|Keefu - 2009-03-05 |
Muddy Mae Suggins
This isn't the dupe. This is the one that got voted out of the hopper. I think the other one went straight to the front page.
|kingarthur - 2009-03-05 |
I've lived in places in this country where people talk exactly like this and my reaction is still thus: "YEEEEEEE-HAWWWWW LIL' DOGGIIIIEE!"
This guy is a simpering ass.
|citrusmirakel - 2009-03-05 |
Hmm... Decisions decisions.
Alright, I'm five starring yours, because yours had to toil in the hopper, and is therefore more valuable. Although I think you should add Xenocide's "GOBS OF EM" tag to this one.
|millerman13 - 2009-03-05 |
Thanks to Xenocide for being a gentleman.
Perhaps next time a simple task like checking the hopper would certainly not do you any harm, since this is clearly my submission.
I had no idea this was so important to you.
Anyway, everyone (including me) gave you stars. GOBS OF THEM. So calm down.
Hey man, I'm not yelling here. However, I recognize that you have submission-to-front page privileges and I do not. For that you must be commended. Just some good natured ribbing, my friend, just some good natured ribbing.
|Stog - 2009-03-05 |
Rep. Zach Wamp's Start to Socialism score is approximately two seconds. That's pretty tough to beat, though I couldn't take him seriously for more than a second because of his GEWFY SOUTHERN ACCENT HYUK HYUK HYUK.
|halon - 2009-03-05 |
I'll 5 star this one too, because the newscaster is still ultrahot.
|cognitivedissonance - 2009-03-05 |
Man, Republicans are sure hung up on Hilary Clinton, aren't they? How dare rich people lose their tax deductions? THAT WAY LIES MADNESS!!!
"AH WAS JUST ABOUT TO FINISH..."
|heyitslozeau - 2009-03-05 |
................................im sorry what?
|afp3683 - 2009-03-05 |
I'm glad this man is standing up for my rights to CHOOSE to not go to the doctor or hospital because my employer's health insurance policy would reduce my paycheck to below a living wage.
|godot - 2009-03-05 |
To be fair, our constitutional rights are all restrictions of, and protections against, government activity. The idea of rights to goods and services is pretty recent in the language. In this debate the term is mostly just an awkward rhetorical device that incenses opponents perhaps more than it rallies support.
I call single-payer healthcare simply a pragmatic solution. Its certainly better than the current system of subsidizing private insurance, transferring rationing away from the consumer (encouraging overconsumption), as well as creating a huge profit / payment overhead. Single-payer doesn't do much for the former, but largely fixes the later. There's not much to be done about patients disputing how much care they should be rationed.
Also, as far as I can tell, Obama seems to be leaning to a mandatory private insurance program, a bit like Hillarycare, which hasn't worked at the state level. Maybe we'll get Canada care after 60 senate seats are secured.
As a small businessperson who can't afford the crappy private insurance available (which covers squat and gives you a deductible you wouldn't agree on for your friggin' house), a single-payer system would be great.
And I know a lot of the conservatives start talking about breast implants for homeless women or stuff like that, but all I'm saying is that if you break your leg, you shouldn't lose your home to get it set and put in a cast. You shouldn't have to wait until you're dying of pneumonia before you have no choice but to go to the ER. We're already paying for the uninsured via insurance premiums and so forth; why not make it more efficient and just install a working system?
In closing, HMOs should be criminalized. Setting up a for-profit entity that makes more money the more health care it denies is the product of either a sadist or a lobotomized brain.
I agree, Kleenex. Good show.
|Big Muddy - 2009-03-05 |
Senator Tankerbell you have the floor.
|Cena_mark - 2009-03-05 |
So I guess food should be a privilege too since we need it to survive? I'm going to walk right into a Kroger fill up my cart and just walk on out.
Actually, I was pretty sure you did that already.
If the store was a single-payer food distribution system, sure, go nuts.
But unlike health care, food is abundant, affordable, regulated (mostly, don't touch the peanuts for a while) and nobody gets extra cash for keeping you from getting it.
Come to think of it, your analogy is pretty far-fetched. And it's yet again one of those "all or nothing" memes conservatives seem to favor. Think the war in Iraq is a bad idea? You must want Saddam as president. Think a Republican president isn't doing a good job? You must want to live in Soviet Russia. It's so childish, really. It's like listening to a whining teenager who claims that because they're grounded for a weekend, they might as well shoot themselves, because THAT'S what their parents want, obviously.
Health care like any other resource must have a price, if not then the recourse would be used up and abused. I have a 20$ copay on my insurance. I'm not going to see a doctor for every little sniffle I get because I don't want to throw away 20$. Now imagine a world where there are no payments to any medical establishments. It would be like Sweden.
Malmo, with its 280,000 residents, is Sweden's third-largest city. To see a physician, a patient must go to one of two local clinics before they can see a specialist. The clinics have security guards to keep patients from getting unruly as they wait hours to see a doctor. The guards also prevent new patients from entering the clinic when the waiting room is considered full. Uppsala, a city with 200,000 people, has only one specialist in mammography. Sweden's National Cancer Foundation reports that in a few years most Swedish women will not have access to mammography.
Yeah, Michael Whore left those little details out.
I'm not sure "Capitalism Magazine" is the best unbiased source of info for those things. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Sweden they still beat us on every metric. Not that they don't have a waiting time problem.
|Hooper_X - 2009-03-05 |
"Zack Womp" is the kind of noise that needs to be followed by groaning and "DUDE ARE YOU OKAY?"
|SolRo - 2009-03-05 |
has Rep. Douchebagington given up his free congressional health coverage?
|Rodents of Unusual Size - 2009-03-05 |
Gobs of illegals is the scientific term. Like "herd" or "flock".
|Senator_Unger - 2009-03-06 |
You know, treating something like it's a nightmare conceived from Stalin's fevered brain really only works when EVERY OTHER DEVELOPED NATION doesn't have it.
|Aress - 2009-03-06 |
This isn't a fun or entertaining comment, but it's not a very fun or entertaining video. Health care is a need, not a right. A right is a freedom of action, not a claim on a material good or service other people give to you. Which is why there's no such thing as a right to a PS3, or a a Car, or health care. If a right equals a material claim, that means someone else has to supply it. Who are the people that are going to supply those people with their "right"?
On the other hand Wamp's latent xenophobic anti-immigrant mentality is just typical of modern Republicans. People want to come to America for all the right reasons. If it weren't for people like him arbitrarily creating stupendous requirements to legally enter the country there'd be no problem with "illegals".
Health care does need reform, but not by pretending it's a "right". Repealing laws that require insurers to provide extremely costly benefits, as well as allowing them to sell catastrophic-only policies would reduce costs by a huge amount. In addition everyone should be allowed to purchase insurance across state lines and use Health Savings Accounts for routine expenses.
|Nikon - 2009-03-19 |
Needs banjo soundtrack.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|