Alaska Darin Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Now explain exactly why it's funny. Try and use something beyond your typical trite followerism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 exactly what nail was she aiming for? I think she went for about 20in a negative construction of argumentum ad populum fallacy. Like you don't see it. C'mon Dennis, Ann Couter is a fuggin' vampire but there is no difference in tactics between the political parties. It's sad how much time everyone spends arguing around the fringe and ignoring the big sh-- sandwich virtually every level of government is cramming down our throats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 More than 20 percent of all Medicare spending occurs in the last two months of life. Gundersen Lutheran Health System in La Crosse, Wisconsin has developed a successful end-of-life, best practice that combines: 1) community-wide advance care planning, where 90 percent of patients have advance directives; 2) hospice and palliative care; and 3) coordination of services through an electronic medical record. The Gundersen approach empowers patients and families to control and direct their care. The Dartmouth Health Atlas has documented that Gundersen delivers care at a 30 percent lower rate than the national average ($18,359 versus $25,860). If Gundersen’s approach was used to care for the approximately 4.5 million Medicare beneficiaries who die every year, Medicare could save more than $33 billion a year. via Health Care Rx: Across the Country, Some Systems Are Getting It Right – Newt Gingrich. http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/08/12...d-of-life-care/ Scumbag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 My 93 year old aunt started peeing blood in April. She went in got tests and found it was a benign tumor on her bladder. Got it removed and went to a wedding in NC a month later. Under Obama No Care, they would have said "Sorry, it's time for you to go." No take the painkiller and shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 My 93 year old aunt started peeing blood in April. She went in got tests and found it was a benign tumor on her bladder. Got it removed and went to a wedding in NC a month later. Under Obama No Care, they would have said "Sorry, it's time for you to go." No take the painkiller and shut up. You're a bigger moron than I thought. Show me where in any plan it says anything resembling anything of the sort? You can't because it doesn't exist. Your aunt is also, in all likelihood, a socialist, getting help from her socialist single-payer insurance. "It does us no good to incite fear in people by saying that there's these end-of-life provisions, these death panels," Murkowski, a Republican, said. "Quite honestly, I'm so offended at that terminology because it absolutely isn't (in the bill). There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill. Lisa Murkowski -- Republican http://www.adn.com/life/health/story/895431.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 You're a bigger moron than I thought. Show me where in any plan it says anything resembling anything of the sort? You can't because it doesn't exist. Your aunt is also, in all likelihood, a socialist, getting help from her socialist single-payer insurance. Rush and rest of the frindge dorks said it it must be true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 My 93 year old aunt started peeing blood in April. She went in got tests and found it was a benign tumor on her bladder. Got it removed and went to a wedding in NC a month later. Under Obama No Care, they would have said "Sorry, it's time for you to go." No take the painkiller and shut up. Where do you come up with this stuff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 The anointed one himself said something today about giving someone painkillers instead of a hip replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 The anointed one himself said something today about giving someone painkillers instead of a hip replacement. Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 The anointed one himself said something today about giving someone painkillers instead of a hip replacement. Did your aunt's hip replacement cure her tumor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Link? Obammy's Grammy He says he would have paid for it because it was his grandma.....NO SHICK!!! That is the point. 99% of us don't have that money, so it's easy for you to impose rationing when you are above it all. (i.e. Al Gore and his 16x energy consumption on a home he resides in on an occasional basis.) If 80% of costs come after someone is "terminal", do the math. You stop paying for terminal patients.....but who decides if/when one's condition is terminal? It will be some pipsqueak in the government....not you or your doctor. I'd rather fight an insurance company and live vs. have to die waiting for approval and then care from the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 So let me get this straight: These tree-hugging liberals -- whom all they ever want to do is throw more money at any problem -- and spend spend spend spend other people's money -- who spend all their time and whiny lives trying to help people who don't need help -- THE ONE FUKKING TIME IN HISTORY THEY REFUSE TO HELP AND REFUSE TO THROW MONEY AT A PROBLEM AND REFUSE TO SPEND OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY IS ON GRAMMA ON HER FUKKING DEATHBED?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Obammy's Grammy He says he would have paid for it because it was his grandma.....NO SHICK!!! That is the point. 99% of us don't have that money, so it's easy for you to impose rationing when you are above it all. (i.e. Al Gore and his 16x energy consumption on a home he resides in on an occasional basis.) If 80% of costs come after someone is "terminal", do the math. You stop paying for terminal patients.....but who decides if/when one's condition is terminal? It will be some pipsqueak in the government....not you or your doctor. I'd rather fight an insurance company and live vs. have to die waiting for approval and then care from the government. Yes, that quote demonstrates that Obama is intelligent enough to understand there are moral issues, and discuss it with reason. There is nothing there that suggests he would willfully deny a senior that operation. And as far as I know, it has nothing to do with any health care plan currently being considered. But I can understand why something like that might be used to rile up those who Oppose him, and/or the incredibly stupid. Note: I am not saying those who are opposed to him are necessarily stupid. Let's put that stupid argument to rest right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Obammy's Grammy He says he would have paid for it because it was his grandma.....NO SHICK!!! That is the point. 99% of us don't have that money, so it's easy for you to impose rationing when you are above it all. (i.e. Al Gore and his 16x energy consumption on a home he resides in on an occasional basis.) If 80% of costs come after someone is "terminal", do the math. You stop paying for terminal patients.....but who decides if/when one's condition is terminal? It will be some pipsqueak in the government....not you or your doctor. I'd rather fight an insurance company and live vs. have to die waiting for approval and then care from the government. That was in April, not today and does not suggest that painkillers will become a substitute for hip replacements as Wacka stated. I realize that the Republicans are the ones stirring the pot. However, if the Democrats do not get their act together and present one plan, this will not go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Obammy's Grammy He says he would have paid for it because it was his grandma.....NO SHICK!!! That is the point. 99% of us don't have that money, so it's easy for you to impose rationing when you are above it all. (i.e. Al Gore and his 16x energy consumption on a home he resides in on an occasional basis.) If 80% of costs come after someone is "terminal", do the math. You stop paying for terminal patients.....but who decides if/when one's condition is terminal? It will be some pipsqueak in the government....not you or your doctor. I'd rather fight an insurance company and live vs. have to die waiting for approval and then care from the government. There is NO PLAN whatsoever in any of the plans to ration care for the elderly. What they are proposing to do is a set up a board of health professionals to evaluate what is working and what is not. THEN DOCTORS CHOOSE if they wish to use that information as valuable or not. There is no plan to ration medical care for seniors. An independent organization of health care experts and medical professionals would study medical therapies to determine which work well and which are ineffective. Doctors could use the information as they see fit. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-...0,2337440.story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Are you people fruity? Go google "Ezekiel Emanuel Complete Lives System". It's not worth arguing with people that don't want to seek out the truth. This is Obama's top medical advisor and brother to his COS. One of his quotes from 2008..."Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously." Another one of Obama's advisors says that as time and effort is invested in a "born fetus".......after a few years of living it starts to be considered a human being. This goes along with Emanuel's theory of only giving coverage to people ages 15-40 and let everyone else cross their fingers. People are waking up. Hopefully this is a peaceful revolution. Baring that I hope it doesn't turn into a civil war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Are you people fruity? Go google "Ezekiel Emanuel Complete Lives System". It's not worth arguing with people that don't want to seek out the truth. This is Obama's top medical advisor and brother to his COS. One of his quotes from 2008..."Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously." Another one of Obama's advisors says that as time and effort is invested in a "born fetus".......after a few years of living it starts to be considered a human being. This goes along with Emanuel's theory of only giving coverage to people ages 15-40 and let everyone else cross their fingers. People are waking up. Hopefully this is a peaceful revolution. Baring that I hope it doesn't turn into a civil war. Of course, it's nonsense. He's not at all the top health adviser. Nor are any of the foolish claims part of any plan or close to what he actually was talking about. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1915835,00.html Wake up and join the doom! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Go google "Ezekiel Emanuel Complete Lives System". And the first two links that come up are crackpot sites: Freedom Eden, and Lyndon LaRouche. What, Rense.com was too credible for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Of course, it's nonsense. He's not at all the top health adviser. Nor are any of the foolish claims part of any plan or close to what he actually was talking about.http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1915835,00.html Wake up and join the doom! And Time's article is a whitewash of his actual paper. I take it everybody here is talking about a research paper they haven't read? Again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 I take it everybody here is talking about a research paper they haven't read? Again? Yo, nerdling, not everyone here reads research papers for fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts