Thanks Obama

[jynxxxedangel]

I've come to one conclusion, after having read many years' worth of political discussions on this forum; conservative 'frieks' are oddballs....and I am one of them. This is why I rarely get into these debates, because my democratic friends really don't like my rather-conservative points of view....and it causes great resentment. Therefore, I won't be saying what I really have to say, here. Besides, the ladies' opinions tend to get ignored withing the melee of flying testosterone! LOL! Am I the only female on the board who's noticed this?

I will say this much, though; I can't think of but a handful of politicians, who really have working-class Americans' best interests at heart.

[Jinx]

I will say this much, though; I can't think of but a handful of politicians, who really have working-class Americans' best interests at heart.

Mark Twain comes to mind when I read that. "We have far too many politicians and not enough Statesmen."

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

The thing is... Hillary won the primary. She is the one that should have gone on to the general election... I would have voted for Hillary over McCain. But no, The elites in the Democratic party had picked Obama... in 2004 to be the next President... and so they used thier "super delagates" to override who the people voted for. I am still shocked she took a job in his cabinet.

Just wanted to point out.. the Tea party's roots start in 2008 when Bush signed the TARP bill. many conservatives were against that bailout... and the one later signed by Obama.

where was your activism when the Bush Buddies stole the election?

Also, I will agree I did favor Hillary over Obama, but just slightly. However, it would have still been a pick my poision situation as I don't think she is good enough to be president either.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

According to Gaf logic, when choosy moms choose Jif they also choose to silence gay people.

So do the 9 out of 10 dentists that prefer Crest.

I don't like to weigh in on political topics on this board often because of the spin doctors and the strong feelings people have for their beliefs. I must pipe up to say this though-

Gaf, your spinning and propaganda on here has reached an all time low. The spinning and hypocrisy that I've seen here astonishes me. Same with the backpedaling.

I have seen better conduct from Faux News.

Oh....and Gaf...

Practice what you preach sir. You still are avoiding this...

Are you fucking kidding? I NEVER SAID OUR SYSTEM WAS BETTER. NOT ONCE. Why would I expalin why I think our system is better than Canada's if I didn't actully say I beleive that our system is better?

As for the gay thing, let me try to explain in smaller words.

Siren discounted 11% of the population. She did so by saying that the provinces could handle thier needs or not. For what ever her reasons, addressing thier concerns is not worthy of the Central government. When Gay marrige comes up. people say they the Central Government needs to make Gay marrige legal so thier rights are not trampled on. If someone says they think that it is something that the states should provide they are labled a homophobe or worse. They are accused of not careing for the Rights of the Gays. I want to know why that 10% is treated one way and the 11% the exact oppisite.

If you somehow translate that to me calling Siren a gay basher or a homophobe... well.. you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Gaf The Horse With Tears

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

Are you fucking kidding? I NEVER SAID OUR SYSTEM WAS BETTER. NOT ONCE. Why would I expalin why I think our system is better than Canada's if I didn't actully say I beleive that our system is better?

Woah, before you blow your lid man, let me explain to you WHY most people here might feel you are actually doing this..

Though you haven't DIRECTLY said our system is better, you keep pointing out the problems with other systems, and other ideas for improvement. You also, never, until a recent post, said that Canada's health care is better, but you also said Obama is better than Jesus too.. so as much as I laughed at that sarcasm, I can't count that post because of the sarcasm.

It's more of a matter of not what you defend, but what you are on the offensive about. It's rather tunnel visioned. We are looking for an improvement to our health care, so any system that's doing better than ours can be looked at as an example. You would drive on the counter to point out nothing but the problems with these other health care systems. Wich really.. and i mean REALLY, drives the impression to alot of us that, since you only have negative things to say about any other ideas or systems in other countries, that you're not wanting them because you think it's so much worse. I would go on quoting certain things you've said but I really can't be arsed at the moment since I'm not trying to argue you, rather explain why some people would get this certain impression off you.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Woah, before you blow your lid man, let me explain to you WHY most people here might feel you are actually doing this..

Though you haven't DIRECTLY said our system is better, you keep pointing out the problems with other systems, and other ideas for improvement. You also, never, until a recent post, said that Canada's health care is better, but you also said Obama is better than Jesus too.. so as much as I laughed at that sarcasm, I can't count that post because of the sarcasm.

It's more of a matter of not what you defend, but what you are on the offensive about. It's rather tunnel visioned. We are looking for an improvement to our health care, so any system that's doing better than ours can be looked at as an example. You would drive on the counter to point out nothing but the problems with these other health care systems. Wich really.. and i mean REALLY, drives the impression to alot of us that, since you only have negative things to say about any other ideas or systems in other countries, that you're not wanting them because you think it's so much worse. I would go on quoting certain things you've said but I really can't be arsed at the moment since I'm not trying to argue you, rather explain why some people would get this certain impression off you.

It's because people want to adopt the systems that we see failing.. right now. Look at the riots. Look at the countries going into default. Not one of you will address these things. Where is the money going to come from to cover the costs? The UE is on the brink of collapse. Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Portugal.... all going under... All for the same reason... Debt due to entitlements they cant pay for. Canada's debt problem is worse than the US's. England and France are not much better off... Germany and France are talking about pulling out of the Euro. All due to Debt caused by entitlements.

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

It's because people want to adopt the systems that we see failing.. right now. Look at the riots. Look at the countries going into default. Not one of you will address these things. Where is the money going to come from to cover the costs? The UE is on the brink of collapse. Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Portugal.... all going under... All for the same reason... Debt due to entitlements they cant pay for. Canada's debt problem is worse than the US's. England and France are not much better off... Germany and France are talking about pulling out of the Euro. All due to Debt caused by entitlements.

That can simply, rounded up in a nutshell, be explained by all countries, who once were soveriegn of their own nations, including our own system of currency, letting their financhial independence (like our federal reserve system) go away in place of a system the investors conjured up. Then comes inflation, dept, made up money, allowing money that doesn't exist to be used, a total loss of balance and control.. and oh, the only people that aren't hurt by this? The investors and credit unions. I read several articals on the current system and how fucked up it is but I think that's an entirely different can of worms that, if disussion is continued on this, must go to another thread (which i think exists already) as to not threadjack this thread.

EDIT-this color is indicated on what I edited in. Curse my bad habbit of proof reading after posting

Edited December 18, 2010 by Epic_Fail_Guy

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

Oh and as for the money to cover these costs? We COULD have had it.. had people like you joined people like us in protesting the terrible mistakes the Bush administration has made, which has got this ginormously huge ball of dept rolling in the first place.

Again, I ask, where was your great concern when Bush stole his 2nd election?

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Oh and as for the money to cover these costs? We COULD have had it.. had people like you joined people like us in protesting the terrible mistakes the Bush administration has made, which has got this ginormously huge ball of dept rolling in the first place.

Again, I ask, where was your great concern when Bush stole his 2nd election?

I dont think Bush stole his second election... Kerry lost because Kerry sucks. Also, that does not expalin why Europe is falling apart.

BTW, I tried to send you a direct mail but you have me blocked.

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

I dont think Bush stole his second election... Kerry lost because Kerry sucks. Also, that does not expalin why Europe is falling apart.

BTW, I tried to send you a direct mail but you have me blocked.

Oh yeah, i'm currently trying to figure out how to unblock you. I had you blocked because of a few months ago, I was convinced you were trolling.

I had said why europe is falling appart is a can of worms that needs to be directed to another thread because of the currency bullshit I had mentioned.

Also, The Bush election was stolen, had you forgotten about voter's rights being taken away in florida? and what about the reports of all the spoofed ballots from overseas? Like deployed troops?

On a personal note, I would be fucking irate if I found out my vote was changed, or even doubled, if i was deployed during the time of elections.

However.. you got me on a topic, that again, deserves it's own thread as to not threadjack, and also, I'm sure in this situation, if we dug a bit, we could find plenty of threads about this specific topic at hand.

Rather, email would probably be better once I figure out how to unblock you.. I've never been a big fan of necroposting unless it's meant as a Joke.

[StormKnight (1)]

Just to throw some references out there for discussion of health care in the US.

PDF of US satisfaction/ dissatisfaction rate of the health care system for 2010. All quality improvement programs consider "Fair" and "Poor" rating percentiles as dissatisfaction and actionable.

Please note the line at the bottom of this .PDF. "EBRI is a nonpartisan research institute based in Washington, DC, that focuses on health, savings, retirement, and economic security issues. EBRI does not lobby and does not take policy positions."

Employee Benefits Research Institute's (survey source,) home page.

Linke to total cost of healthcare in the US.

And for disclosure on the physician side, since one is putting the information out there:

Link to total number of active physicians in the US. Please note, though the site is the American Association of Family Physicians, the 100,000 is *all* active, practicing physicians.

Physician pay by salary. The way the matching process goes for matching medical school graduates with careers, at most 2% will ever get near the specialties that generate the high end incomes due to academic requirements. Most liberal average I have heard about physician pay (most use 1099 (myself included,) if private practice or contracted,) is $200,000 pre tax. Myself at my current level (for full disclosure,) is less than half of that at most (depending on patient load,) with a school debt burden of around half of the average medical school graduate, depending on survey.

Edited December 18, 2010 by StormKnight

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Just to throw some references out there for discussion of health care in the US.

PDF of US satisfaction/ dissatisfaction rate of the health care system for 2010. All quality improvement programs consider "Fair" and "Poor" rating percentiles as dissatisfaction and actionable.

Please note the line at the bottom of this .PDF. "EBRI is a nonpartisan research institute based in Washington, DC, that focuses on health, savings, retirement, and economic security issues. EBRI does not lobby and does not take policy positions."

Employee Benefits Research Institute's (survey source,) home page.

Linke to total cost of healthcare in the US.

And for disclosure on the physician side, since one is putting the information out there:

Link to total number of active physicians in the US. Please note, though the site is the American Association of Family Physicians, the 100,000 is *all* active, practicing physicians.

Physician pay by salary. The way the matching process goes for matching medical school graduates with careers, at most 2% will ever get near the specialties that generate the high end incomes due to academic requirements. Most liberal average I have heard about physician pay (most use 1099 (myself included,) if private practice or contracted,) is $200,000 pre tax. Myself at my current level (for full disclosure,) is less than half of that at most (depending on patient load,) with a school debt burden of around half of the average medical school graduate, depending on survey.

So, If I read correctly... out of pocket health costs are going up at a higher rate due to the Healthcare reform? and over all costs? and Doctors are going to get paid less for giving care?

and the costs of Medical Malpractice insurance? Where does that stand?

[torn asunder]

Siren discounted 11% of the population. She did so by saying that the provinces could handle thier needs or not. For what ever her reasons, addressing thier concerns is not worthy of the Central government. When Gay marrige comes up. people say they the Central Government needs to make Gay marrige legal so thier rights are not trampled on. If someone says they think that it is something that the states should provide they are labled a homophobe or worse. They are accused of not careing for the Rights of the Gays. I want to know why that 10% is treated one way and the 11% the exact oppisite.

just a thought - it's only discrimination if the 10% is a minority.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

just a thought - it's only discrimination if the 10% is a minority.

"In sociology, discrimination is the prejudicial treatment of an individual based solely on their membership in a certain group or category. Discrimination is the actual behavior towards members of another group. It involves excluding or restricting members of one group from opportunities that are available to other groups.^[1] The United Nations explains: "Discriminatory behaviors take many forms, but they all involve some form of exclusion or rejection."^[2] Discriminatory laws such as redlining have existed in many countries. In some countries, controversial attempts such as racial quotas have been used to redress negative effects of discrimination."

"dis·crim·i·na·tion 

 /dɪˌskrɪməˈneɪʃən/ [dih-skrim-uh-ney-shuhn] –noun 1. an act or instance of discriminating. 2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination. 3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination. 4. Archaic . something that serves to differentiate"

I beg to differ and so does every definition I can find.

[torn asunder]

it was meant more as sarcasm; more like "that's how it works in society now, unfortunately". sorry i wasn't clear enough...

although i will say that each example given in those definitions cite race and religion. i don't see how "people who disagree with health care" is really a "class" against which people can discriminate.

the more i think about it, i think i'm right in this case. "dismissing" 11% of people who disagree is not discrimination. to make a more obvious point, what if 100% of the people polled were black? or white? or christian or jewish? if they were all the same, then "dismissing" 11% wouldn't even be an issue, would it?

(unless maybe i'm misunderstanding something!?)

Edited December 18, 2010 by torn asunder

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

"certain group or category"

"a person or thing based on the group, class, or category"

[torn asunder]

"certain group or category"

"a person or thing based on the group, class, or category"

so you're saying that "anyone who disagrees with other people" is a category? i'm sorry, but that's assinine.

[StormKnight (1)]

Link to malpractice by state year to year.

This covers the top 3: Internal Medicine (which is about on par with the other primary care specialties (family practice and pediatrics,)) General Surgery, and OB/GYN. These rates are taken out of the post-tax income, so it is a sizable chunk of net income. Throw in the average student debt load and payments, and a lot gets eaten up.

OB/GYN have historically had the worse percentages of malpractice per income...upwards of 70% of net income. If in a group (like I am,) or a hospital, the rates can be grouped to reduce the cost.

Lawsuits, however big or small, won or lost, tend to be an automatic raise in rates. As far as I have been able to read, there is no discount for not being sued in a given time period (like car insurance good driver rates.)

If I remember correctly, none of the actual "big ticket" reforms have hit the public yet. Per the report itself, copied from the text:

"The decline may be due to passage of health reform, the continuing weak economy, or both."

I was not able to find definitive answers to whether it is the reforms passage or the economy and cut backs in level of coverage that have been increasing out of pocket expenses (which the satisfaction rate survey didn't cover from my read on it BTW.) To assume one without considering the other without hard facts that one wins over the other is speculative at best, and spin at worst.

Only information I found on EBRI about out of pocket expenses was regarding depending on plan here, which is based on data from and up to 2009, PRIOR to the enactment of reforms.

I thought most of the recent hikes in out of pocket expenses were a combination of the annual hike in insurance rates and the fear of the reforms. If someone can provide information to the contrary, post links or hard references here.

Edited December 18, 2010 by StormKnight

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

so you're saying that "anyone who disagrees with other people" is a category? i'm sorry, but that's assinine.

Sorry, but thats exactly the definition of Category. Any group that has something in common is a category. Hence the original group being shown in the poll in question. If they were not a category they would not have been listed with a % next to them.

"cat·e·go·ry

noun \ˈka-tə-ˌgȯr-ē\plural cat·e·go·ries

Definition of CATEGORY

1: any of several fundamental and distinct classes to which entities or concepts belong 2: a division within a system of classification"

[torn asunder]

Sorry, but thats exactly the definition of Category. Any group that has something in common is a category. Hence the original group being shown in the poll in question. If they were not a category they would not have been listed with a % next to them.

"cat·e·go·ry

noun \ˈka-tə-ˌgȯr-ē\plural cat·e·go·ries

Definition of CATEGORY

1: any of several fundamental and distinct classes to which entities or concepts belong 2: a division within a system of classification"

so by your logic, any time i dismiss anyone who's opinion i disagree with, i'm discriminating against them? that's just a ridiculous concept. yes, i understand that semantically, that may be true on a technical level, but we live in a world of practicality, and what you're apparently trying to say is the most overkilled "PC" stance i think i've ever seen. you're just trying to get a win here, rather than being practical, and imo, making yourself look foolish in the process.

i gotta run...

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

so by your logic, any time i dismiss anyone who's opinion i disagree with, i'm discriminating against them? that's just a ridiculous concept. yes, i understand that semantically, that may be true on a technical level, but we live in a world of practicality, and what you're apparently trying to say is the most overkilled "PC" stance i think i've ever seen. you're just trying to get a win here, rather than being practical, and imo, making yourself look foolish in the process.

i gotta run...

11% is not one or anyone. It's 11%. It's a group. A group of people. Anytime you dismiss a group of people, you are discriminating.

Exactly how large does a group have to be before they count in your views?

I'm not being foolish, thanks for the insult. I am being truthful and straight forward. You are advocating discrimination against a GROUP of people who do not share your political views. A little over 1Tenth of the population.

I can think of a list of causes that Liberals advocate for that encompass small percentages of the population. Gay rights being one that comes easyest to mind. A good portion of them are based on political idieas. Why is it disrimination to discount/right off/ignore thier voices but not simular groups with conservatives views?

Civil Rights do not end when you cross over into conservative thoughts.

,

[Slogo]

11% is a group of people but nobody is denying them their right to speak out. They are allowed to have their opinion but we should not be slaves to the opinion of 3.2 million people out of 34 million. If they want to have their suggestions it's perfectly acceptable for them to promote it. Nobody's saying they can't.

And the reference to gay rights isn't the best way to compare it. They are actually asking for the FREEDOM to do something. Not that everybody adopt their opinion (Gay people aren't forcing anyone else to be gay whereas the health care issue would affect all of our northern neighbor). Besides, that 11% of people that are gay aren't alone in thinking they should be allowed to get married.

[phee]

11% is not one or anyone. It's 11%. It's a group. A group of people. Anytime you dismiss a group of people, you are discriminating.

I still fail to see a dismissal because they are a minority.... I only see stating a fact that they are a minority.

[phee]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/barack-obama-either-doing-his-best-in-one-of-the-m,18635/

LOL

[Scar My Machine]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/barack-obama-either-doing-his-best-in-one-of-the-m,18635/

LOL

It was funny.