which is unclear.

> Tax fine: If asked, the State of Mass will use the following unclear language: "An amount up to as much as $915.00". But on the tax return form itself, the language is much more definite. It informs us that, if we do not have "proof of credible coverage," we can lose our personal exemptions, an amount of several thousand dollars. Loss of that exemption will raise the amount of your income that is taxable so much that, for some income levels, it could bump you into the next higher tax bracket, thus increasing your tax still further. So, if the tax forms are accurate, then that "up to as much as $915" could actually end up costing thousands per year.

> Note that the State of Mass has done nothing to clarify this issue. Perhaps they are afraid that, if people think they can afford the fine, they'll opt for that over the much more expensive insurance premiums. Which, in fact, is what an increasing number of working Mass residents are doing, as inflation in this state is rising faster than the national average.

> By the way, the State recently increased its requirements for "credible coverage" to include prescription coverage, regardless of whether you take prescription meds or not, thus further increasing the costs to citizens.

> So, basically, the State and their corporate sponsors are not just raping the citizens, they are holding us down and raping us.

> I would also point out that, while forcing the citizens to deal with these private companies under threat of heavy fines, the State of Mass places NO restrictions or regulations on how the companies must deal with the citizens. When they announced the rule requiring us all to buy prescription coverage, they DID NOT make any rule requiring the insurers to PROVIDE prescription coverage in their plans. So that just forced us to take the time to shop for new, more expensive plans.

They also make no regulation about how companies can increase premiums at renewal. You know, when you renew your lease with a landlord, the landlord is not allowed to increase the rent above a certain percentage. If he wants to go higher, he has to make a new lease. But the insurance companies have no such limitation. When my policy renewed this past July, my insurer increased my premium by about 30%, bumping me up from $350/month to more than $450 (with no prior warning, either). What the fuck! And that was for a plan that didn't even have scrip coverage. I had to downgrade my coverage to get a plan that is legally compliant AND is back down to the $350 I was paying before (which I cannot afford, by the way; this is all depleting my savings). Less For Your Money(tm) -- that's the motto of the whole filthy business.

Oh, and of course, there is no requirement that they actually pay out on claims. So you have to hand them your money every month, but they don't actually have to give you any service for it.

And this "plan" is being touted as a model for the whole nation. So heads up to all you living in the other 49 states.

We got the rock on one side -- the Romney-style ass-rape system -- and the hard place on the other -- the Goodman-style "insurance is whatever we say it is, and we say you already got it so... 'bye" philosophy. And us in the middle. Like bugs.

That's because I didn't include the four psychiatrists that now work with insurance sales, and uncontrollably suckle their thumbs and cry when they see me.

Well, I'm considered 'untouchable' by the mental health community because I cause more havoc under care than left to my own devices. :cool:

Well, I'm considered 'untouchable' by the mental health community because I cause more havoc under care than left to my own devices. :cool:

Oh, you too? :cool:

> I would also point out that, while forcing the citizens to deal with these private companies under threat of heavy fines, the State of Mass places NO restrictions or regulations on how the companies must deal with the citizens. When they announced the rule requiring us all to buy prescription coverage, they DID NOT make any rule requiring the insurers to PROVIDE prescription coverage in their plans. So that just forced us to take the time to shop for new, more expensive plans.





LIES! The market is infailable, and therefore anything that relies on private corperations or the market always works! Your just a commie! Corperations do nothing but good and would never abuse the absurd amount of power a state might give them!


ALL HAIL THE MARKET!!


(as an aside and threadjack, have you ever noticed that you can essentially take any Christian preacher/televangalist's sermon, replace the words "God", "Jesus", "Father", "Holy Spirit", etc with the word "Market" and you essentially have a libertarian stump speech?)

can't we just for once be happy and believe the lies?

Apparently so. One has to wonder about the mental health of someone who wishes debilitating illness on people who disagree with them.
Am I wishing destruction and misery upon someone who is doing their best to ruin my life in order to enrich themselves? Why, yes, I am. So what?

And what horrible fate am I really wishing on them? Altzheimer's is an increasingly common disease, as people live longer and longer. Any of us could die from it. If an appropriate level of health care exists, our suffering could be mitigated to the point where we would still be able to die in dignity and comfort.

But if these scumbags are permitted to keep running things, such levels of health care will not exist. Not for anyone. Including them.

All I am really wishing on them is that they get to enjoy the system they think is so good for the country they live in. If it's so fucking perfect, then let them depend upon it for their own care.

Let them lie in the bed they make. And we'll see how that goes.

can't we just for once be happy and believe the lies?

Nope...

Am I wishing destruction and misery upon someone who is doing their best to ruin my life in order to enrich themselves? Why, yes, I am. So what?

And what horrible fate am I really wishing on them? Altzheimer's is an increasingly common disease, as people live longer and longer. Any of us could die from it. If an appropriate level of health care exists, our suffering could be mitigated to the point where we would still be able to die in dignity and comfort.

But if these scumbags are permitted to keep running things, such levels of health care will not exist. Not for anyone. Including them.

All I am really wishing on them is that they get to enjoy the system they think is so good for the country they live in. If it's so fucking perfect, then let them depend upon it for their own care.

Let them lie in the bed they make. And we'll see how that goes.

To be sure, he was criticizing ME for wishing specifically locked-in syndrome upon them. Preferably after a botched suicide attempt, that way they'd be clinically depressed AND prisoners in their own bodies.

can't we just for once be happy and believe the lies?
not without koolaid.

To be sure, he was criticizing ME for wishing specifically locked-in syndrome upon them. Preferably after a botched suicide attempt, that way they'd be clinically depressed AND prisoners in their own bodies.
I do not believe it is possible for these villains to get depressed. I am starting to think that being purely evil and delusionally egotistical, in combination, is a cure or preventative for depression.

EDIT: Of course, in Massachusetts, being immune to that disorder will not let them off the hook of having to pay for meds for it.

I do not believe it is possible for these villains to get depressed. I am starting to think that being purely evil and delusionally egotistical, in combination, is a cure or preventative for depression.

EDIT: Of course, in Massachusetts, being immune to that disorder will not let them off the hook of having to pay for meds for it.

And to be sure, locked-in syndrome also numbs the person emotionally, in such a way that they don't mind their condition, so I guess I'll have to look up some other form of eternal torment. Ah well.

(as an aside and threadjack, have you ever noticed that you can essentially take any Christian preacher/televangalist's sermon, replace the words "God", "Jesus", "Father", "Holy Spirit", etc with the word "Market" and you essentially have a libertarian stump speech?)
By the way, I have noticed that. ;) It works for neocons, too.

By the way, I have noticed that. ;) It works for neocons, too.

Indeed. However with neocons they are just as likely to actually use the words "Jesus" and such in he political realm as they are to praise the market.

Indeed. However with neocons they are just as likely to actually use the words "Jesus" and such in he political realm as they are to praise the market.
One must admire their ability to fit themselves to any situation. My cat wishes he could be as flexible and twisty as a neocon.

Am I wishing destruction and misery upon someone who is doing their best to ruin my life in order to enrich themselves? Why, yes, I am. So what?

And what horrible fate am I really wishing on them? Altzheimer's is an increasingly common disease, as people live longer and longer. Any of us could die from it. If an appropriate level of health care exists, our suffering could be mitigated to the point where we would still be able to die in dignity and comfort.

But if these scumbags are permitted to keep running things, such levels of health care will not exist. Not for anyone. Including them.

All I am really wishing on them is that they get to enjoy the system they think is so good for the country they live in. If it's so fucking perfect, then let them depend upon it for their own care.

Let them lie in the bed they make. And we'll see how that goes.

Some people can manage to disagree with others without having to take pleasure in the thought of their suffering as well. I know it makes it easier for you to hate them if you pretend that they aren't real people - I wonder if you would express these views to someone who cared about the person, or just content yourself with such things in private - but I prefer to avoid making comments that could see me associated with, for instance, the type of posters who make masturbatory comments about all the things they would do if they ever got hold of them durn terrorists, to name one example.

Some people can manage to disagree with others without having to take pleasure in the thought of their suffering as well. I know it makes it easier for you to hate them if you pretend that they aren't real people - I wonder if you would express these views to someone who cared about the person, or just content yourself with such things in private - but I prefer to avoid making comments that could see me associated with, for instance, the type of posters who make masturbatory comments about all the things they would do if they ever got hold of them durn terrorists, to name one example.
Not speaking for anybody else here, but...

I have absolutely no problem facing the fact that John McCain is a real person. I also believe that if there were any sort of cosmic justice, John McCain would be forced to suffer the lingering, unsupported, uncomforted death that his policies force on countless others. I doubt this will happen, since he (like most of the super-rich) will be able to buy any and every comfort he could possibly desire. However, I firmly believe that the world would be a much better place if people like John McCain were actually compelled to live the lives that they force on millions of other people...because if that were the case, people like John McCain wouldn't exist any more.

Not speaking for anybody else here, but...

I have absolutely no problem facing the fact that John McCain is a real person. I also believe that if there were any sort of cosmic justice, John McCain would be forced to suffer the lingering, unsupported, uncomforted death that his policies force on countless others. I doubt this will happen, since he (like most of the super-rich) will be able to buy any and every comfort he could possibly desire. However, I firmly believe that the world would be a much better place if people like John McCain were actually compelled to live the lives that they force on millions of other people...because if that were the case, people like John McCain wouldn't exist any more.

And that's essentially why I respect you, Bottle...

Some people can manage to disagree with others without having to take pleasure in the thought of their suffering as well.
And some people can't. What a world of varieties we live in!

I know it makes it easier for you to hate them if you pretend that they aren't real people -
You don't know jackshit about me. And what makes you think I'm pretending they are not real. I wish to the gods that I could kid myself that these people were not real.

I wonder if you would express these views to someone who cared about the person, or just content yourself with such things in private -
A) NSG is not "in private."

B) I never say or write anything that I would not want to see repeated in the public media, and I never say anything about a person that I would not (and/or have not already) said to their faces.

but I prefer to avoid making comments that could see me associated with, for instance, the type of posters who make masturbatory comments about all the things they would do if they ever got hold of them durn terrorists, to name one example.
Yet you do not seek to avoid making comments that could see you associated with, for instance, the type of posters who make masturbatory comments about how superior they are to other posters and make loftily judgmental assumptions about what goes in the lives and minds of other posters whom they do not know outside of the forum.

So, let me see if I've got this straight: You disapprove of my honest and unrestrained expression of my opinion of these individuals and what they are doing, but you do approve of (and practice) presumptuos and egotistical exercises in putting other people down when they say something you don't like?

Okay, I get it. Good to know where everyone stands, eh?

Am I wishing destruction and misery upon someone who is doing their best to ruin my life in order to enrich themselves? Why, yes, I am. So what?The difference between wishing evil upon someone and doing evil to someone lies mainly in the perpetrator's ability to do harm, and it's not necessarily the act of doing harm alone that defines the latter as bad.

I doubt this will happen, since he (like most of the super-rich) will be able to buy any and every comfort he could possibly desire.

As well as several million dollar houses, many of which he forgets he has.



No, I will not let that go;)

Snip.

At moments like this, Mur, I have no idea why you're a fan of mine - you do it GOOD...

As well as several million dollar houses, many of which he forgets he has.



No, I will not let that go;)

I hope neither do the Democrats.

The difference between wishing evil upon someone and doing evil to someone lies mainly in the perpetrator's ability to do harm, and it's not necessarily the act of doing harm alone that defines the latter as bad.

Nope, it lies in the intent and willingness to perform the action.

Well, I'm considered 'untouchable' by the mental health community because I cause more havoc under care than left to my own devices. :cool:

Escalation my dear nut. Escalation. :p

Not speaking for anybody else here, but...

I have absolutely no problem facing the fact that John McCain is a real person. I also believe that if there were any sort of cosmic justice, John McCain would be forced to suffer the lingering, unsupported, uncomforted death that his policies force on countless others. I doubt this will happen, since he (like most of the super-rich) will be able to buy any and every comfort he could possibly desire. However, I firmly believe that the world would be a much better place if people like John McCain were actually compelled to live the lives that they force on millions of other people...because if that were the case, people like John McCain wouldn't exist any more.

Truth.

And either they would not exist anymore, or their policies would not exist anymore. It is only because they live in the ivory towers of their wealth that these people can say the shit they say. Reality is a remarkable teacher. The best the universe has to offer. I firmly believe that anyone who proposes a system for others to live under, should live under that system themselves, so they can test directly whether it really works or not.

If they refuse to do so, then I suspect that they are not really interested in whether it works or not.

Truth.

And either they would not exist anymore, or their policies would not exist anymore. It is only because they live in the ivory towers of their wealth that these people can say the shit they say. Reality is a remarkable teacher. The best the universe has to offer. I firmly believe that anyone who proposes a system for others to live under, should live under that system themselves, so they can test directly whether it really works or not.

If they refuse to do so, then I suspect that they are not really interested in whether it works or not.
My mom (who, interestingly, is atheist) once explained her moral system to me thusly:

Suspend your disbelief a bit, and pretend that when we die we will be reincarnated into another human lifetime. We will get to choose the place into which we are born, but we will not get to choose our parents or our own nature. In other words, you could choose to be born in Canada, but you wouldn't get to choose if you'd be male or female, rich or poor, black or white, gay or straight, etc etc etc. Think about your current country. Would you want to gamble and choose your current country, knowing that you might be born to one of the minorities or disadvantaged groups in your country? How does your current nation treat the "lowest" on the totem pole?

My mother's morality is about making her own corner of the world the kind of place where everybody would choose to be reincarnated.

So look at the candidates and ask yourself, Would McCain or Obama want to take that gamble and be reincarnated in the America he would create as President? Does he really believe he will be building an America that is better for all, or at least for most, to the point where he'd be willing to risk that he'll be born the gay daughter of a poor immigrant family?

B) I never say or write anything that I would not want to see repeated in the public media, and I never say anything about a person that I would not (and/or have not already) said to their faces.

Just out of curiosity - is this an admission that you would, for instance, tell McCain's daughter you wish her father to suffer from Alzheimers?

Yet you do not seek to avoid making comments that could see you associated with, for instance, the type of posters who make masturbatory comments about how superior they are to other posters and make loftily judgmental assumptions about what goes in the lives and minds of other posters whom they do not know outside of the forum.

I do not claim that my view in some way makes me superior, you just made that part up. As I have quite clearly pointed out, its not disagreement that I have a problem with. My sole opinion on this subject is that a desire to see deliberate suffering inflicted on others worries me.

Not speaking for anybody else here, but...

I have absolutely no problem facing the fact that John McCain is a real person. I also believe that if there were any sort of cosmic justice, John McCain would be forced to suffer the lingering, unsupported, uncomforted death that his policies force on countless others. I doubt this will happen, since he (like most of the super-rich) will be able to buy any and every comfort he could possibly desire. However, I firmly believe that the world would be a much better place if people like John McCain were actually compelled to live the lives that they force on millions of other people...because if that were the case, people like John McCain wouldn't exist any more.I recall a post of yours on why you have no respect for people that harbor rape fantasies, though more than for those that actually engage in rape. The situation I'm in here is similar. I find disease fantasies appalling, even if less so than actually going out and infecting people.
[...] it lies in the intent [...]There you go.

The difference between wishing evil upon someone and doing evil to someone lies mainly in the perpetrator's ability to do harm, and it's not necessarily the act of doing harm alone that defines the latter as bad.
No, actually, it is. Doing harm is bad. Having the harm you're doing pointed out to you, and then continuing to do it and doing more of it, makes you a bad person.

And what does wishing evil upon someone have to do with that? Do you believe in magic? Do you think that if I put a curse on Goodman, McCain and Romney, they'll actually suffer from it?

Thought is not equal to deed. Therefore the person who merely wishes evil upon their enemy is not made a bad person by their thoughts/feelings, whereas the person who actually does evil to people who are not even their enemies is made a bad person by their actions.

And anyway, it is my position that I am not wishing evil upon them. I am wishing justice upon them.

I can understand why they would think justice visited upon them would be an evil. After all, look at the systems they are devising. Who would want to be thrown into them?

So, since I am merely wishing that they become dependent on their own systems, and you call that wishing evil upon them, then obviously, you must agree with me that their systems are bad. Right?

I recall a post of yours on why you have no respect for people that harbor rape fantasies, though more than for those that actually engage in rape. The situation I'm in here is similar. I find disease fantasies appalling, even if less so than actually going out and infecting people.

I understand what you are saying, but I gotta say that I think it's a rather different situation.

I think it's rather different for a rape victim to fantasize about getting back at her rapist by violating him, than it is for somebody to simply fantasize about raping others.

So, since I am merely wishing that they become dependent on their own systems, and you call that wishing evil upon them, then obviously, you must agree with me that their systems are bad. Right?
I think it kind of goes without saying at this point that wishing Republican rule upon anybody is a grave punishment indeed. :P

There you go.

Intent of PERPETRATING the action. There's a difference between planning or wishing you could kill someone and being happy when they bite it.

No, actually, it is. Doing harm is bad. Having the harm you're doing pointed out to you, and then continuing to do it and doing more of it, makes you a bad person.Yeah. Only there's more to being a bad person than only engaging in harmful activities.
And what does wishing evil upon someone have to do with that? Do you believe in magic? Do you think that if I put a curse on Goodman, McCain and Romney, they'll actually suffer from it?Nah. The only effect that has is on your character.
Thought is not equal to deed. Therefore the person who merely wishes evil upon their enemy is not made a bad person by their thoughts/feelings, whereas the person who actually does evil to people who are not even their enemies is made a bad person by their actions.Nope. A person that does wrong is worse than someone who merely wishes wrong on people. A person doing wrong being something bad does not somehow make someone only wishing harm on someone else good.
And anyway, it is my position that I am not wishing evil upon them. I am wishing justice upon them.

I can understand why they would think justice visited upon them would be an evil. After all, look at the systems they are devising. Who would want to be thrown into them?It is my position that you're confusing revenge and justice.
So, since I am merely wishing that they become dependent on their own systems, and you call that wishing evil upon them, then obviously, you must agree with me that their systems are bad. Right?Undoubtedly. I'm arguing that feeding them their own medicine, or wishing that it would be done is an act of wrong as well.

So, since I am merely wishing that they become dependent on their own systems, and you call that wishing evil upon them, then obviously, you must agree with me that their systems are bad. Right?

So if I think Obama's healthcare system is good (and I do, for the most part), then wishing that he suffers a debilitating illness so he can experience his excellent service first hand is also good, right?

Just out of curiosity - is this an admission that you would, for instance, tell McCain's daughter you wish her father to suffer from Alzheimers?
Absolutely, if she were to ask me. In fact, if you want to forward a link to this thread to the McCain campaign, with my posts highlighted, go right ahead.

Hopefully, if they read it, they will be better able than you to see that what I am actually hoping is that her father will become dependent on the health care system he proposes to impose upon the US. The Altzheimer's was merely a conveniently memorable prop for that. I really don't care how he ends up helpless and in care.

I do not claim that my view in some way makes me superior, you just made that part up. As I have quite clearly pointed out, its not disagreement that I have a problem with. My sole opinion on this subject is that a desire to see deliberate suffering inflicted on others worries me.
No, you make no claims at all. You let the attitude you cop speak for you. Keep your worries for someone who cares about them.

I understand what you are saying, but I gotta say that I think it's a rather different situation.

I think it's rather different for a rape victim to fantasize about getting back at her rapist by violating him, than it is for somebody to simply fantasize about raping others.I'd still maintain that isn't "good" either.
Intent of PERPETRATING the action. There's a difference between planning or wishing you could kill someone and being happy when they bite it.Not going through with it doesn't somehow make you a good person. Not harboring such feelings in the first place does.

I'm sure McCain is a sensible politician with well though out policies. He would have to be to run for President. Why he doesn't get better advisors puzzles me...

So if I think Obama's healthcare system is good (and I do, for the most part), then wishing that he suffers a debilitating illness so he can experience his excellent service first hand is also good, right?
It wouldn't be as bad as the fate he would suffer under McCain's plan.

But you carry on trying to deflect this conversation from what it is really about -- the health care plans and the people devising them -- and keep trying to make it be about me and my way of speaking. I'm sure everyone will be taken in and distracted by that.

I'm arguing that feeding them their own medicine, or wishing that it would be done is an act of wrong as well.

And why?

No, you make no claims at all. You let the attitude you cop speak for you. Keep your worries for someone who cares about them.

For someone who rightly claims that I know nothing about you, you certainly seem to think you know about my 'attitude'. Let me put this plainly - I do not consider myself superior and now that I have stated it twice I should think that people will accept that.

And I will express my thoughts on this public forum whether you care for them or not.

I'd still maintain that isn't "good" either.
I don't think either fantasy is "morally good" or "morally bad." I simply feel that they're quite different, and I personally have more respect and understanding for one than for the other. But I don't define moral goodness based purely on what I like and respect.

My mom (who, interestingly, is atheist) once explained her moral system to me thusly:

Suspend your disbelief a bit, and pretend that when we die we will be reincarnated into another human lifetime. We will get to choose the place into which we are born, but we will not get to choose our parents or our own nature. In other words, you could choose to be born in Canada, but you wouldn't get to choose if you'd be male or female, rich or poor, black or white, gay or straight, etc etc etc. Think about your current country. Would you want to gamble and choose your current country, knowing that you might be born to one of the minorities or disadvantaged groups in your country? How does your current nation treat the "lowest" on the totem pole?

My mother's morality is about making her own corner of the world the kind of place where everybody would choose to be reincarnated.

So look at the candidates and ask yourself, Would McCain or Obama want to take that gamble and be reincarnated in the America he would create as President? Does he really believe he will be building an America that is better for all, or at least for most, to the point where he'd be willing to risk that he'll be born the gay daughter of a poor immigrant family?

This take on morality gives me new hope.


Hope that Jerry Falwell is reincarnated gay.

I'm sure McCain is a sensible politician with well though out policies. He would have to be to run for President. Why he doesn't get better advisors puzzles me...Didn't stop George W. Olympic Mascot from running...
And why?It's the first step in direction of actually doing it, and regardless of any future steps afterwards, it's a step in the wrong direction on its own.

My mom (who, interestingly, is atheist) once explained her moral system to me thusly:

Suspend your disbelief a bit, and pretend that when we die we will be reincarnated into another human lifetime. We will get to choose the place into which we are born, but we will not get to choose our parents or our own nature. In other words, you could choose to be born in Canada, but you wouldn't get to choose if you'd be male or female, rich or poor, black or white, gay or straight, etc etc etc. Think about your current country. Would you want to gamble and choose your current country, knowing that you might be born to one of the minorities or disadvantaged groups in your country? How does your current nation treat the "lowest" on the totem pole?

My mother's morality is about making her own corner of the world the kind of place where everybody would choose to be reincarnated.

So look at the candidates and ask yourself, Would McCain or Obama want to take that gamble and be reincarnated in the America he would create as President? Does he really believe he will be building an America that is better for all, or at least for most, to the point where he'd be willing to risk that he'll be born the gay daughter of a poor immigrant family?
That's an excellent way of thinking about morality.

Personally, I do not think that McCain or any of those working on his policies would wish to be reincarnated in the US they are planning to build. I do not think they even plan, during this life, to still be in the US they build by the time they might start suffering from long term illnesses like Altzheimer's. The US they are planning to build is not a nation for people to live in, it's a money engine that they hope will spit out all the cash it can into their pockets as fast as possible, so they can get out and move on to the next venture. When they think about their next lives, just as when they think about their retirement, I'd be willing to bet they are imagining places like Dubai or Luxembourg.

I'm sure McCain is a sensible politician with well though out policies.
Why would you think so?
He would have to be to run for President.
Huh? No he wouldn't.
Why he doesn't get better advisors puzzles me...
He gets advisors who think similarly to himself.

I don't think either fantasy is "morally good" or "morally bad." I simply feel that they're quite different, and I personally have more respect and understanding for one than for the other. But I don't define moral goodness based purely on what I like and respect.But we're not really talking about rape fantasies here, anyway.

Why would you think so?

Huh? No he wouldn't.

He gets advisors who think similarly to himself.

Fine... back to cynical America bashing for me.

That's an excellent way of thinking about morality.

Personally, I do not think that McCain or any of those working on his policies would wish to be reincarnated in the US they are planning to build. I do not think they even plan, during this life, to still be in the US they build by the time they might start suffering from long term illnesses like Altzheimer's. The US they are planning to build is not a nation for people to live in, it's a money engine that they hope will spit out all the cash it can into their pockets as fast as possible, so they can get out and move on to the next venture. When they think about their next lives, just as when they think about their retirement, I'd be willing to bet they are imagining places like Dubai or Luxembourg.I wouldn't put it beyond them to genuinely believe that anyone can achieve anything so long as they're not lazy.

I'd still maintain that isn't "good" either.
Not going through with it doesn't somehow make you a good person. Not harboring such feelings in the first place does.

I never claimed to be a good person.

I CLAIM, however, to be a tired person.

I'm tired of living in a world that has as its main power a cowboy state, ran by the most repulsive kind of people, and that's willing to invade random countries for NOTHING.

I'm tired of seeing Republicans argue that any health care at all would be "socialism", and calling commies anyone that disagrees with them.

I'm tired of seeing the most powerful country in the world turning into a theocracy that lets people in Africa die of AIDS because they wanna teach abstinence-only.

I'm tired of a party that tries to make gays, minorities, pagans and atheists into second-class citizens in their country, and would LOVE to export such a notion.

I'm tired of a party that profiles and attacks people based on religion and nationality.

In short, I'm fucking tired of the GOP's bullying, stupidity, boister, prejudice and intolerance, and if McCain has to die, go to hell and relive every horrid experience he ever had in Nam while being raped in the ass with a chainsaw turned on for eternity or until he likes it, whichever comes first, so that criminal party gets the hell out of the White House, I WISH IT!

That's an excellent way of thinking about morality.

Personally, I do not think that McCain or any of those working on his policies would wish to be reincarnated in the US they are planning to build. I do not think they even plan, during this life, to still be in the US they build by the time they might start suffering from long term illnesses like Altzheimer's. The US they are planning to build is not a nation for people to live in, it's a money engine that they hope will spit out all the cash it can into their pockets as fast as possible, so they can get out and move on to the next venture. When they think about their next lives, just as when they think about their retirement, I'd be willing to bet they are imagining places like Dubai or Luxembourg.


But....but....they are saving us from turning into godless, queer tolerating, negro loving savage sodomites!

It wouldn't be as bad as the fate he would suffer under McCain's plan.

But you carry on trying to deflect this conversation from what it is really about -- the health care plans and the people devising them -- and keep trying to make it be about me and my way of speaking. I'm sure everyone will be taken in and distracted by that.

It takes two to perpetuate an argument. If you feel it is distracting from the subject at hand then feel free to stop responding.

Fine... back to cynical America bashing for me.
I don't think it's terribly "cynical", just realistic, to recognize that American politicians can in fact suffer from ignorance and failure to think things through: nor is it "America bashing" unless you think it is unique to the US. Aren't there some ignorant and less-than-thoughtful politicians in the UK, or France, or India, or Peru, or.... ?

Yeah. Only there's more to being a bad person than only engaging in harmful activities.
Not really. Bad is a relative term. If it does not affect other people, then it does not matter as much as if it does.

Nah. The only effect that has is on your character.
My character is not your concern, so long as I do not cause harm to you.

Nope. A person that does wrong is worse than someone who merely wishes wrong on people. A person doing wrong being something bad does not somehow make someone only wishing harm on someone else good.
False dichotomy. Saying something does not make you bad, does not automatically equate to saying something makes you good. There is another option -- neutral.

It is my position that you're confusing revenge and justice.
I disagree. Obviously. And since I live inside my own head, I think I'm in a better position to say what goes on in there than you are.

Undoubtedly. I'm arguing that feeding them their own medicine, or wishing that it would be done is an act of wrong as well.
I disagree again. It may not be good, but it would be right, not wrong.

The problem is pinning this to McCain. He has a clear healthcare policy and this isn't it. It would be easier to attack him on issues where he is fuzzy and stupid comments like this have more weight.

Indeed, McCain's stated healthcare plan, for those who bothered to research his position, is far better for our quality of healthcare than Obama's. Obama is setting up healthcare to fail so he can implement what he really wants: socialized medicine.

But hey, concentrate on the toady instead of the stated policy of the candidate. While we are at it, let's look at Biden's solution to 9/11 and Arab animosity:

http://www.tnr.com/columnists/story.html?id=ba9b09bb-ed01-4582-b6ec-444834c9df73&k=93697

Biden: "Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran,". Never mind, Joe, that Iran is a Arab nation.

Or perhaps this is the point I throw out Obama's military strategist and his Winnie the Pooh take on military affairs. But I won't because Obama's ignorance on affairs is what I listen to. The noise his handlers and advisors make detract from the real picture Obama paints when he mumbles his way through hard questions.

I'm sure McCain is a sensible politician with well though out policies. He would have to be to run for President. Why he doesn't get better advisors puzzles me...
It leaves you sure but puzzled?

It doesn't suggest at all to you that, just maybe, McCain is not quite as sensible as he should be for the job he's applying for?

It leaves you sure but puzzled?

It doesn't suggest at all to you that, just maybe, McCain is not quite as sensible as he should be for the job he's applying for?

I suppose he could be senile...

Snip.

I wonder if, for one glistening moment, when you post, you fancy yourself someone who knows what he's talking about.

I don't think it's terribly "cynical", just realistic, to recognize that American politicians can in fact suffer from ignorance and failure to think things through: nor is it "America bashing" unless you think it is unique to the US. Aren't there some ignorant and less-than-thoughtful politicians in the UK, or France, or India, or Peru, or.... ?

Yes, there are. One of them is sitting in 10 Downing Street right now and the other just left it. I'm certain if you wanted to start a thread about New Labour and their attempts at gutting our country of any semblance of civil liberties and turning us into a police, ineffective bureaucratic make-overs and pseudo-privatisation practices with regards to our valued public services (including the NHS, see it's on topic :D) and of course, their "liberal interventionist foreign policy" which basically involves dragging us into pretty much any conflict the US gets involved in, despite the fact we can't handle the strain, then I'm sure you'd get a lot of Brits posting in support...

And I don't know about anyone else, but I personally would not consider it UK bashing, I'd rightly consider it criticism of our current government and their policies. It is important to be able to distinguish the two.

Indeed, McCain's stated healthcare plan, for those who bothered to research his position, is far better for our quality of healthcare than Obama's. Obama is setting up healthcare to fail so he can implement what he really wants: socialized medicine.


Not that I see anything wrong with socialized medicine, but you got a source for that accusation, or is his just a case of "TEH EBIL BLACK MAN IS TRYIN TO MAKE US COMMUNIST!!!"

But hey, concentrate on the toady instead of the stated policy of the candidate. While we are at it, let's look at Biden's solution to 9/11 and Arab animosity:

http://www.tnr.com/columnists/story.html?id=ba9b09bb-ed01-4582-b6ec-444834c9df73&k=93697

Biden: "Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran,". Never mind, Joe, that Iran is a Arab nation.


Quote something aside from a right wing blog please.

Or perhaps this is the point I throw out Obama's military strategist and his Winnie the Pooh take on military affairs.

Indeed. Diplomacy is a sign of weakness. Lets just kill everything and be done with it.

But I won't because Obama's ignorance on affairs is what I listen to.

Back this up please. I have yet to see anything to the level of ignorance as "The economy is fine".

The noise his handlers and advisors make detract from the real picture Obama paints when he mumbles his way through hard questions.

Never seen this. Im callin this a lie.

For someone who rightly claims that I know nothing about you, you certainly seem to think you know about my 'attitude'. Let me put this plainly - I do not consider myself superior and now that I have stated it twice I should think that people will accept that.
If you don't want people to get the wrong impression of you, perhaps you should be more careful about how you express yourself in the first place. For instance, don't say you know that I'm pretending these people aren't real or that you know that I'm the kind of person who talks big in private only, if you're not trying to pretend you know anything about me. Don't tell us all about how you prefer to avoid being associated with other people whose comments are "masturbatory" if you don't want to give the impression that you are trying to be superior. Instead, be like me and say what you mean, the way you mean it.

And I will express my thoughts on this public forum whether you care for them or not.
I never asked you not to.

The problem is when American politicians enact poorly though out policies the consequences are at least an order of magnitude larger and more destructive than if Brown did.

I never claimed to be a good person.

I CLAIM, however, to be a tired person.

I'm tired of living in a world that has as its main power a cowboy state, ran by the most repulsive kind of people, and that's willing to invade random countries for NOTHING.

I'm tired of seeing Republicans argue that any health care at all would be "socialism", and calling commies anyone that disagrees with them.

I'm tired of seeing the most powerful country in the world turning into a theocracy that lets people in Africa die of AIDS because they wanna teach abstinence-only.

I'm tired of a party that tries to make gays, minorities, pagans and atheists into second-class citizens in their country, and would LOVE to export such a notion.

I'm tired of a party that profiles and attacks people based on religion and nationality.

In short, I'm fucking tired of the GOP's bullying, stupidity, boister, prejudice and intolerance, and if McCain has to die, go to hell and relive every horrid experience he ever had in Nam while being raped in the ass with a chainsaw turned on for eternity or until he likes it, whichever comes first, so that criminal party gets the hell out of the White House, I WISH IT!And I think that's not a nice thing to do. Good day.
Not really. Bad is a relative term. If it does not affect other people, then it does not matter as much as if it does.Not as much, no.
My character is not your concern, so long as I do not cause harm to you.In this particular instance, yes. Of course, it not being any of my concern has no relevance as to whether or not what you're doing is right.
False dichotomy. Saying something does not make you bad, does not automatically equate to saying something makes you good. There is another option -- neutral.Wishing something on someone is clearly not a sign of neutrality.
I disagree. Obviously. And since I live inside my own head, I think I'm in a better position to say what goes on in there than you are.Oh, I know. I'm merely going by what you post here.
I disagree again. It may not be good, but it would be right, not wrong.Why?

It's the first step in direction of actually doing it, and regardless of any future steps afterwards, it's a step in the wrong direction on its own.

Nonsense. Unless you believe in such a thing as a "thought crime"? Do you honestly believe that all the billions of people in the world who never commit a bad action against anyone else all go through their entire lives with nothing but good wishes for their fellow humans in their heads every day?

And I think that's not a nice thing to do. Good day.

And I think that at this point in time we're so beyond the point in which "nice" was an issue that it's not even funny.

I wouldn't put it beyond them to genuinely believe that anyone can achieve anything so long as they're not lazy.
What does that have to do with what I said? Or anything in this thread?

I never claimed to be a good person.

Glad you are going with the evidence on this one.

I CLAIM, however, to be a tired person.

Don't you Brazilians sleep all day?

I'm tired of living in a world that has as its main power a cowboy state, ran by the most repulsive kind of people, and that's willing to invade random countries for NOTHING.

Random? Nothing? Your take on history is laughable.

I'm tired of seeing Republicans argue that any health care at all would be "socialism", and calling commies anyone that disagrees with them.

We have excellent heathcare that provides the world's best care to a majority of its people as well as providing an enviroment for innovation. Why screw it up by letting the government control it any more than it already does? Socialization of healthcare creates healthcare rationing and a lower quality of services.

Why are you tired of this? You don't even live here.

I'm tired of seeing the most powerful country in the world turning into a theocracy that lets people in Africa die of AIDS because they wanna teach abstinence-only.

Gee, Africans celebrate GWB's efforts in Africa. The most ever done by any President. GWB has saved more Africans than any other world leader. How does your country compare?

I'm tired of a party that tries to make gays, minorities, pagans and atheists into second-class citizens in their country, and would LOVE to export such a notion.

All those minorities are the richest minorities in the world. Please look at how minorities, gays, and pagans are treated in most other countries. Here they have the right to believe anything they wish.

I'm tired of a party that profiles and attacks people based on religion and nationality.

The Democrats? Why are you tired of them?

In short, I'm fucking tired of the GOP's bullying, stupidity, boister, prejudice and intolerance, and if McCain has to die, go to hell and relive every horrid experience he ever had in Nam while being raped in the ass with a chainsaw turned on for eternity or until he likes it, whichever comes first, so that criminal party gets the hell out of the White House, I WISH IT!

You are a disturbed individual and an excellent example of BDS. You wish the worst things in the world on people whose ideas are different than yours in the name of protecting people whose ideas are different from theirs. I fully disagree with 99% of what you say yet I only wish you the best. Your stupidity is nothing to wish death upon you over.

Amazing the stupidity of your statements don't choke you as you write them.

Quote something aside from a right wing blog please.

How about something from the New Republic, a liberal publication? Oh shi-

If you don't want people to get the wrong impression of you, perhaps you should be more careful about how you express yourself in the first place. For instance, don't say you know that I'm pretending these people aren't real or that you know that I'm the kind of person who talks big in private only, if you're not trying to pretend you know anything about me. Don't tell us all about how you prefer to avoid being associated with other people whose comments are "masturbatory" if you don't want to give the impression that you are trying to be superior. Instead, be like me and say what you mean, the way you mean it.

I didn't say that I know that you pretend people aren't real, I said that I know it makes it easier to dehumanise them. And just because I don't want to be associated with a certain group of people doesn't mean I consider myself superior, it means I consider myself different.

I never asked you not to.

You told me to keep my thoughts to myself. I won't, thanks.

Browsing some blogs this morning, I came upon this lovely story...



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/27/22326/5277/714/576952

There's a lovely comment posted that tickled my ribs...



When I was visiting my Grandparents in Arizona last spring, the local papers front pages were all about how illegal immigrants, who almost always have no option other than the ER, are causing increased wait times for all ER visitors, increased strain on hospital staff, increased costs of providing care, and subsequently, higher costs for all who seek that care.

McCains plan apparently consists of taking the bad situation currently ongoing in his own state, and export it to the other 49.

This point ought to be reiterated by Democrats every day from now until Election Day. People who want decent medical care in this country had better think long and hard before casting a vote for John McCain.

boring. just get the NHS.

It takes two to perpetuate an argument. If you feel it is distracting from the subject at hand then feel free to stop responding.
OK. *ignores Cosmopoles from now on*

Don't you Brazilians sleep all day?

Your stupidity is nothing to wish death upon you over.

You are a disturbed individual(...)

Amazing the stupidity of your statements don't choke you as you write them.

Never minding the fact that you're utterly wrong on the rest of the post, it's not a good idea to bait me. Reported.

But we're not really talking about rape fantasies here, anyway.
Given that you introduced the parallel in the first place, I assumed you would see my ultimate point. Allow me to clarify:

It is one thing to fantasize about harming others simply for the joy of causing harm. It is another thing to fantasize about others being harmed specifically because they have harmed you (or others).

I believe the John McCain has harmed thousands, if not millions, of people. I believe that he will harm more people if elected president. I fantasize about him experiencing the harms that are of his own making, the ones that he forces upon so many other people, and I do this not because I enjoying the idea of causing pain but because I enjoy the idea of somebody reaping what he has sown.

Nonsense. Unless you believe in such a thing as a "thought crime"? Depends on how you define thought crime. I'm not arguing that you should be punished for wishing alzheimers on someone, merely that you should drop the pretense that it's perfectly reasonable and moral to do so, in the hopes that perhaps someday you'd stop.
Do you honestly believe that all the billions of people in the world who never commit a bad action against anyone else all go through their entire lives with nothing but good wishes for their fellow humans in their heads every day?You mean to imply people aren't perfect? :eek2:
Just because everyone does something doesn't somehow make it a good thing.

I suppose he could be senile...
He doesn't have to be senile. There are other options. He could be misled by others. Or he could be stupid. Or he could be dishonest and corrupt.

I wouldn't put it beyond them to genuinely believe that anyone can achieve anything so long as they're not lazy.
I would. They, more than anybody, know precisely how much of a bullshit line that whole concept is.

Make no mistake: the super-rich uber-capitalists who preach about the value of hard work are not buying into their own lines. They know exactly what they're doing.

Given that you introduced the parallel in the first place, I assumed you would see my ultimate point. Allow me to clarify:

It is one thing to fantasize about harming others simply for the joy of causing harm. It is another thing to fantasize about others being harmed specifically because they have harmed you (or others).Yeah I got that, and as I pointed out, we're not really talking about rape. It was a bit obscurely worded, so I didn't want to jump into a discussion on that, in case that wasn't what you meant.
I believe the John McCain has harmed thousands, if not millions, of people. I believe that he will harm more people if elected president. I fantasize about him experiencing the harms that are of his own making, the ones that he forces upon so many other people, and I do this not because I enjoying the idea of causing pain but because I enjoy the idea of somebody reaping what he has sown.Yeah, and I find that mentality appalling. I see variations of it in people that cheer on torture or use of nuclear weapons on the grounds that whoever's on the receiving end "deserves it." Even if the people are aware that they'd never do this even if given the opportunity, they're worse people for having entertained the fantasy.

boring. just get the NHS.

But that's socialism! Just like the military, or the police, or the roads, or public schooling, or firefighters, or the mint, or...

Where was I going with this?

We have excellent heathcare that provides the world's best care...
We are near the bottom of the industrialized world by any measure (lifespan, infant mortality, chronic disease rates, etc.).

But that's socialism! Just like the military, or the police, or the roads, or public schooling, or firefighters, or the mint, or...

Where was I going with this?

To NERV.

>.>

<.<

What, his avatar is a pic of Ryoji Kaji.

What does that have to do with what I said? Or anything in this thread?If they genuinely believed that anyone could achieve anything if they worked hard enough, they wouldn't mind being born as a disenfranchised minority, since they've been doing their best to craft an America where hard work is rewarded (in their humble opinion). Only has relevance to that post.

And I think that at this point in time we're so beyond the point in which "nice" was an issue that it's not even funny.Your wishing the locked out syndrome on people you hate is appalling to me.

Not as much, no.
In this particular instance, yes. Of course, it not being any of my concern has no relevance as to whether or not what you're doing is right.
Are you again equating actions with things that are not actions? My character is not something that I do. Therefore, my statement that the quality of my character is not your concern as long as I do not cause you harm strongly suggests that I am not harming you, therefore not doing anything wrong.

Wishing something on someone is clearly not a sign of neutrality.
Not taking action to realize that wish is, though.

Oh, I know. I'm merely going by what you post here.
Why?
Because justice makes things right. It rebalances what is out of balance. It makes whole what has been broken or reduced. It redresses wrongs and unfairness.

It does not deliver happiness. It does not make people feel good. It does not create friendship or warm thoughts. It just fixes what is broken. What we make of that, how it affects our lives, is up to us.

Prison is bad, but prison is a just punishment for those who commit crimes of sufficient severity. Having stuff taken away from you is bad, but having stuff taken away is a just penalty for those who take stuff from others unfairly. Having to use, live under and endure the system that they believe is good enough for others would be a just requirement for US politicians and policymakers. Whether they suffer or benefit would be entirely up to them and the system they see fit to implement. Thus, justice could bring them either suffering or happiness, but both would come from their own hands.

Your wishing the locked out syndrome on people you hate is appalling to me.

I'm sure it is.

Thank you, by the way, I wasn't sure how "appalling" was spelled. ;)

How about something from the New Republic, a liberal publication? Oh shi-



I didn't say that I know that you pretend people aren't real, I said that I know it makes it easier to dehumanise them. And just because I don't want to be associated with a certain group of people doesn't mean I consider myself superior, it means I consider myself different.
BS. Sorry, but--

You told me to keep my thoughts to myself. I won't, thanks.
No, I didn't. I told you to keep your worries for someone who cares. I.e., not me. How does that stop you from expressing them to anyone else on this forum? Especially anyone who cares?

OK. *ignores Cosmopoles from now on*

BS. Sorry, but--

No, I didn't. I told you to keep your worries for someone who cares. I.e., not me. How does that stop you from expressing them to anyone else on this forum? Especially anyone who cares?

21 minutes. My congratulations, I thought you would fail quicker than that.

Depends on how you define thought crime. I'm not arguing that you should be punished for wishing alzheimers on someone, merely that you should drop the pretense that it's perfectly reasonable and moral to do so, in the hopes that perhaps someday you'd stop.
Stop doing something I never did in the first place? That will be tricky.

When did I ever say anything about morality? All I have talked about is justice. There is no moral implication in justice. Reap what you sow, as Bottle put it. Is that really a moral argument?

Also, when did I ever characterize my statements as anything other than my "honest and unrestrained opinion"?

You mean to imply people aren't perfect? :eek2:
Just because everyone does something doesn't somehow make it a good thing.
It doesn't make it bad either. Again, with you and your false dichotomies.

Are you again equating actions with things that are not actions? Never have.
My character is not something that I do. Therefore, my statement that the quality of my character is not your concern as long as I do not cause you harm strongly suggests that I am not harming you, therefore not doing anything wrong.What you do or don't do to others isn't the only thing that defines your character. "I'm not going to do it myself, but I'd be glad if it happened," is not a sign of a good character, even if that isn't anyone elses concern.
Not taking action to realize that wish is, though.Nah, I'd say that's a good thing.
Because justice makes things right. It rebalances what is out of balance. It makes whole what has been broken or reduced. It redresses wrongs and unfairness.

It does not deliver happiness. It does not make people feel good. It does not create friendship or warm thoughts. It just fixes what is broken. What we make of that, how it affects our lives, is up to us.McCain receiving alzheimers would definitely not fix what is broken, it would only serve to break more.
Prison is bad, but prison is a just punishment for those who commit crimes of sufficient severity. Having stuff taken away from you is bad, but having stuff taken away is a just penalty for those who take stuff from others unfairly. Having to use, live under and endure the system that they believe is good enough for others would be a just requirement for US politicians and policymakers. Whether they suffer or benefit would be entirely up to them and the system they see fit to implement. Thus, justice could bring them either suffering or happiness, but both would come from their own hands.That's not justice, that's revenge. Take the death penalty for instance: Some argue it's only fair to execute someone that's killed someone. But that's not justice, since it's not about fixing things. I'm glad I live in a country where someone doing wrong isn't considered justification for doing the same to them. Wishing that it be done to them may not be as bad as actually doing it, but it is bad.

21 minutes. My congratulations, I thought you would fail quicker than that.

Oops, I forgot. *puts Cosmopoles on ignore to avoid getting baited again*

If they genuinely believed that anyone could achieve anything if they worked hard enough, they wouldn't mind being born as a disenfranchised minority, since they've been doing their best to craft an America where hard work is rewarded (in their humble opinion). Only has relevance to that post.
I see. But do you honestly believe this is the case with these people? In your opinion, do their actions match up with such an attitude?

Stop doing something I never did in the first place? That will be tricky.You consider it wrong then? Why are we arguing?
When did I ever say anything about morality? All I have talked about is justice. There is no moral implication in justice. Reap what you sow, as Bottle put it. Is that really a moral argument?Yes, indeed it is. Anything that attempts to justify is somehow ethical or moral.
Also, when did I ever characterize my statements as anything other than my "honest and unrestrained opinion"?And why would it be impossible for your "honest and unrestrained opinion" to be immoral or unethical?
It doesn't make it bad either. Again, with you and your false dichotomies.Me not elaborating my point every time I make it isn't a false dichotomy.

Never have.
Really? Then why did you try to suggest that wishing bad on someone makes a person bad?

What you do or don't do to others isn't the only thing that defines your character. "I'm not going to do it myself, but I'd be glad if it happened," is not a sign of a good character, even if that isn't anyone elses concern.
But what I do or don't do is the only thing that is any of your business.

You can prattle on about how "oh, having a bad character is bad and all!" all you like. I have no need to care about your opinion of my thoughts.

Nah, I'd say that's a good thing.
I am aware that you would say that.

McCain receiving alzheimers would definitely not fix what is broken, it would only serve to break more.
That's not justice, that's revenge. Take the death penalty for instance: Some argue it's only fair to execute someone that's killed someone. But that's not justice, since it's not about fixing things. I'm glad I live in a country where someone doing wrong isn't considered justification for doing the same to them. Wishing that it be done to them may not be as bad as actually doing it, but it is bad.
You should do a bit more reading about what justice is before you start making blanket statements. You are wrong on several points.

However, I have to say that I am getting very close to putting you on ignore, too. I believe your obsession with how you feel about how other people think and talk has reached the point of official thread hijack. Do you have anything at all to say about the topic?

I see. But do you honestly believe this is the case with these people? In your opinion, do their actions match up with such an attitude?I can't see into their heads anymore than I can into yours, but I do believe that some are seriously convinced their wealth is a result of their hard work more than their priviledged position and that their policies favor those that work hard.

You consider it wrong then? Why are we arguing?
A) You are putting words in my mouth. Stop it.

B) I have no idea why we are arguing about something that is clearly not on topic. Hey, let's stop, eh?

Yes, indeed it is. Anything that attempts to justify is somehow ethical or moral.
Ethics =/= morality. They are different things.

And why would it be impossible for your "honest and unrestrained opinion" to be immoral or unethical?
That is not what I said. What I said was that I never made any other or further claim concerning them. This is the second time in this post you have tried to put words in my mouth. What's wrong, you can't counter the statements I actually make so you have to provide ones you can answer?

Me not elaborating my point every time I make it isn't a false dichotomy.
No, but if it was a fallacy the first time you made it, it's a fallacy all the other times you refer to it, too.

This is so off topic it's not even cute anymore. Please stop attacking me on this and attack me on the topic, instead.

I can't see into their heads anymore than I can into yours, but I do believe that some are seriously convinced their wealth is a result of their hard work more than their priviledged position and that their policies favor those that work hard.
But since you cannot see into their heads, what is it about them that makes you think they are convinced of that?

Really? Then why did you try to suggest that wishing bad on someone makes a person bad?I'm arguing that wishing bad upon someone makes a person bad, not that wishing ill on someone is the same as doing it to someone. I'm pretty sure I made that point very early on.
But what I do or don't do is the only thing that is any of your business.Whether someone's character is or isn't my business is largely irrelevant to whether them wishing harm on someone without wanting to see that through is ok or not.
You can prattle on about how "oh, having a bad character is bad and all!" all you like. I have no need to care about your opinion of my thoughts.Yeah, maybe I should clarify to avoid sounding too judgemental:

What I've been meaning to say is that "But I wouldn't do it if I had the chance" isn't really all that ethically sound and doesn't justify having cruel thoughts against others. Now while this doesn't necessarily make you a bad person, you would be a better person if you didn't engage in such thoughts or tried to avoid them.

"You" in this case interchangeable with "one" as opposed to "Muravyets."


I am aware that you would say that.


You should do a bit more reading about what justice is before you start making blanket statements. You are wrong on several points.

However, I have to say that I am getting very close to putting you on ignore, too. I believe your obsession with how you feel about how other people think and talk has reached the point of official thread hijack. Do you have anything at all to say about the topic?Not really. I found Heikoku's statement disgusting and got bogged down in a discussion defending my reasons for thinking so.

I found Heikoku's statement disgusting and got bogged down in a discussion defending my reasons for thinking so.

Oh, there's more where that came from. :D

Yeah, and I find that mentality appalling. I see variations of it in people that cheer on torture or use of nuclear weapons on the grounds that whoever's on the receiving end "deserves it." Even if the people are aware that they'd never do this even if given the opportunity, they're worse people for having entertained the fantasy.
Meh, guess we just differ in our opinions, then. I don't think anybody is a worse person for having feelings. Whether or not they are a worse person depends on how they act upon their feelings, IMO, and since I don't believe there has ever been a conscious human adult who HASN'T had such fantasies it more or less breaks even anyhow. :D

A) You are putting words in my mouth. Stop it.You've put words in my mouth by saying that I'm equating actions and thoughts when I started my argument by saying the exact opposite.
B) I have no idea why we are arguing about something that is clearly not on topic. Hey, let's stop, eh?Yes, let's.
Ethics =/= morality. They are different things.Yes, I should have picked my words more carefully. Ethical is what I meant.
That is not what I said. What I said was that I never made any other or further claim concerning them. This is the second time in this post you have tried to put words in my mouth. What's wrong, you can't counter the statements I actually make so you have to provide ones you can answer?Then what were you accusing me of doing in the first place?
No, but if it was a fallacy the first time you made it, it's a fallacy all the other times you refer to it, too.I pointed out here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13963022&postcount=70) why I felt it was wrong. The dichotomies weren't my primary argument. If you'd have asked me to elaborate instead of throwing a "fallacy" ad hominem, I would have.
This is so off topic it's not even cute anymore. Please stop attacking me on this and attack me on the topic, instead.I'm not doing this because I do or don't like you, nor am I "attacking" you any more or less than I would someone else in a debate.

Meh, guess we just differ in our opinions, then. I don't think anybody is a worse person for having feelings. Whether or not they are a worse person depends on how they act upon their feelings, IMO, and since I don't believe there has ever been a conscious human adult who HASN'T had such fantasies it more or less breaks even anyhow. :D

To be sure, my skills in literature and as a gamer do make my imagination that much more creative.

Personally, as disabled American, I wouldn't wish some debillitation on them. I doubt any of them are strong enough to handle it.

But since you cannot see into their heads, what is it about them that makes you think they are convinced of that?Nothing really. But then again, what compelling evidence do you have that states the opposite? I don't really ponder too much about it because in the end, whether their actions were genuinely evil or based on misguided fantasies has precious little impact on the outcome.

To be sure, my skills in literature and as a gamer do make my imagination that much more creative.
The thing is, this is a freaking 'net forum. People come here specifically to vent their feelings.

While I can understand why somebody might express concern when another person says, "I wish harm upon So-and-so," I also think it's a pretty silly hijack given the context.

I've yet to encounter a single human who hasn't had ill-wishing fantasies at one point or another. I don't see why admitting to them makes somebody a worse person.

Meh, guess we just differ in our opinions, then. I don't think anybody is a worse person for having feelings. Whether or not they are a worse person depends on how they act upon their feelings, IMO, and since I don't believe there has ever been a conscious human adult who HASN'T had such fantasies it more or less breaks even anyhow. :DYeah, basically. I just find someone avoiding even wishing ill onto someone a very admirable thing to do, and consequently, wishing someone ill gets downgraded to "less than preferable behavior" on my ethical ladder.

We are near the bottom of the industrialized world by any measure (lifespan, infant mortality, chronic disease rates, etc.).

Show me one objective study. Take infant mortality for instance, in many European countries they measure infant mortality only after the child is six months old. This heavily weighs the measure in their favor since most infant mortality happens inside six months.

And chronic disease rates have no bearing on healthcare. Lifestyle influences that far more than the healthcare we receive. I have the numbers, considering my profession, if you wish to debate on that level.

Show me one objective study. Take infant mortality for instance, in many European countries they measure infant mortality only after the child is six months old. This heavily weighs the measure in their favor since most infant mortality happens inside six months.

And chronic disease rates have no bearing on healthcare. Lifestyle influences that far more than the healthcare we receive. I have the numbers, considering my profession, if you wish to debate on that level.
If you have the numbers, post them, including sources. It saves a lot of time if you're upfront with such info from the beginning.

Never minding the fact that you're utterly wrong on the rest of the post, it's not a good idea to bait me. Reported.

I figure I will just put "Add 6,823 to the post-count" and a 2 next to my name. Really, are you that humorless?

But anyway, please show me where I am wrong. Or you can just say I am "uttly wrong" as though it was true. I can actually point to Obama's own proposals to prove my points.

If you have the numbers, post them, including sources. It saves a lot of time if you're upfront with such info from the beginning.

Which numbers do you want? What measures do you wish to see? Do you want a debunking of hte 45 million myth? Do you want a debunking of a specific report? How about the UN's? There are many areas and levels to this debate/argument.

Now those questions asked: would you change your mind if I provided them? I have provided extensive posts with sources and facts before only to be told I never provide evidence. Should I waste my time?

We have excellent heathcare that provides the world's best care to a majority of its people


What a hideously naive thing to say.

What a hideously naive thing to say.

And yet it is true. Go figure. I find it hideously naive that most people believe our healthcare is horrible. If government got out of the way our healthcare systems would be even better.

Just because nothing is perfect does not mean that everything is wrong. Our healthcare system could use some improvements but having the government interfere even more is not the answer.

And yet it is true. Go figure. I find it hideously naive that most people believe our healthcare is horrible. If government got out of the way our healthcare systems would be even better.


Firstly, if a significant minority is not receiving any health care at all, then that immediately disqualifies a healthcare system from being 'excellent' in my eyes. Secondly, the Government is already massively in control of the health care system in the US anyway.

Firstly, if a significant minority is not receiving any health care at all, then that immediately disqualifies a healthcare system from being 'excellent' in my eyes. Secondly, the Government is already massively in control of the health care system in the US anyway.

Your subjective and emotional view of the US healthcare system does not reflect the facts. A majority of people ARE covered and get access to the best healthcare in the world. Would you say the people who are dying on waiting lists in the UK and Canada have it better?

Secondly, you are correct that the government is already in control of major aspects of our healthcare system. Do you believe that MORE control is needed considering your views on our supposedly dismal system? I support the removal of government from healthcare, within reason, since it is their interference which causes many of our problems.

They wouldn't want to further alienate the Republican base.

The same Republican base that elected Mark Foley and Larry Craig?

who cares if gigantic health care bills bankrupts so many... at least the insurance companies and health care professionals are making a mint.

Take infant mortality for instance, in many European countries they measure infant mortality only after the child is six months old. This heavily weighs the measure in their favor since most infant mortality happens inside six months.


And chronic disease rates have no bearing on healthcare. Lifestyle influences that far more than the healthcare we receive. I have the numbers, considering my profession, if you wish to debate on that level.


Lets see em then.


I also notice you have yet to provide me with sources or reasoning for anything else I asked for.

Which numbers do you want? What measures do you wish to see? Do you want a debunking of hte 45 million myth? Do you want a debunking of a specific report? How about the UN's? There are many areas and levels to this debate/argument.

Now those questions asked: would you change your mind if I provided them? I have provided extensive posts with sources and facts before only to be told I never provide evidence. Should I waste my time?
How about you just post actual numbers to back up your claims?

Honestly, is it really that hard for you to figure out what information you need to provide in order for your arguments to carry weight?

Your subjective and emotional view of the US healthcare system does not reflect the facts.

Hilarious. I can't even count the number of meaningless value judgements present in the post I originally quoted.


A majority of people ARE covered and get access to the best healthcare in the world.

Irrelevant even if true, as I said, a significant minority with no healthcare means there is a serious problem with your system.


Would you say the people who are dying on waiting lists in the UK and Canada have it better?


I don't believe I was talking about our healthcare systems, incidentally I'm not foolishly parading my own healthcare system as amazing either, so I have nothing to defend.


Secondly, you are correct that the government is already in control of major aspects of our healthcare system. Do you believe that MORE control is needed considering your views on our supposedly dismal system? I support the removal of government from healthcare, within reason, since it is their interference which causes many of our problems.

Removing government from healthcare is pretty much impossible in every practical manner, regardless, you can stop government interfering as much as you want with the system whilst still subsidising each citizen for basic health care.

How about you just post actual numbers to back up your claims?

Honestly, is it really that hard for you to figure out what information you need to provide in order for your arguments to carry weight?

See Bottle, if he posted his sources and numbers, hed be shown that hes full of it, so its easier to just pretend he has them and hope nobody asks because he says he is an "expert".


Smiling Frog, Im still waiting for proof of your various claims about Obama, mostly about how his end goal is socialized medicine.

Show me one objective study. Take infant mortality for instance, in many European countries they measure infant mortality only after the child is six months old. This heavily weighs the measure in their favor since most infant mortality happens inside six months.

And chronic disease rates have no bearing on healthcare. Lifestyle influences that far more than the healthcare we receive. I have the numbers, considering my profession, if you wish to debate on that level.

An appeal to expertise only really makes sense if you have something to back up that expertise. Can you show the numbers behind the statement in your second paragraph?

Your subjective and emotional view of the US healthcare system does not reflect the facts.

Your view is every inch as subjective and emotional as his.

He chooses to say that if there are Americans who aren't covered then it's not a good enough system. You say that it can be a great system even if there are millions of Americans without coverage. Both are 100% SUBJECTIVE definitions.

Get off your high horse and start supporting your claims, please. Tossing around pointless and empty insults doesn't do anything for you.


Would you say the people who are dying on waiting lists in the UK and Canada have it better?

Are you suggesting nobody dies on waiting lists in the USA? Or are you saying that our only measure of the success of a health care system should be how many people die while on waiting lists?


Secondly, you are correct that the government is already in control of major aspects of our healthcare system. Do you believe that MORE control is needed considering your views on our supposedly dismal system?

Not wanting to answer for anybody else, here, but for myself: Hell fucking yes. I think right now the insurance companies are writing their own tickets and behaving in completely inappropriate and irresponsible ways. I think they are knowingly and intentionally setting up systems wherein people are flat-out denied the services they have paid for. I think we should not only get some better laws on the books, but we should get our government to actually ENFORCE the laws we do have.


I support the removal of government from healthcare, within reason, since it is their interference which causes many of our problems.
"Within reason" is such a cute little quibble. Basically, all your bluster about getting the government out of the way so that our FANTASTIC system can continue being fantastic is bunk, because you know as well as anybody that unregulated health care blows goats, and that every single modern nation other than the USA has long since caught on to this reality.

who cares if gigantic health care bills bankrupts so many... at least the insurance companies and health care professionals are making a mint.

An excellent example of the type of disinformation that exists out there. You do know that the profit margin for insurance companies is about 1-2% don't you?

An excellent example of the type of disinformation that exists out there. You do know that the profit margin for insurance companies is about 1-2% don't you?
1% out of a billions industry is a lot. If they took out more, they'd be a general uproar as seen every time a petrol company divulges it's profit.

I have no idea why people are trying to get an actual debate out of a Bushevik, or at least a troll trying to play the part of a Bushevik.

But here's a strip that's hilarious in its saddening accuracy:

http://archive.salon.com/comics/boll/2001/08/02/boll/story.gif

* Costs are UP: Insurance premiums rose over four times as fast as wages between 2000 and 2006. (Kaiser Family Foundation)

* Quality is DOWN: A Consumer Reports survey indicated that nationwide, 29 percent of adults with insurance had “coverage so meager they often postponed medical care because of costs.” (Consumerreports.org)

* Industry Profits are through the roof: Between 2003 and 2007, the profits of the nation’s largest insurers rose 170.2 percent, to $12.6 billion. (www.nwfco.org)

I have no idea why people are trying to get an actual debate out of a Bushevik, or at least a troll trying to play the part of a Bushevik.

But here's a strip that's hilarious in its saddening accuracy:

http://archive.salon.com/comics/boll/2001/08/02/boll/story.gif

haha - I know that truth first hand - My wifes insurance did everything they could to avoid paying for her cancer surgeries and treatments. She's a year cancer free and we are still paying for insurance as well as the health care bills.

What actually happens, is that you go to the ER, and then they send you bills. Then more bills. Then collection calls. Then threats. etc.

At what point does McCain's plan say the government kicks in as this 'payer of last resort'?

When the hospital is about to close because they haven't gotten paid. The government will provide them with some money. That pays your bill on that end, however, it only helps the hospital. The hospital's financial department will still sell your debt to collectors (for pennies on the dollar) and they will harass you until you give in or declare bankruptcy.

The good news is if you are poor enough, they are all bark, they won't sue you if they can't get anything, they'll SAY they are going to, but they won't. So all you really have to deal with at that point is being shouted down and insulted and threatened daily and also not being able to get a job.

It's really just trouble free. I mean you got treated right?

*guess who got off the phone with the hospital about 45 minutes ago.......and I actually DO have health insurance.

I'm arguing that wishing bad upon someone makes a person bad, not that wishing ill on someone is the same as doing it to someone. I'm pretty sure I made that point very early on.
Yeah, and I'm pretty sure I made it clear early on why I think that's nonsense.

Whether someone's character is or isn't my business is largely irrelevant to whether them wishing harm on someone without wanting to see that through is ok or not.
Yeah, it does, because if it doesn't affect you or anyone else in any negative way, then there's nothing not-okay about it.

Yeah, maybe I should clarify to avoid sounding too judgemental:

What I've been meaning to say is that "But I wouldn't do it if I had the chance" isn't really all that ethically sound and doesn't justify having cruel thoughts against others. Now while this doesn't necessarily make you a bad person, you would be a better person if you didn't engage in such thoughts or tried to avoid them.
Saying that doing A (which is the action you prefer) would make me a "better person" is judgmental.

"You" in this case interchangeable with "one" as opposed to "Muravyets."
Understood.

Not really. I found Heikoku's statement disgusting and got bogged down in a discussion defending my reasons for thinking so.
Oh, okay, then completely irrelevant to topic and never likely to find its way to the topic. So I can stop talking about it now. Thanks.

Nothing really.
Hardly surprising.

But then again, what compelling evidence do you have that states the opposite?
All I have to do is compare what they do to what they say.

I don't really ponder too much about it because in the end, whether their actions were genuinely evil or based on misguided fantasies has precious little impact on the outcome.
The lack of thought you put into this is apparent, including the part where you completely miss the point of asking about their motives.

It does not matter whether they believe what they believe because they are the spawn of evil spirits or because they are the unwitting dupes of greedy campaign donors.

What matters is what the actual, real purpose of their policies and programs is. Because when you identify the real purpose, you will see what their real goals are, and that will tell you what you can expect from these people in current and future dealings with them. Obviously.

The thing is, this is a freaking 'net forum. People come here specifically to vent their feelings.

While I can understand why somebody might express concern when another person says, "I wish harm upon So-and-so," I also think it's a pretty silly hijack given the context.

I've yet to encounter a single human who hasn't had ill-wishing fantasies at one point or another. I don't see why admitting to them makes somebody a worse person.
Apparently, honesty is no longer the best policy.

Explains a lot, doesn't it?

Which numbers do you want? What measures do you wish to see? Do you want a debunking of hte 45 million myth? Do you want a debunking of a specific report? How about the UN's? There are many areas and levels to this debate/argument.

Now those questions asked: would you change your mind if I provided them? I have provided extensive posts with sources and facts before only to be told I never provide evidence. Should I waste my time?
i dont know about anyone else but i would love you to put up a bunch of links that i can read through that might give me a more balanced view of what is going on in US health care as compared to what happens in other countries.

<snip>

Not wanting to answer for anybody else, here, but for myself: Hell fucking yes. I think right now the insurance companies are writing their own tickets and behaving in completely inappropriate and irresponsible ways. I think they are knowingly and intentionally setting up systems wherein people are flat-out denied the services they have paid for. I think we should not only get some better laws on the books, but we should get our government to actually ENFORCE the laws we do have.


"Within reason" is such a cute little quibble. Basically, all your bluster about getting the government out of the way so that our FANTASTIC system can continue being fantastic is bunk, because you know as well as anybody that unregulated health care blows goats, and that every single modern nation other than the USA has long since caught on to this reality.
Not wanting to feed the SF troll or anything, but I would like to second the above-quoted sentiments. I agree entirely.

i dont know about anyone else but i would love you to put up a bunch of links that i can read through that might give me a more balanced view of what is going on in US health care as compared to what happens in other countries.
And now I'm laughing my ass off. Honestly, I think we're all more likely to get $1,000 each in the mail from SF than any proof or support for his ridiculous assertions.

And now I'm laughing my ass off. Honestly, I think we're all more likely to get $1,000 each in the mail from SF than any proof or support for his ridiculous assertions.

How likely ARE we to get $ 1,000 in the mail from Street Fighters? o_O

And now I'm laughing my ass off. Honestly, I think we're all more likely to get $1,000 each in the mail from SF than any proof or support for his ridiculous assertions.

He certainly seems eager to avoid providing any sort of backing for his claims.

Such is the way of things, I suppose.

He certainly seems eager to avoid providing any sort of backing for his claims.

Such is the way of things, I suppose.

I thought we were all just supposed to bask in the wisdom of TSF's unsupported assertions.

And now I'm laughing my ass off. Honestly, I think we're all more likely to get $1,000 each in the mail from SF than any proof or support for his ridiculous assertions.
now dont be that way. either he has the links or he doesnt. if he has them he can post them and ill be more than happy to look at them. if he is talking out his ass, i guess we will never have to wonder about that again.

Show me one objective study...

i dont know about anyone else but i would love you to put up a bunch of links that i can read through that might give me a more balanced view of what is going on in US health care as compared to what happens in other countries.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=482678

Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries. This report—an update to two earlier editions—includes data from surveys of patients, as well as information from primary care physicians about their medical practices and views of their countries' health systems. Compared with five other nations—Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom—the U.S. health care system ranks last or next-to-last on five dimensions of a high performance health system: quality, access, efficiency, equity, and healthy lives.

http://www.pnrec.org/2001papers/DaigneaultLajoie.pdf

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/healthcare/healthcare_profiles.html

http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/1862/International-Comparisons-Health-Care-OVERVIEWS-SELECTED-HEALTH-CARE-SYSTEMS.html

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=482678



http://www.pnrec.org/2001papers/DaigneaultLajoie.pdf

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/healthcare/healthcare_profiles.html

http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/1862/International-Comparisons-Health-Care-OVERVIEWS-SELECTED-HEALTH-CARE-SYSTEMS.html

Thanks much.

To extend the list-o-links, NPR's interview show Fresh Air had a really good piece (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93975730) on the Obama and McCain health plans. The host talked to Dr. Jonathan Oberlander, a poli-sci/public-health guy who wrote a comparison of the plans for the NEJM. (The article's here (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/8/781) if you don't want to listen to the half-hour interview.)

How likely ARE we to get $ 1,000 in the mail from Street Fighters? o_O

Not bloody likely. :D

To extend the list-o-links, NPR's interview show Fresh Air had a really good piece (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93975730) on the Obama and McCain health plans. The host talked to Dr. Jonathan Oberlander, a poli-sci/public-health guy who wrote a comparison of the plans for the NEJM. (The article's here (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/8/781) if you don't want to listen to the half-hour interview.)
yaya thats what i was listening to to find out about mccain's proposals. i didnt get to hear what he said about obama's proposals but the mccain part was very enlightening.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=482678



http://www.pnrec.org/2001papers/DaigneaultLajoie.pdf

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/healthcare/healthcare_profiles.html

http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/1862/International-Comparisons-Health-Care-OVERVIEWS-SELECTED-HEALTH-CARE-SYSTEMS.html

To extend the list-o-links, NPR's interview show Fresh Air had a really good piece (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93975730) on the Obama and McCain health plans. The host talked to Dr. Jonathan Oberlander, a poli-sci/public-health guy who wrote a comparison of the plans for the NEJM. (The article's here (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/8/781) if you don't want to listen to the half-hour interview.)
Thank you kindly. :)

Congratulations to those of you who have managed to wrench this thread back on topic despite others' dedicated baiting. Those involved will be hearing from me later in the day, when I get back from real life, if another mod hasn't walloped you by then.

Y'know, the Democrats should grab this statement and play it for all it's worth. Let's dissect Johnny on health care!
Yeah, be a good counter since the Republicans are playing the "Baby Killer" card again.

Yeah, be a good counter since the Republicans are playing the "Baby Killer" card again.

Especially because the issues are interconnected...

Indeed, McCain's stated healthcare plan, for those who bothered to research his position, is far better for our quality of healthcare than Obama's. Obama is setting up healthcare to fail so he can implement what he really wants: socialized medicine.

Oh NOEZ! Not socialized medicine! Next thing you know he'll be eating our babies!

No, actually, it is. Doing harm is bad. Having the harm you're doing pointed out to you, and then continuing to do it and doing more of it, makes you a bad person.

And what does wishing evil upon someone have to do with that? Do you believe in magic? Do you think that if I put a curse on Goodman, McCain and Romney, they'll actually suffer from it?

Thought is not equal to deed. Therefore the person who merely wishes evil upon their enemy is not made a bad person by their thoughts/feelings, whereas the person who actually does evil to people who are not even their enemies is made a bad person by their actions.

And anyway, it is my position that I am not wishing evil upon them. I am wishing justice upon them.

I can understand why they would think justice visited upon them would be an evil. After all, look at the systems they are devising. Who would want to be thrown into them?

So, since I am merely wishing that they become dependent on their own systems, and you call that wishing evil upon them, then obviously, you must agree with me that their systems are bad. Right?

I understand what you are saying, but I gotta say that I think it's a rather different situation.

I think it's rather different for a rape victim to fantasize about getting back at her rapist by violating him, than it is for somebody to simply fantasize about raping others.
You're both missing the point, though. I can understand your point of view. And certainly it's more understandable in a case like that which you proposed, Bottle.

But that does not make it right.

Is that, ultimately, a viewpoint issue? Perhaps. But I find what you two are wishing on McCain appalling. I wouldn't wish that on anyone, least of all the people who are causing that sort of situation in the first place. That's not justice. That's a case of revenge, or at least morally equivalent, which in my eyes is most definitely wrong.

But that's my point of view, again. I'll say this: I most definitely respect your point of view and I understand and even somewhat agree with your reasoning. I just don't think it's right.

<snip>Don't you Brazilians sleep all day?
<snip>You are a disturbed individual ... <snip> Your stupidity is nothing to wish death upon you over.

Amazing the stupidity of your statements don't choke you as you write them.

Warned for flaming. I acknowledge that your comment about Brazilians was probably a joking response to Heikoku's "I AM TIRED", but please remember that national stereotypes sometimes offend.

<snip> ... if McCain has to die, go to hell and relive every horrid experience he ever had in Nam while being raped in the ass with a chainsaw turned on for eternity or until he likes it, whichever comes first, so that criminal party gets the hell out of the White House, I WISH IT!

Remember our discussion in Moderation about a kick in the ankle, Heikoku? Well, I just raised the bar, as it were. You now have an official warning.

Why am I acting on your remarks (wishing ill on a politician) when I'm not on Murayvets' (wishing ill on a politician)?

Murayvets' were an illustration of an argument. Yours are the sort of rodomontade that makes the forums unapproachable for some posters and inflames others -- ie, trolling.

You have incurred a penalty not on any ethical or moral ground, but because such behaviour interferes with the operation of the forums.

Remember our discussion in Moderation about a kick in the ankle, Heikoku? Well, I just raised the bar, as it were. You now have an official warning.

Why am I acting on your remarks (wishing ill on a politician) when I'm not on Murayvets' (wishing ill on a politician)?

Murayvets' were an illustration of an argument. Yours are the sort of rodomontade that makes the forums unapproachable for some posters and inflames others -- ie, trolling.

You have incurred a penalty not on any ethical or moral ground, but because such behaviour interferes with the operation of the forums.

Okay.

"Rodomontade"? o_O

*Looks it up*

Well, what do you know, I learned a new word in English AND in Portuguese. Thanks. :)