Jump to content

Joe's a Liar


ZimZam
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey Matt, I'm not trying to make light of your pain in any way, and if an alternative therapy helped you then I say keep with it. My intent was to take a dig at the moron known as PHELONIUS, who lists his occupation as "Acupuncturist". FWIW, I don't consider most M.D.'s all that useful either--glorified auto mechanics, many. But every now and then you get a good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

As I showed earlier, Lieberman was campaigning for universal healthcare as recently as 2006. Lieberman is the prototypical corporate tool favored by the DNC to prevent anti-war Democrats from entering congress (thank you Rahm Emmanuel).

 

Either progressives challenge corporate shills for control of the Democratic party, or the party will be destroyed in the coming socio-economic crisis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No..assuming I already knew the diagnosis. Going to an accupuncturist while a cancerous tumor was growing wouldn't be my idea of cost effective med. Going to either fora known no-improvement outcome is also a poor choice. To be clear that isn't the choice I set up for Mattp.

 

Um...how would you know its a known no-improvement outcome beforehand? Don't outcomes, you know, come afterwards n shit?

 

Just sayin...

 

OW wrote:

 

What Peter, are you saying you'd be indifferent to paying 10x as much for the same no-improvement outcome?

 

Just sayin'.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mattp are you saying if there was no cost issue at all you would be indifferent between the treatment offered by an accupuncturist and a certain Dr. whose name i gave you?

 

Where in the world did you get that idea?

 

Just asking for clarification........

 

 

Your comment did however get me thinking about two scenarios......

 

ONE

You never went to the doctor who got you on the “right track” and continued to suffer a great deal of (possibly) increasing pain. Move ahead ten years. At this point it seems reasonable that despite your significant levels of pain you would make this claim yet again: over the years my acupuncture experiences have been comparable in effectiveness to my doctor visits, expensive scans, and medicines with side effects when it comes to pain issues.

 

TWO

Now the second scenario is what actually has happened to date and then we again proceed 10 years. I imagine at this point you will be suffering significantly less pain than you have/would in scenario one and yet it doesn’t seem unreasonable that you would again state: over the years my acupuncture experiences have been comparable in effectiveness to my doctor visits, expensive scans, and medicines with side effects when it comes to pain issues.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've always wanted to ask the cc.com collective this on a political thread....

 

why on earth do you think any of these guys aren't lying to begin with? isn't it safer to assume that they're lying until proven wrong. the list of honest politicians doesn't seem long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL...Lieberman, representing the state of Connecticut which I seem to recall is known as America's insurance industry capital. No connection there, I'm sure! :rolleyes:

 

Connecticut, next time just play it straight, and send SATAN directly to the US Senate: he, at least, will be prettier to look at and we won't have to endure that disgusting voice of a sedated camel anymore. A better deal for your money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL...Lieberman, representing the state of Connecticut which I seem to recall is known as America's insurance industry capital. No connection there, I'm sure! :rolleyes:

 

Connecticut, next time just play it straight, and send SATAN directly to the US Senate: he, at least, will be prettier to look at and we won't have to endure that disgusting voice of a sedated camel anymore. A better deal for your money!

 

WTF, wasn't he "your guy" in 2000? You liberals sure are fickle!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it makes a certain sort of sense for the parties to take turns destroying themselves, and it is the Democrat's turn...

 

I must say it isn't a great surprise to see them not delivering on their promises considering their dismal record of giving to Bush almost everything he wanted for 8 years, including 2 yrs with a majority in congress.

 

 

But all this blaming of Lieberman, doesn't really place the blame where it should:

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), among the most vocal supporters of the public option, said it would be unfair to blame Lieberman for its apparent demise. Feingold said that responsibility ultimately rests with President Barack Obama and he could have insisted on a higher standard for the legislation.

 

“This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I don’t think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth,”

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/72375-lieberman-expresses-regret-to-colleagues-over-healthcare-tension-

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've always wanted to ask the cc.com collective this on a political thread....

 

why on earth do you think any of these guys aren't lying to begin with? isn't it safer to assume that they're lying until proven wrong. the list of honest politicians doesn't seem long.

 

True enough, and people shouldn't be so naive considering the evidence provided but accountability is still an essential part of the relationship between politicians and their constituencies. Without it, democracy is impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

White House as Helpless Victim on Health Care

 

by Glenn Greenwald

 

Of all the posts I wrote this year, the one that produced the most vociferious email backlash -- easily -- was this one from August, which examined substantial evidence showing that, contrary to Obama's occasional public statements in support of a public option, the White House clearly intended from the start that the final health care reform bill would contain no such provision and was actively and privately participating in efforts to shape a final bill without it. From the start, assuaging the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries was a central preoccupation of the White House -- hence the deal negotiated in strict secrecy with Pharma to ban bulk price negotiations and drug reimportation, a blatant violation of both Obama's campaign positions on those issues and his promise to conduct all negotiations out in the open (on C-SPAN). Indeed, Democrats led the way yesterday in killing drug re-importation, which they endlessly claimed to support back when they couldn't pass it. The administration wants not only to prevent industry money from funding an anti-health-care-reform campaign, but also wants to ensure that the Democratic Party -- rather than the GOP -- will continue to be the prime recipient of industry largesse.

 

As was painfully predictable all along, the final bill will not have any form of public option, nor will it include the wildly popular expansion of Medicare coverage. Obama supporters are eager to depict the White House as nothing more than a helpless victim in all of this -- the President so deeply wanted a more progressive bill but was sadly thwarted in his noble efforts by those inhumane, corrupt Congressional "centrists." Right. The evidence was overwhelming from the start that the White House was not only indifferent, but opposed, to the provisions most important to progressives. The administration is getting the bill which they, more or less, wanted from the start -- the one that is a huge boon to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industry.

 

more: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/12/16/white_house/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...