The GOP's Fake Doctor Council

[elganned]

It is not someone else's duty or responsibility, under threat of force, to do anything for someone else...

Unless, of course, that is the very service you are selling. Seems a strange business model to me, selling a service and then denying that service at the very time it is needed.

At the very least they should return all the premiums these people have paid if they're not going to deliver the service being paid for.

[Lorax]

It is not someone else's duty or responsibility, under threat of force, to do anything for someone else...If it were, that would be what we call slavery. Mind you, under capitalism, more beneficial things are accomplished and accomplishable than could ever be conceived under socialist slavery.

Truly deluded post, and indefensible- congratulations on a new low.

When the individual you so value has PAID their premiums, and is denied health care, or is a slave to corporate health care plans, and is then DENIED coverage for a variety of bogus reasons, then the theft you so eloquently speak of is from the victimized individual who has PAID their premiums.

People die every day from preventable illness simply because their billionaire health care masters decided to have the crab and the lobster for lunch that day.

You support an oligarchical view of our national body politic. Rule by the rich for the rich. As a doctor, you are a discredit to your so-called profession. All that education wasted- sad, really.

I have to add this, if you really value what you do, how is it that you have so much time to "contribute" over 4000 posts? Must be the girls in the office who run the show for you so you can have so much free time. Make sure they juice Medicare really good before the end of the year- you may be faced with our long-awaited socicalized medicine.

[Bobl]

Another step was taken today to bar competition with the insurance industry, by eliminating the public option in "reform" sponsored by Senator Baucus.
The "reform" would require all to purchase health insurance from these for profit firms who gave us HMOs, Preexisting Condition clauses, rationing, and death panels.
I will quote old Motown gems:
"...Makes you wanna holler, throw up both your hands..."
While the insurance companies sing:
"...Money, that's what I want..."

This is NOT reform, folks.

[ccbatson]

Libs are getting desperate and fracturing. However, don't for a second think they have had a change of heart, they are weaseling their way into the goals of taking over [[and therefore destroying) healthcare. Guess what? Voters are wise to the charade now.

[Bobl]

Sure, bats. It is just plain logical to be the only civilized country that rations millions out of health care while channeling one third of health care spending to for profit companies before a single cent is spent on medical care or prevention of illness.

[Lorax]

If anyone thinks we're going to be forced to shovel money into the coffers of for-profit health care nazis, they have another thing coming.

No way will this happen, or there will be a revolt in this country. The giveaways in the Baucus Bill to big insurance is incomprehensible, this is more of it.

The phony outrage over a public option is fueled by the billions in donations from monstrously wealthy health care corporations to our elected officials. They don't work for us, in case no one's noticed, they work for the United Corporations of America.

[ccbatson]

Hooray, if this is a consistent response, the bill will be dead via this fracture on the left.

[rb336]

Libs are getting desperate and fracturing. However, don't for a second think they have had a change of heart, they are weaseling their way into the goals of taking over [[and therefore destroying) healthcare. Guess what? Voters are wise to the charade now.

funny, bats, as blue dogs are getting the message and shifting to the public option side. funny, bats, as recent polls find 60% and higher of the population SUPPORT a public option

[elganned]

It doesn't matter if we have a public option or not. It may influence the cost of insurance, but won't affect the forces driving the cost of health care.

Public option or not, we'll revist this question in a few short years when whatever they adopt is discovered to have--surpise!--not addressed the real problem.

[Lorax]

Complete agreement here. Anything short of Swedish style socialized medicine will never address the problem. We will have to drag the naysayers kicking and screaming into the 21st century, and when the program proves successful long after I'm dead, then the Rethuglicans will try and claim credit for it as they do when proven wrong, which is constantly.

[rb336]

It doesn't matter if we have a public option or not. It may influence the cost of insurance, but won't affect the forces driving the cost of health care.

Public option or not, we'll revist this question in a few short years when whatever they adopt is discovered to have--surpise!--not addressed the real problem.

the thing is -- cost of health care insurance IS a real problem - a problem driven by tremendous administrative costs, an obscene pay/bonus package for their execs and a wall street demand for ever increasing profits.

the cost of health care is also a problem, driven by many of the same forces, an AMA created shortage of primary care physicians, physicians ordering too many tests [[hint -- another problem created by the insurance industry), etc.

[ccbatson]

I can't believe that intelligent people fail to realize that true and just free markets would/will solve this problem.

[elganned]

And I can't believe that intelligent people fail to realize that your "true and just" free market is exactly what got us into this problem to begin with.

[ccbatson]

Never had one, so how is your allegation even a possibility?

[elganned]

So you admit your "true and just" free market is merely a chimera.

Funny how you can be so certain that a system which has never existed will perfectly correct all ills. Where's the data?

Again, you sound like the apologists for communism, who argue that we've never actually seen "true" communism, so it hasn't been proven to be bad.

[Lorax]

Never had one, so how is your allegation even a possibility?

So your fascist utopian view of the nation as you see it, has never existed?

Why do you then choose to advocate for a system that never existed?

Are you running for mayor of Whoville?

[ccbatson]

Look in a dictionary for the definition of the word "ideal". Humans [[sometimes including liberals) must strive for perfection and ideals knowing that they will never achieve it in order to accomplish anything.

[Lorax]

Look in a dictionary for the definition of the word "ideal". Humans [[sometimes including liberals) must strive for perfection and ideals knowing that they will never achieve it in order to accomplish anything.

Can you repeat that?

I came in somwhere in the middle.

I feel like I'm in that Twix commercial "blogging about my ideals"

Question is, am I the girl blogging, or the guy trying to get into her pants?

[ccbatson]

Forfeit by attempted deflection by Lorax...noted.

[Lorax]

Sorry, "Doc", don't confuse confusion with capitulation.

Learn to post coherently and then we'll have a conversation.

[ccbatson]

If an individual is incapable of understanding something, it is not the fault of the concept, but the fault of the individual refusing to confront and understand the concept. Ignorance is not an excuse.

[Lorax]

If an individual is incapable of understanding something, it is not the fault of the concept, but the fault of the individual refusing to confront and understand the concept. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Ususally it's the fault of the individual trying to explain the concept.

You deal in absolutes which is a faulty foundation to begin with. Most critical thinkers don't engage in such irrational behavior.

Ignorance has more to do with the one explaining the concept, especially in this instance.

[ccbatson]

Axiomatic thinking is the basis of critical thinking and that, as you should know, is to deal in absolutes.

[Lorax]

Problem is, axioms are only axioms when they are self-evident.

Political ideology is never axiomatic, since often what is offered as say, socialism, as under Hitler is really just a cloak for fascism.

Or as professed to be socialism by the USSR was really communism.

Or as Bush professed to be a "compassionate consrvative" ended up not only non-axiomatic, but an oxymoron.

Or as Obama professes to be a progressive, he's really a conservative.

So there.

[rb336]

Axiomatic thinking is the basis of critical thinking and that, as you should know, is to deal in absolutes.

actually, as you should know, "axiomatic" and "absolutes" as a basis for "thinking" are anathema to critical thinking as they stink of preconceptions that blind one to truths