First there was the Death Star menacing humanity. Now, there is “the Death Panel.” Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called President Barack Obama’s health plan “downright evil” on her Facebook page and warned American of Obama’s “death panel” that will hold the power of life or death over average Americans. Indeed, the Obama Death Panel appears to have their sights on little Trig. Presumably, the chair will be Palpatine (aka Darth Sidious), the Dark Lord of the Sith.
Palin states in her first statement after quitting her job as governor that “The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care . . .Such a system is downright evil.”
The following footage from one of the patient reviews of the Death Panel has been located:
The real news here is the disclosure that Palin’s page has 700,000 readers, making it the most popular comics page in the world.
For the full story, click here.
Reiteratively, Mike Spindell is a fine man. When we had our first major disagreement, I interjected my admiration for him to ensure that people knew that, although I strongly disagreed with him on an LE issue involving facts—not opinion—he is my personal favorite within this blawg. To be certain, just because I have an LE background does not necessarily mean that I was ‘right’ in that instance. Mike and I respected each other enough to supplant our different opinions and discuss other important issues.
For all the people who have been married or are married with children, know that some of the most intense arguments can occur with those you care the most for and who you helped bring into this world and nurtured. Therefore, we are bound and determined to have illogical arguments within this blawg, although I would prefer to see Professor Turley exert more control with *after* post moderation, of which he has done some of when he was not in the ‘Obama Lookin’ Forward’ mode. Additionally, we all have bad days, but there are several regulars who are habitual ‘bad day’ instigators.
The debate here is important and we must not let continuous bickering detract from the message that we are all strong supporters of the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights et al., and the rule of law. The ‘Trinity of our Republic’—as I term the three pillars of our representative democratic Republic—represents the antithesis of the Holy Trinity and nary the twain shall meet.
Mike,
I did not construe your comments as taking sides. My response was clear. If you don’t see the parallel between taking a trash talking troll to task and taking a trash talking regular to task, I’m not sure I can force you to nor would I want to.
I also point out that both situations are the reciprocal of the Golden Rule. It’s not about turn the other cheek. It’s about equity – response to inappropriate actions be they bigotry or ad hominem nonsense attacks – and following the very minimal guidelines the Prof puts on this space. Nothing more from my perspective.
You should also consider the topic of this thread and any possible motives for being a shit disturber here when looking at the situation. In fact, I’m surprised neither you nor AY have mentioned that fact that’s been glaring since the first venomous word. A doctor with ties to the insurance industry would have nothing to gain, would they?
I’m not asking you to take sides.
I’m simply asking you to think about what I’ve said.
Mike Spindell and others:
I don’t mind at all if you call me names. For the little comment about government and monopolies there was quite a honking of all the geese.
And actually I don’t see any decent rejoinder other than it is a myth or it is a fairy tail or people are mean and cruel or I am stupid or a racist, or I am a retard and have no morals or I am a dirty a** licker, etc, etc.
You only have opinions as well, every “fact” that you throw out there I have an opposing “fact” from one of my “experts” to refute your “fact”.
The “facts” in reality tell me my “facts” are better than your “facts”. Just look around, the federal government screws up about everything they touch and that is my argument pure and simple. That you choose to evade that fact is your problem.
We have regulations and they don’t work to well from what I can see. That mortgage fiasco is a case in point and so is Bernie Madoff’s scheme, regulators ignored complaints for years. This type of stuff goes on and on and your solution-lets have more of what doesn’t work.
And unless you have a doctorate in a subject our level of education is similar, although coming from the hard sciences I am willing to bet mine was quite a bit harder. Call me a math/science snob if you wish but we used to take econ, poli-sci and geography and philosophy to boost our grade point as they were guaranteed A’s for us.
In my business I have to be moral and deal with reality on a daily basis, I cannot manipulate nature to fit my wants, needs and desires. I do not have that luxury as nature is an iron fisted mistress and you ignore her at your own and others peril.
You however ignore reality on a daily basis as evidenced by most of your posts.
Your assertions are laughable and based on your stereotypes of what people on the right are like based on the bs you received in your liberal arts courses (in fact most of the liberal arts classes I took had professors that actually were rather dimwitted). To them and you I am some hayseed bible thumper from Bumpass, Arkansas with a barefoot wife and stupid children sporting mullets and live in a trailer park.
Gyges:
did it ever occur to you that I wanted to know what your actual opinion was on a subject and not what someone else’s “facts”? I deal in facts all day long and was hoping for some theoretical what if, all I found was ad hominem attacks and factoids presented as analysis.
AY,
If you noticed in my original post I specifically said I wasn’t into getting into further debate on this and that was mainly because I realize this is personal and I like you all. Now you’ve come back with
three posts addressing me and Buddha one supporting you. You forced my response and I gave it, but in all fairness I had to reference the fact that Patty C because of:
“Mike
I can’t disagree with the gist of what you wrote. And you need not respond. I understand and I regret that you are, likewise, upset about the current state of the turlee blawg as am I and have been for many months.”
Her not trying to pull me into the middle of this brouhaha. I also feel close to Patty C, not because she’s an old “Turlee,” but because of the “Jill” issue. On two separate issues and occasions, Jill accused me of attacking her, when all I was doing was refuting her points w/o ad hominem attacks. As I remember it, Buddha was the one who immediately came to my defense the second time in the sense of saying I didn’t attack her, you might have also. Whether Patty C did or not is irrelevent because then she would have been accused of settling old scores. In this second instance some people that I like, FFLEO/Mespo, came down on the other side. I made my responses and then left it at that.
I find myself in the position of not being able to disagree with Jill, ever on this blog, because she has attained “untouchable” status. I simply stay away from her and her comments. Patty C is also in the same position. Patty C and I still both support the President, so there is an affinity there. Yet I also have an affinity for you two and we share different interests.
Now since you’ve drawn me back into this let me give you my opinion.
All three of you have behaved immaturely in your debate, because your responses were far below your ability to think and write. What makes that so tedious is that at least if you were insulting each other on a higher plane, we could enjoy the interplay of wit. The other thing is that sometime one has to know where to make one’s final point and withdraw. This three way seems like arguments I’ve had with my wife, where each of us keeps wanting to have the last word and so continue the argument beyond necessity. After three decades I think we’ve both learned that sometimes you make your final point and cool it.
Now since you drew me into this regarding my continued responses to Bdaman and IS. I thought my post at 9:40pm yesterday made that clear.
Bigotry can never be ignored so I will hound Bdaman on it. That is my way. I’ve lost close friends because of their bigoted attitude towards others and their loss pains me, but to leave bigotry unanswered is to empower it. With IS I’ve withdrawn somewhat as others like Slart and Mike A have more than ably taken up the cause. In that instance, yes this has been a long thread but an important one. Part of what has so screwed up our society is the mythology of the “free market” and that private industry always does it better. The Health Care issue is the most important issue in this country today, bar none, because within its’ solution can lie the salvation of our country. Therefore it is important to take pains to debunk the opponents, who base their opposition on falsehoods and crazy conceptions of government.
Mike S,
This seems to be one of the longest threads on the blawg. How many can be attributed to Bdaman and you? Has it got personal beyond the thread? Have you responded adequately? I am not making judgment. One of the beauties of reading it on the cell is if it a birther issue I see who posted. But mostly I delete. Now if someone blasted the hell out of me there and I would probably not see it because it would be deleted. If you or Vince post I usually read it until I am nauseated by the issue.
What I am asking, if you could look back after your request not only did she not do as she was asked by you but responded to Buddhas in these words “Bite Me” now how conducive is that to getting along? Just a question?
Mike Spindell 1, August 21, 2009 at 10:14 am
Buddha & AY,
Re-read what I wrote again, I think reading it on your phones you may have missed some nuance, which Patty C to her credit picked up. I wasn’t attacking any of you, taking sides as to who was right or wrong, or even telling any of you to shut up. Just for the sake of the rest of us, asking one and all to cool it a bit.
****************************
Oh believe me I have reread it over and over before I responded. Right now someone has called you a Jesus Killer. I too took offense and believe I responded.
All’s that I ask is if someone disagrees with me, you, mespo, Mike A anyone at all. DO NOT MAKE IT PERSONAL. Attack what I say, don’t start with the innuendos.
I will say thank you for now giving the person that has attacked both Buddha and myself more ammunition. I can see how she will play it out and reuse what you have stated each and every time the verbal abuse starts.
Buddha & AY,
Re-read what I wrote again, I think reading it on your phones you may have missed some nuance, which Patty C to her credit picked up. I wasn’t attacking any of you, taking sides as to who was right or wrong, or even telling any of you to shut up. Just for the sake of the rest of us, asking one and all to cool it a bit.
Vince,
When I grow up I want to be just like you, seriously. The only problem is I’m older than you and don’t have the chops. Lately here you have been like a bulwark of sanity as we come face to face with people from an alternate reality. You’ve kept us all focussed. Thank you.
“For Mike
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1249418664479”
Bdaman,
Your point? Would you think I’m unaware of this or that the Pope is a former member of the Hitler Youth? What is unsaid is that this is also the position of many other Christian Sects. The pathetic part of this is that Jews believe that “good works” (to put in in Christian Terms)is what is blessed in the eyes of God, whereas most Christians believe it is faith. To me the truth is that Jesus clearly believed the former, judging by the Gospels. As for the side you’re on the term “Christ Killer” says it all and if you want to keep vying for my attention on the subject, I’ll trounce you every time.
“The ideas that IS is pushing about the wonders of unfettered capitalism rely on two myths.”
You said it better than me in less space and yet you’re almost as old as I am. Want to recommend any supplements I might take to get my brain to approach your sharpness?
“I’ve just been watching too much political theater. now the senate wants to demand 75 to 80 votes when the constitution says 51 is a
majority.”
GWLSM,
Wouldn’t you agree that a big part of this problem is that the news media breathlessly reports each of these nonsensical pronouncements as if they have equal weight in truth? If I remember it correctly Medicare was passed by 51 votes. Those that do news analysis on TV, even on Keith and Rachel who I watch, mostly have no idea of what they’re talking about. I’m of course not talking about JT, Taibbi or Scahill, but the usual suspects from Newsweek and the Washington Establishment. Then too the newswriters for the Networks and Cable news, forget FOX, lack the perception to properly give depth or truth to a story. Walter Cronkite is missed because he delivered the news as it was and did not try to hype it for its’ entertainment value. Frankly, while he was good, no one was ever as good as Edward R. Murrow.
“I am for reasonable regulation in all aspects of societal life—much less for obstruction of personal freedoms—but especially for regulating financial markets and controls to avoid business monopolies. I strongly disapproved of Ronald Reagan’s deregulation and his Reaganomic fiscal policies that both helped initiate the steps to our current debacle.”
FFLEO,
This was what true Conservatism meant when I was growing up. Robert Taft, the elder was a true Conservative, so was Barry Goldwater. These were men one might no agree with but they were men of principle and a
patriotic love of country, rather than corporations. These also would be people that a dialogue could be established with from the left, because fiscal restraint is not a partisan issue, nor is prudent legislation. If you’ve ever read Sinclair Lewis and his novels of the 1920’s, todays the Republican Party suffers from what he called “boosterism,” which is all about the money and personal benefit
and not about the needs of the country or its people.
Mike,
What AY said.
For Mike
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1249418664479
Obama and big pharma listen to the audio in his own words
http://patriotroom.com/article/redstate-broke-it-air-america-nails-obama-as-a-liar-on-drug-company-dealings
Bill O’Reilly: Dr. Day what is the biggest problem with your health care system?
Dr. Brian Day: Well, the biggest problem is access. By access we have, in the Canadian system the first line of defense for a sick patient is the family doctor. And, in a population of 33 million Canadians 5 million Canadians do not have a family doctor.
Bill O’Reilly: Is it because the doctors don’t get paid as well as doctors get paid as well in the United States? We have 30% more doctors per 100,000. Is it because they are not getting paid as well?
Dr. Brian Day: No, we rank 26 out of 28 in the developed countries as far as doctors to population. It’s part of the mechanism of rationing that has to happen when you promise to deliver everything and don’t have enough resources.
Bill O’Reilly: Is that a major problem rationing in Canada? Are people suffering because they cannot get in to see a doctor?
Dr. Brian Day: Oh yes. We have over a million people waiting for surgery and probably another million waiting to see their specialist before they get to wait for the surgery.
Bill O’Reilly: Obama says if we pass this trillion dollar bill over 10 years that costs will go down in the United States. You’re saying that in Canada they have skyrocketed. So, I’m just saying, this is what we’re hearing we don’t know. Does it seem plausible to you that if Obamacare gets passed our costs are going to come down?
Dr. Brian Day: I don’t think so.
http://www.brianday.ca/
I watched the entire 2 ½ hour Q&A session of Barney Frank’s Dartmouth MA town meeting on C-span this afternoon. He was impressive. The snippets from youtube and Fox do not do justice. He answered every question, despite the hoots and hollers and boos. He never lost his temper or composure. He was informed on all aspects of health care, and of the totally unrelated questions tossed at him. As people shouted at him, he asked if their shouts helped the discussion, and repeatedly asked people to ask their questions as fully as they could. As he noted, many questioners did not even listen to his answers, since their minds were made up in advance. Others interrupted him repeatedly, taking their cues from the blogs and cable shows.
It is very frustrating that the lies have gone global. I entered this thread just to make the point that the “death panels” were pure fiction. The opponents are remorseless in their resistance to the facts. Even as they concede that there is no language in the bills that would have created such death panels, they cling to their arguments by predicting a parade of horribles.
The proposed bills have nothing to do with euthanasia, death panels, government rationing of health care, or Platonic termination of the weak, unfit, and unworthy. Those are just persistent lies that poison any rational debate. Even under the bills the insurance companies would continue to operate as they have for years, and they have rationed health care ruthlessly down through the years, as anyone who has ever had a claim denied will attest.
Thank, Slart, for the kind words. [I must not have been a hippie, since I can remember the Summer of 1968.] I try to add substance to the discussions, and do not hurl insults or call people imbeciles, morons, or other names, but respond to facts or legal arguments.
Finally, there was one post that reeked of unapologetic anti-Semitism. I think that the implications of that post have been thoroughly explained to all. There has been no relevant response by that poster, and the same poster has opened an attack on a new minority ethnic group.
That, as the caption of this blog says, speaks for itself.
Res ipsa loquitor.
Mike S,
I guess you are not immune to someone getting under you skin and angering you as well. If the person that is getting under our skin did not make personal attacks it would not bother us so. That is why I have been offended. Not that I am pretty, brighter, younger and can flutter my eyes faster. It is just insane to expect silence when the banter becomes personal.
AY