Dr. Jack Cassell, 56, a Mount Dora urologist and a registered Republican, left a message for Obama supporters on his door: heal thyself or at least find a doctor elsewhere.
Cassell posted a sign reading “If you voted for Obama…seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years.” Personally, I am not sure I want a proctological exam with a guy who is really pissed off at Democrats and liberals. Hint: when you visit Dr. Cassell bring a copy of Rush Limbaugh on tape, the exam goes much smoother.
Curiously, Cassell insists that telling Obama supporters to “seek urologic care elsewhere” is not denying them care: “I’m not turning anybody away — that would be unethical. But if they read the sign and turn the other way, so be it.”
This raises an interesting question. It would seem unethical to deny care based on political beliefs but state law only addresses race, religion,
gender, sexual preference or disability. However, as an ethical matter, it would seem rather clear but I am but a juris doctor.
To further his unique combination of politics and proctology, Cassell supplies copies of a health-care timeline produced by Republicans and added a sign that reads “This is what the morons in Washington have done to your health care. Take one, read it and vote out anyone who voted for it.”
For the full story, click here.
Buddha:
I think its Smith’s mea culpa for the crowd that read the first half of An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations and not the latter books talking about social responsibility, justice, the plight of workers, progressive taxation (“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion.”), and all the other liberal ideas that was, even then, conveniently forgotten or purposefully ignored.
Bdaman:
“Now, how you doin? Belly full?”
*******************
Yes, indeed, and thanks for asking. I tried my hand at a little gratin and it was great. I am now a great fan of smoked Spanish paprika and am trying to use it in everything.
mespo,
I’ve read The Wealth of Nations but never The Theory of Moral Sentiments.
That sounds like an interesting read.
Forgot, Happy Easter
Mespo I just post em when I see em.
Now, how you doin? Belly full?
Bdaman:
Coming from the David Winston and The Winston Group, should this poll really surprise us?
From the site: “David Winston has served as a strategic advisor to Senate and House Republican leadership for the past 10 years. He was formerly the Director of Planning for Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, and advises center-right political parties throughout Europe. Additionally Winston was a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation where he did statistical policy and econometric modeling. He has served in a senior staff role to four RNC Chairmen.
In one of the most extensive looks to date at just who Tea Party activists are, how they think, and the ideas that matter to them, the report found that 17% of the people polled considered themselves “part of the Tea Party movement” and more than four in ten Tea Party members said they were either Independents or Democrats.
In three national surveys, done for New Models from December 2009 through February 2010, 57% of Tea Party members called themselves Republicans, another 28% said they were Independents, and 13% were Democrats. Two-thirds of Tea Party members identify as conservatives but 26% say they are moderate and 8% described themselves as liberal
The study also found Tea Party members are more likely to be male by a 56-44% margin, slightly older than the electorate as a whole and middle income earners. When it comes to issues, the research found that Tea Party activists espouse a strong economic conservatism.
According to David Winston, president of The Winston Group,
“Our research shows that Tea Party activists’ top concern – economy and jobs — mirrors the majority of voters in the country.”
http://winstongroup.net/2010/04/01/behind-the-headlines-whats-driving-the-tea-party-movement/
Byron:
“Yes you are right about that, what you describe is Fascism and it has been around for awhile. Please dont call it capitalism.”
****************
I know you don’t think capitalism is an unfettered absolute. What I describe isn’t fascism but regulated capitalism managed under the law. Some folks think Capitalism’s underlying selfishness is some god-given right, and their reply to those who would reign in its excesses are “well, it just business.” That attitude shows a profound misunderstanding of the system as given to us by no less than Adam Smith himself in The Wealth of Nations:
Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest in his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man, or order of men.[my emphasis]
In The Theory of Moral Sentiments Smith explains that Capitalism divorced from its moral underpinnings is a soulless, counterproductive system:
How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortunes of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is pity or compassion, the emotion we feel for the misery of others, when we either see it, or are made to conceive it in a very lively manner. That we often derive sorrow from the sorrows of others, is a matter of fact too obvious to require any instances to prove it; for this sentiment, like all the other original passions of human nature, is by no means confined to the virtuous or the humane, though they perhaps may feel it with the most exquisite sensibility. The greatest ruffian, the most hardened violator of the laws of society, is not altogether without it.
(…)
It is then, in the last dregs of life, his body wasted with toil and diseases, his mind galled and ruffled by the memory of a thousand injuries and disappointments which he imagines he has met with from the injustice of his enemies, or from the perfidy and ingratitude of his friends, that he begins at last to find that wealth and greatness are mere trinkets of frivolous utility, no more adapted for procuring ease of body or tranquillity of mind than the tweezer-cases of the lover of toys; and like them too, more troublesome to the person who carries them about with him than all the advantages they can afford him are commodious.
Fascism is not regulated capitalism, but capitalism divorced from any regulation and thrust onto the population as a template for a political system. Fascism severs the government from its benevolent purposes and subscripts the entire nation into a society founded on notions of corporatism. In essence, it is the corporation superimposed over the political system, with the population viewed as an organic component of the “Nation.” It is the government of the ant colony requiring both subservient workers and a royal court. Whereas government may lawfully and properly regulate capitalism, capitalism can be never be permitted to regulate government. That is fascism.
gah, pardon the sloppy typing. I was having feline assistance.
Goneville-n-keys,
You said, ““DAT” is a racist term mocking the way some black people speak. that dates back to the days of “AMOS AND ANDY” where they would say “who dat out dare?”, mocking the speech of blacks who were by and large uneducated thanks to white oppression.”
This is not necessarily so.
“Dat” is a colloquial usage in modern parlance that has less to do with race (which I agree Amos and Andy’s usage was pure racist) than with locale. It is simply how some people in some regions simply talk regardless of color. New Orleans and parts of the East Coast. I’m think both NY and NJ, both of which I’ve heard residents use “use “dat” simply because that’s the local inflection for “that”. New Orleans uses “y’at”, a contraction of “you at” as well, as in the standard phone and personal greeting “where y’at?”. Pronunciation is a lot like politics – it’s all local at some point.
Words used to harm must be considered in a contextual light. For example, if I said, “That nigger’s crazy!” without any context, it could be seen as racist. However, if I was talking about the Richard Pryor album of the same name, eh, that’s accurate, not racist. Words have no power other than what people imbue them with and the value loading we give words is just as contextual as definitional.
That being said, yeah, duh is a racist in denial and good job wrangling his teabagger trollery. One is indeed known by the company they keep.
Goneville-n-keys.
Thank-you that’s the one. Wishing you a good evening!
Here ya go CEJ.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5T3FXFnoTzE&hl=en_US&fs=1&]
Oops, sorry again, visit youtube for Nina Simone’s “Don’t let me be misunderstood” I was attempting to embed the version with photos from the civil rights movement. It fits my post.
Thank-you all above, for doing all the heavy lifting your arguments are wonderfully well stated and anyone with a rational mind let alone a empathetic heart can see HCR is so long overdue.
Please excuse my snark on such a beautiful day but I am unable to contain my complete revulsion for the action Dr JACK-cASSell of Mount Dick, Flori-duh has chosen to take. Yes, this pitiful prick, an MD from Grenada, who is not board certified, with a healthgrades rating of 1.5 out of 5, is telling supporters of President Obama and HCR to piss off.
Typical neo-celebrity for the Party of NO; he is unable to even articulate what is in the bill.
The repuglican, teabagging Tea-hadists are nothing but pathetic selfish sore losers! Your guy lost get over it. No they can’t you see, they are the tragic Victims of a fair election, they have never been so angry before in their lives. They had 8 years, and wrecked every thing they touched, and we should listen to those who for the first time in their lives see something so wrong they have to protest.
Did any of them MARCH for Civil Rights for African Americans and all people of color, Women, Gays; did they MARCH to Stop the Wars(Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq)or Stopping hunger,or No Nukes, or Farm Aid, or ADA, or FOR true HCR, yes people have actually have spent years protesting to get HCR done, did they March for a living wage, etc., you get the idea.
NO, they were not there, they did not care enough, but HCR finally passed and they are just so upset, about this: Just the merest start to curb obscene profits in the health care industry so people can afford health care in the future.
That they claim VICTIM status is laughable; they are only victims of their own selfish ignorance and paranoia!
Sorry for the rant, I guess I needed to vent.
Today is the anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, April 4th 1968, lets remember the true victims.
Those who have always had access to reasonably good health insurance/care and/or are lucky enough to have been pretty healthy don’t have the same perspective as a person on the other side of the fence.
Buddha wrote, “This is a lesson in empathy.” And compassion.
Byron,
I knew you were going to be upset, but that was the point. I have done this to you on purpose and for that I apologize but as to the why I make no apology. You are frustrated because you think someone wants to take what you earned/desired (after all no one would want to earn what they don’t desire).
Now, I’d like you to take that frustration and apply it to a mother who – through no fault of her own but driven by market forces – cannot provide health care for a sick child or partner.
There is simply no comparison.
This is a lesson in empathy.
Fruits of your labor? No one is denying you the fruits of your labor, but that whole argument goes hand in hand with capitalism but ONLY when free markets are the correct mechanism for the greatest utility to civilization.
And how can one logically argue that raising the baseline health of a country is in any way bad for civilization? Sick people cannot work or create or fully contribute. Bad health equates to bad productivity. Would you begrudge a sick person the chance to get well and contribute? Would you begrudge them if it created a minor inconvenience to you? A major inconvenience? Would it matter if you knew that person, once well, might be able to literally change the world for the better somehow for most if not all people? Would it matter if they didn’t?
You said, “I call looking after yourself and providing for your own life without any expectations of others a moral virtue. But then I am a capitalist so what would you expect.” You know me well enough to know that I do in fact agree with that first part. Such a principle is indeed part of the 8 Fold Path Buddha speaks of although it’s usually worded differently and you know this influences philosophically how I view the world. He also speaks highly of the trait of compassion and caring for others. In agreement with your second statement? Not so much. You are and always have been evident as a small “c” capitalist since you quite baiting and started contributing. Very often both me and Gyges have pointed to this in the way we attack your take on capitalism. I suggest that this is indicative of another state of being that rests inside you and occasionally causes you discomfort, anger and/or frustration: Byron the Closet Humanist. That side would be more pronounced if you were more open to empathy possibly being more important than . . . well . . . just about anything as related to the survival of the species. As a disabled man, can you honestly say that no one *no one* has ever assisted you for purely altruistic reasons? Even as cynical about human nature as I can be at times, even I don’t think people are so bad that you have never personally benefited from the fruits of another’s labor without expectation of recompense.
You talk up capitalism in part because you are a closet humanist AND a bit of an optimist – you act decently in the course of free commerce and you expect that is the norm because “people are people and you are people too”. You do this in part because you believe the tool – free markets – can make life better. This is only partially true. The only problem is that in reality, people can be monsters to one another. And in free markets, people will do what they can get away with absent regulation and enforcement of rules. It is human nature and the nature of the tool. I don’t begrudge you small “c” capitalism. In fact, I can’t count the times I’ve said free markets are fine and dandy for 95% of the things we buy and sell that don’t impact national security and/or the fabric of civilization. But I do dislike the blind spot it sometimes gives you. Blind spots allow suffering to accumulate if left unattended too long. If my poke has left you sore, might I suggest examining the reaction and not the provocation.
Ask yourself the above and consider is a treage procedure too large a price to pay for everyone to have health care as a right instead of a monetized commodity – including someone who might not grow up to cure cancer without this basic human need being met as a societal goal?
You aren’t a bad fellow and you know I like you personally.
A true big C Capitalist wouldn’t give a rat’s ass about the proposition of socialized health care as a right as long as he got what he wanted because for those types – the bad capitalists – desire is the only bottom line on personal P/L statements. Your reaction suggests that you somehow think that others might think you less of a good person for your views and this is a tell that you do care about others. You don’t want to be a burden so you don’t want others to burden you, yet you get upset when I intimate it’s greed – that kissing cousin to capitalism. Sometimes it’s like you understand the concept of forests and have even seen a few, but man do you get hung up looking at some of the more “sparkly” trees. 😀 But the fact you have been historically willing to look and re-evaluate shows you have an open mind when you want to. And as long as you have an open mind, I’m only going to try to open the door wider.
It’s my nature.
goneville-n-keys
Thank you Rafflaw, I tried but I’m afraid Duh has an agenda and that agenda does not include acknowledging the facts when they are given to him.
AND
mespo727272
Bottom line on your typical tea bagger isn’t racism but stupidity. Most have no idea that, at their income levels, all got a tax cut and not a tax increase. Also they have no idea that the government stands to make money on its sale of bailed out bank stocks given the rise in the market. The most laughable part of the movement is the claim that we have sunken into tyranny by having a duly elected President introduced a much needed healthcare reform bill which garner a majority of votes for passage in both houses of Congress and was, in fact, signed into law. If that’s tyranny, here’s notice to dictators world-wide that their job just got a lot tougher. Why paint your good ol’ boy tea bagger as racist, when fool will do–nicely. ………………….Believe it or not capitalism works when properly managed by government who can prevent its excesses, and industry’s unwillingness to delve into some markets. It’s really nothing new.
==============================================================
After having read the entire thread, Duh has not supported his argument very well at all … tea-baggers are foolish and racism is deeply embedded within the “movement”.
Why do we have to call it anything? Fascism. Capitalism. Socialism. We hear so much of this these days yet the truth is we have them all. In any truly advanced society you’ll see elements of them all.
There is no hard line there. A smart country will take the best from each and merge it into their own.
How about we just call it Americanism and get on with what works?
Mespo:
“Believe it or not capitalism works when properly managed by government who can prevent its excesses, and industry’s unwillingness to delve into some markets. It’s really nothing new.”
Yes you are right about that, what you describe is Fascism and it has been around for awhile. Please dont call it capitalism.
Buddha:
” I hate to say it, but your greed is showing. You call it free market capitalism all you like.”
How about you sit in my wheelchair for awhile and then tell me I am greedy. I don’t ask anyone to support me why should I as a handicapped individual have to support other people just because I make a few more bucks than they do? And by extrapolation why should an able bodied individual who makes a few more bucks than me be forced to support me? My misfortune is not a claim on someone else’s life. They have a moral right to their work, I have no moral claim on their labor. If you want you to call it greed then go ahead. I call looking after yourself and providing for your own life without any expectations of others a moral virtue. But then I am a capitalist so what would you expect.