Obama Stimulus Plan Dangerous to Your Health..CODE RED.

ViRedd · Feb 11, 2009

Remember when some of the more outspoken "progressives" were just aghast over the fact that Sarah Palin and her husband opted to have their autistic child instead of abortiing it? Honestly, these people are so transparent, it isn't even funny. They call themselves "liberals," but there is nothing liberal about them. They are totalitarians, pure and simple.

Vi

xochipili · Feb 11, 2009

No Milf, I havent heard of voluntary sterilization, although if thats what "you" choose, hey to each his own, just like I choose to burn one. And I'm pretty sure what your calling Eugenics is Euthenasia, the difference being one is being terminated at the beginning of life (before they can reproduce) and the other after they have reproduced, but both are fucking awful situations, reminiscent of Nazi Germany! Ive read (from some greek philosopher, cant put a name on him right now, neways) that "governments make laws that benefit themselves". It seems like every law is some "double-edged sword" one side is made to "look" like its benefiting the people when in actuallity its for the governments own benefit. So call me obtuse, but what is this other agenda, its gotta more than just them cutting costs and lining their pockets right? You seem very well informed Milf, carry on!

CrackerJax · Feb 12, 2009

In the end, the Govt. is not an economically right headed beast. It is a political animal which seeks approval and votes.

Let's just run down the list well managed Govt. programs.
1.)
2.)
3.)
4.)
5.)

Well, that is an impressive record. Let's just hand over control of our health to them.

out. :blsmoke:

misshestermoffitt · Feb 12, 2009

We already have rationed health care, this is just the first time someone has had the balls to say it out loud.

No health insurance? Owe the hospital money? They "limit" your services, meaning that anything they deem as "elective" they can refuse to treat you. If you're not dying they show you the door. This has been going on in my area for over 20 years.

Do you find it odd that terminally ill people don't have the right to end things by their own means, but a hospital or doctor can refuse to treat you over money and let you get worse until you die and that's just fine and dandy?

How about a citizen can have their treatment refused, but refuse that same treatment to someone in prison (tax payer dollars) and they scream about their rights and win?

CrackerJax · Feb 12, 2009

misshestermoffitt said:
We already have rationed health care, this is just the first time someone has had the balls to say it out loud.

No health insurance? Owe the hospital money? They "limit" your services, meaning that anything they deem as "elective" they can refuse to treat you. If you're not dying they show you the door. This has been going on in my area for over 20 years.

Do you find it odd that terminally ill people don't have the right to end things by their own means, but a hospital or doctor can refuse to treat you over money and let you get worse until you die and that's just fine and dandy?

How about a citizen can have their treatment refused, but refuse that same treatment to someone in prison (tax payer dollars) and they scream about their rights and win?

I agree with you Miss and that is exactly why we don't need more of the same. An interesting little factoid is that SELECTIVE procedure costs have gone down as NON SELECTIVE has gone way way up. The thing to keep in mind is SELECTIVE medical procedures are not under any govt. control, but are free market oriented. There is no reason to believe that if the same thing were allowed to happen across the board, that the same result would occur....costs would lower for everyone.

WE will not be allowed to find out of course, it would ruin everything for the govt.
out. :blsmoke:

HotNSexyMILF · Feb 12, 2009

xochipili said:
No Milf, I havent heard of voluntary sterilization, although if thats what "you" choose, hey to each his own, just like I choose to burn one. And I'm pretty sure what your calling Eugenics is Euthenasia, the difference being one is being terminated at the beginning of life (before they can reproduce) and the other after they have reproduced, but both are fucking awful situations, reminiscent of Nazi Germany! Ive read (from some greek philosopher, cant put a name on him right now, neways) that "governments make laws that benefit themselves". It seems like every law is some "double-edged sword" one side is made to "look" like its benefiting the people when in actuallity its for the governments own benefit. So call me obtuse, but what is this other agenda, its gotta more than just them cutting costs and lining their pockets right? You seem very well informed Milf, carry on!

Certainly seems to be a mix of eugenics and euthenasia. I agree, though tend to just sum it up as plain eugenics.. the agenda seems simple, cull the useless eaters. Through our food, water, technology, politics.. society in general, it seems to permiate every faction of our life.. there's so many faucets that really one comes to the point where they come to the conclussion that either A. the people in power are REALLY REALLY REALLY stupid.. or B. it's planned or allowed to happen.. and with all the information available to just a little peon like myself- it seems pretty apparent that those in power would be well aware of the information I have and much more.

CrackerJax said:
In the end, the Govt. is not an economically right headed beast. It is a political animal which seeks approval and votes.

Let's just run down the list well managed Govt. programs.
1.)
2.)
3.)
4.)
5.)

Well, that is an impressive record. Let's just hand over control of our health to them.

out.

LOL.. oh cmon.. but they're the government, they looovvveee us, and can fix everything if only we give them enough money and power. :wall:

misshestermoffitt said:
We already have rationed health care, this is just the first time someone has had the balls to say it out loud.

No health insurance? Owe the hospital money? They "limit" your services, meaning that anything they deem as "elective" they can refuse to treat you. If you're not dying they show you the door. This has been going on in my area for over 20 years.

Do you find it odd that terminally ill people don't have the right to end things by their own means, but a hospital or doctor can refuse to treat you over money and let you get worse until you die and that's just fine and dandy?

How about a citizen can have their treatment refused, but refuse that same treatment to someone in prison (tax payer dollars) and they scream about their rights and win?

All good points Miss, and yes, our healthcare system is already rationed.. just seems, not only are they coming out and stating it blatantly- the government isn't happy about the health industry doing the rationing- they are reserving that awesome power for THEMSELF.

National healthcare sure sounds good to the masses.. but boy.. things are going to even worse as we march into the reality of it..

misshestermoffitt · Feb 12, 2009

The bad thing is Jax, a hospital can call heart surgery "elective" or impacted wisdom teeth removal is considered "elective". They can pretty much put any prodcedure under review and deem it "elective".

It's bad when men in suits with no medical training are deciding peoples fates. It should be between the person and their doctor alone. Everyone else should butt out.

TheBrutalTruth · Feb 12, 2009

xochipili said:
No Milf, I havent heard of voluntary sterilization, although if thats what "you" choose, hey to each his own, just like I choose to burn one. And I'm pretty sure what your calling Eugenics is Euthenasia, the difference being one is being terminated at the beginning of life (before they can reproduce) and the other after they have reproduced, but both are fucking awful situations, reminiscent of Nazi Germany! Ive read (from some greek philosopher, cant put a name on him right now, neways) that "governments make laws that benefit themselves". It seems like every law is some "double-edged sword" one side is made to "look" like its benefiting the people when in actuallity its for the governments own benefit. So call me obtuse, but what is this other agenda, its gotta more than just them cutting costs and lining their pockets right? You seem very well informed Milf, carry on!

Actually I heard that it went beyond being voluntary to being mandatory in states like New Orleans where the former governor (the one before Jindal) was trying to make it necessary for people receiving government aid to be sterilized in order to continue to receive aid.

That's not voluntary, and while I do agree that people that are not capable of financially supporting themselves have no business having kids, I can not agree that the government should forcefully sterilize these people by threatening their lives.

Blueberryyum · Feb 13, 2009

The government needs to give us the people a better change to start up and run businessess. Small buisness makes up a HUGE part of Jobs in america. This new spending bill isn't anything close to a stimulus- its an attempt to buttfuck America to socialism. What ever happened to making an honest living?

medicineman · Feb 13, 2009

CrackerJax said:
The stimulus bill starts out like all great deceptions with a big lie. This bill is not a stimulus at all. But once that lie is swallowed, and it has been (baah bahh), the rest is easy. I saw people actually clapping when the deal was finally approved...... I just rolled my eyes and was thankful i had the foresight to get offshore in July. Can things go from bad to worse? Sure, and it will.

out.

I see you're offshore,, is your boat still floating?

medicineman · Feb 13, 2009

Here's a question for all you righties:
Say we get a not for profit comprehensive national health care system, Where everyone is entitled to the same care as the senators and representatives, (that is basically what all progressive politicians have been promising) Now if you are so turned off by this type of care, couldn't you take some of that hard earned cash out of the bank and go to a private for profit doctor or hospital and get the VIP treatment? I certainly wouldn't begrudge you that.

TheBrutalTruth · Feb 13, 2009

medicineman said:
Here's a question for all you righties:
Say we get a not for profit comprehensive national health care system, Where everyone is entitled to the same care as the senators and representatives, (that is basically what all progressive politicians have been promising) Now if you are so turned off by this type of care, couldn't you take some of that hard earned cash out of the bank and go to a private for profit doctor or hospital and get the VIP treatment? I certainly wouldn't begrudge you that.

The problem you loon, is that the government would be robbing me to pay for everyone else's treatment. Then to add insult to injury I'd have to charge to go to the provider of my choice, which would likely be operating in a black market economy with minimal legality. Assuming that all honest doctors haven't left this country for other places where the amount that they can make is not restricted, and the government does not attempt to tell them what they must or must not do in their attempt to save a patient's life.

CrackerJax · Feb 13, 2009

medicineman said:
Here's a question for all you righties:
Say we get a not for profit comprehensive national health care system, Where everyone is entitled to the same care as the senators and representatives, (that is basically what all progressive politicians have been promising) Now if you are so turned off by this type of care, couldn't you take some of that hard earned cash out of the bank and go to a private for profit doctor or hospital and get the VIP treatment? I certainly wouldn't begrudge you that.

The country could not begin to afford the bill for that plan. Congress has an elitist health care plan.
The very fact that they do one thing while saying another should make the alarms go off in your head.

And i don't consider myself affiliated with the "right". When it comes to economics however, the left has absolutely nothing that remotely resembles sustainable economics. If we talk about something other than money and economics, you will find my positions scattered through out the spectrum,....as it should be for all people with an open mind.

out. :blsmoke:

xochipili · Feb 16, 2009

I just read an interesting qoute from Lennin (the Russian not the Brit) : capitalism will always evolve into socialism. That doesnt bode well for all these anti-Socialists on here, not that I'm applauding this outcome btw.

TheBrutalTruth · Feb 16, 2009

xochipili said:
I just read an interesting qoute from Lennin (the Russian not the Brit) : capitalism will always evolve into socialism. That doesnt bode well for all these anti-Socialists on here, not that I'm applauding this outcome btw.

Lenin has no idea what he was talking about. The move from Capitalism to Interventionism to Socialism has been taking course over the last 70 years. Ever since FDR was elected to become president.

FDR was a statist, but not the first. No, the first person to deserve naming as a statist was Wilson, who was a pawn of the international banking cartel, as proven by his signing of the act that created the Federal Reserve.

Funny, but historically the most dangerous people to America have always been Democrats.

Wilson - Federal Reserve, Income Tax
FDR - Statism/Socialism/Fascism, take your pick, that's what he implemented.
Clinton - Housing Crisis
Obama - We don't know how bad Obama is going to be, but from how it looks, it's going to be BAD.

medicineman · Feb 16, 2009

Obama - We don't know how bad Obama is going to be, but from how it looks, it's going to be BAD.
Of course you discounted Bush and the damage he has done and is still being done by his policies.
We must give Obama a chance to change some things to get the economy back to level, then we can began to assess his progress. Just getting it back to level would be historic in itself. No president since FDR has inherited such a mess, and lets not forget who FDR inherited it from, Herbert Hoover, a repuke of the highest order, Ever heard of Hooverville shanties?

TheBrutalTruth · Feb 16, 2009

medicineman said:
Obama - We don't know how bad Obama is going to be, but from how it looks, it's going to be BAD.
Of course you discounted Bush and the damage he has done and is still being done by his policies.
We must give Obama a chance to change some things to get the economy back to level, then we can began to assess his progress. Just getting it back to level would be historic in itself. No president since FDR has inherited such a mess, and lets not forget who FDR inherited it from, Herbert Hoover, a repuke of the highest order, Ever heard of Hooverville shanties?

Hoover barely scratched the cluster fuck that FDR created. All Hoover had time to do was raise taxes to 70%. FDR raised them to 91%.

Which of course created a serious drag on the economy that was not eased until Kennedy lowered taxes. Followed by Reagan lowering them.

And, I'd probably have to state that Bush's tax cuts are probably the only thing that kept us from slipping into a full blown recession after the tech sector bubble burst, and 9/11.

Of course, it wasn't possible for Bush to keep the economy up forever, because the Federal Reserve (A financial corporation) has continued its inflationary policies of easy credit and devaluation/debasement of the dollar that lead directly into this crisis.

Of course, the easy credit that was created by the Fed after 9/11 probably also has something to do with the fact that the economy managed to continue to limp along after 9/11 and the Tech Sector Bubble going.

But the Federal Reserve's policies alone would have caused a hyper-inflationary collapse.

Or at least it would if the rest of the world wasn't so happy to continue to buy up our debt.

Of course, now we see them buying up our country with our debt. Perhaps some one should congratulate the Democrats (Woodrow Wilson) on slashing the throat of this country when he authorized the central bank.

Not to mention going back in time and congratulating FDR on screwing over our country even worst than Wilson did. At least had we maintained the dollar's link to Gold we'd have a stable currency that has not been exposed to the inflationary policies of the central bank that has lead to increasing amounts of poverty in this country.

CrackerJax · Feb 17, 2009

FDR policies were in full effect when the depression really took over. Even his own economist admitted that they made a depression into a GREAT depression. I see the very same recipe here (wish I didn't), except even FDR did not put all of the countries assets at stake..... Obama & the dem's have. This isn't a golf game you know....you don't get to call a Mulligan.

HotNSexyMILF · Feb 17, 2009

Didn't you all know? FDR saved us all from the Depression and socialism is good, we had to go off the gold standard because nothing was worth more than the FRN, and that we need a bigger and bigger government because we have more and more people in this country.. or so my grandmother just keeps telling me.. =) Don't mind me and my silly facts that say otherwise.. I haven't talked to the people who lived through it and should get off the computer and learn some REAL history.. :roll:

Sunnysideup · Feb 17, 2009

misshestermoffitt said:
The bad thing is Jax, a hospital can call heart surgery "elective" or impacted wisdom teeth removal is considered "elective". They can pretty much put any prodcedure under review and deem it "elective".

It's bad when men in suits with no medical training are deciding peoples fates. It should be between the person and their doctor alone. Everyone else should butt out.

Miss the hospital can call chemotherapy elective as well. They turned away my sister....she was stage 4 ovarian cancer and somehow they deemed that elective...They do whatever they want.

Obama Stimulus Plan Dangerous to Your Health..CODE RED.

New Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member