Politics and religion.

[lizbud]

Did you read what I wrote - I had to google Code Pink, as I didn't know what it was.

I did not know what it was: I had to google to find out. I saw it was a group of women against the war. I am, and have been since 2003, against the war.

I did not know the things you just mentioned - maybe they are true - maybe not.

Now now ,Grace, don't go confusing Frick & Frack with actual facts.

[Grace]

Now now ,Grace, don't go confusing Frick & Frack with actual facts.

Thanks lizbud - I needed that right about now

[lizbud]

Thanks lizbud - I needed that right about now

Yeah, I figured you did. Sometimes it's hard to take the high road
in these "discussions".

[RICHARD]

I trust Wilford Brimley and his degree in medicine more that I trust any elected Meat when it comes to medical advice.

[Edwina's Secretary]

I trust Wilford Brimley and his degree in medicine more that I trust any elected Meat when it comes to medical advice.

That is like saying insurance salespeople decide the premiums that will be charged. It is not how business - nor government - works.

There are working for the federal government many well-educated, knowledge people in the field of healthcare. The National Institutes of Health, for example is quite full of people who know a heck of a lot more about health, medicine and medical care than a former hospital clerk.

They don't make as much money as they could if they worked for...say a drug company...but they do it because it is something they believe.

To suggest that "any elected Meat"...(does that mean an elected official??) would be giving medical advice or making medical decisions without the support and input of medical professionals is disingenuous at best and an example of the fear tactics so prevalent in these discussions.

[Puckstop31]

Praise God that SOMEbody on "the other side" gets it...

Camille Paglia

Buyer's remorse? Not me. At the North American summit in Guadalajara this week, President Obama resumed the role he is best at -- representing the U.S. with dignity and authority abroad. This is why I, for one, voted for Obama and continue to support him. The damage done to U.S. prestige by the feckless, buffoonish George W. Bush will take years to repair. Obama has barely begun the crucial mission that he was elected to do.

Having said that, I must confess my dismay bordering on horror at the amateurism of the White House apparatus for domestic policy. When will heads start to roll? I was glad to see the White House counsel booted, as well as Michelle Obama's chief of staff, and hope it's a harbinger of things to come. Except for that wily fox, David Axelrod, who could charm gold threads out of moonbeams, Obama seems to be surrounded by juvenile tinhorns, bumbling mediocrities and crass bully boys.

Case in point: the administration's grotesque mishandling of healthcare reform, one of the most vital issues facing the nation. Ever since Hillary Clinton's megalomaniacal annihilation of our last best chance at reform in 1993 (all of which was suppressed by the mainstream media when she was running for president), Democrats have been longing for that happy day when this issue would once again be front and center.

But who would have thought that the sober, deliberative Barack Obama would have nothing to propose but vague and slippery promises -- or that he would so easily cede the leadership clout of the executive branch to a chaotic, rapacious, solipsistic Congress? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down.

There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama's aggressive endorsement of a healthcare plan that does not even exist yet, except in five competing, fluctuating drafts, makes Washington seem like Cloud Cuckoo Land. The president is promoting the most colossal, brazen bait-and-switch operation since the Bush administration snookered the country into invading Iraq with apocalyptic visions of mushroom clouds over American cities.

You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you're happy with it, Obama keeps assuring us in soothing, lullaby tones. Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.

I just don't get it. Why the insane rush to pass a bill, any bill, in three weeks? And why such an abject failure by the Obama administration to present the issues to the public in a rational, detailed, informational way? The U.S. is gigantic; many of our states are bigger than whole European nations. The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vampirically absorb whatever savings Obama thinks could be made. And the transition period would be a nightmare of red tape and mammoth screw-ups, which we can ill afford with a faltering economy.

As with the massive boondoggle of the stimulus package, which Obama foolishly let Congress turn into a pork rut, too much has been attempted all at once; focused, targeted initiatives would, instead, have won wide public support. How is it possible that Democrats, through their own clumsiness and arrogance, have sabotaged healthcare reform yet again? Blaming obstructionist Republicans is nonsensical because Democrats control all three branches of government. It isn't conservative rumors or lies that are stopping healthcare legislation; it's the justifiable alarm of an electorate that has been cut out of the loop and is watching its representatives construct a tangled labyrinth for others but not for themselves. No, the airheads of Congress will keep their own plush healthcare plan -- it's the rest of us guinea pigs who will be thrown to the wolves.

With the Republican party leaderless and in backbiting disarray following its destruction by the ideologically incoherent George W. Bush, Democrats are apparently eager to join the hara-kiri brigade. What looked like smooth coasting to the 2010 election has now become a nail-biter. Both major parties have become a rats' nest of hypocrisy and incompetence. That, combined with our stratospheric, near-criminal indebtedness to China (which could destroy the dollar overnight), should raise signal flags. Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?

What does either party stand for these days? Republican politicians, with their endless scandals, are hardly exemplars of traditional moral values. Nor have they generated new ideas for healthcare, except for medical savings accounts, which would be pathetically inadequate in a major crisis for anyone earning at or below a median income.

And what do Democrats stand for, if they are so ready to defame concerned citizens as the "mob" -- a word betraying a Marie Antoinette delusion of superiority to ordinary mortals. I thought my party was populist, attentive to the needs and wishes of those outside the power structure. And as a product of the 1960s, I thought the Democratic party was passionately committed to freedom of thought and speech.

But somehow liberals have drifted into a strange servility toward big government, which they revere as a godlike foster father-mother who can dispense all bounty and magically heal all ills. The ethical collapse of the left was nowhere more evident than in the near total silence of liberal media and Web sites at the Obama administration's outrageous solicitation to private citizens to report unacceptable "casual conversations" to the White House. If Republicans had done this, there would have been an angry explosion by Democrats from coast to coast. I was stunned at the failure of liberals to see the blatant totalitarianism in this incident, which the president should have immediately denounced. His failure to do so implicates him in it.

As a libertarian and refugee from the authoritarian Roman Catholic church of my youth, I simply do not understand the drift of my party toward a soulless collectivism. This is in fact what Sarah Palin hit on in her shocking image of a "death panel" under Obamacare that would make irrevocable decisions about the disabled and elderly. When I first saw that phrase, headlined on the Drudge Report, I burst out laughing. It seemed so over the top! But on reflection, I realized that Palin's shrewdly timed metaphor spoke directly to the electorate's unease with the prospect of shadowy, unelected government figures controlling our lives. A death panel not only has the power of life and death but is itself a symptom of a Kafkaesque brave new world where authority has become remote, arbitrary and spectral. And as in the Spanish Inquisition, dissidence is heresy, persecuted and punished.

Surely, the basic rule in comprehensive legislation should be: First, do no harm. The present proposals are full of noble aims, but the biggest danger always comes from unforeseen and unintended consequences. Example: the American incursion into Iraq, which destabilized the region by neutralizing Iran's rival and thus enormously enhancing Iran's power and nuclear ambitions.

What was needed for reform was an in-depth analysis, buttressed by documentary evidence, of waste, fraud and profiteering in the healthcare, pharmaceutical and insurance industries. Instead what we've gotten is a series of facile, vulgar innuendos about how doctors conduct their practice, as if their primary motive is money. Quite frankly, the president gives little sense of direct knowledge of medical protocols; it's as if his views are a tissue of hearsay and scattershot worst-case scenarios.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/...12/town_halls/

[RICHARD]

Praise God that SOMEbody on "the other side" gets it...

Camille Paglia



http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/...12/town_halls/

Great article.

Great summation-

What was needed for reform was an in-depth analysis, buttressed by documentary evidence, of waste, fraud and profiteering in the healthcare, pharmaceutical and insurance industries. Instead what we've gotten is a series of facile, vulgar innuendos about how doctors conduct their practice, as if their primary motive is money.


------------------------

Just got the news that an HMO is giving out 1,600 pink slips AFTER a 1.1 billion dollar profit report.

House keepers, biz office and transcriptionists are part of the work force getting axed.

Lovely.

[blue]

Yeah, I figured you did. Sometimes it's hard to take the high road
in these "discussions".

You should try taking the high road sometime and see how it feels.

[lizbud]

You should try taking the high road sometime and see how it feels.

I know how it feels, you should try it.

[blue]

I know how it feels, you should try it.

Ill stay in the median between the roads. Your idea of the high road means talking down to people and being condescending, as proven by your response.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Now now ,Grace, don't go confusing Frick & Frack with actual facts.

Liz, Liz, Liz...are you suggesting photoshopped photos completely changing the message aren't "factual"????

I am shocked...absolutely shocked.

[blue]

Now now ,Grace, don't go confusing Frick & Frack with actual facts.

Grace got her info from wikipedia. I quoted Code Pink right from their website on disrupting military recruiting. Less recruiting means more forced retention of military members, not very supporting of our troops on the ground is it?

So lets see you bring some facts.

Liz, Liz, Liz...are you suggesting photoshopped photos completely changing the message aren't "factual"????

I am shocked...absolutely shocked.

What is shocking is the chopped photos are the end result of Code Pinks efforts.