Right Pundits

Whoo, Andys got groupies.
Leftish ot rightish, you got hugs buddy

Yes, Micky,

Though I should say I have known Karin for several years, long before I started blogging. She is a very sweet lady!

Karin, no doubt has to be sweet if shes huggin you !
Hey Karin !
###################

TA, what were you reading ?
You are aware that the real reason for the audiences outburst was Ron Paul and his feeble stutterin rump that usual has one or both sides of the room pee’d off when he answers a question?

He wasnt saying anyone should die as the question was framed inappropriately and as much as he simply vocalized the whole thing in such an absurd backasswards manner that it sounded like that.
We dont let people die in this country and its never taken government intervention to instill that moral and ethic into our society.
If you’re “ABLE” theres no reason everyone else should be forced to pay for your insurance, even you.
But of course if you opt out of insurance dont go crying when you need it but bought solar panels instead

I read about the crowd’s reaction to the “do we let an uninsured thirty year old die” question on several sites, including Politico. I do not see this as an inappropriate question – it is really the heart of the whole debate on healthcare.

As to your comment, “If you’re “ABLE” theres no reason everyone else should be forced to pay for your insurance, even you.
But of course if you opt out of insurance dont go crying when you need it but bought solar panels instead.” In theory I agree. But in reality, who makes the determination that someone who is being wheeled into an emergency room should have used their money for insurance rather than solar panels? It just doesn’t work.

Until we as a society are willing to literally let people die in the streets, then we as a society are going to be paying for care for the uninsured. It’s really that simple. If people would just acknowledge this very basic fact maybe there could be meaningful dialogue and perhaps even a plan that all or most could agree on. But while the far right continues to insist that healthcare is a personal responsibility, while at the same time refusing to admit that this means people will indeed go without care, we’re going to continue to spin our wheels and argue amongst ourselves and get nothing done.

“I do not see this as an inappropriate question – it is really the heart of the whole debate on healthcare.”

I never said the question was inappropriate.
Its the way it was framed/presented.
He did say “of course we dont let people die”

I watched the debate and I am no fan of Ron Paul whatsoever, everyone knows this.
But he was badgered unfairly.
###########################
I dont think the pregnant woman will have much choice, eventually.

Everyone can have insurance without the government getting into it.
So stop making everyone not in favor of government mandated insurance out to be heartless killers.
And stop pretending that government will not have to ration that care at some point.
THEY DO ALREADY !!!

Its a “FCKING BULLSHT” ARGUMENT AND ASSERTION TO MAKE !

Let the market do what it does so it can supply a demand.
Right now the demand is for cheap affordable insurance.
The market serves itself no purpose if it keeps policies no one can afford.
Private companys have yours, share holders and their money to be accountable for if they are a profit business.
The government is under no obliogation to be responsible with your money.
When with what program has the government ever been fiscally responsible with your money !
They pi$$ it away as if theres always more and are outrageously irresponsible with it because they have no profit or managemant to answer to.

You’re crazy stupid high if you think government run mandated unconstitutionally applied insurance can be sustainable or be of the quality needed.
There is nothing the government has ever done that didnt suck and cost ten times more than projected.

Its a fcking disaster waiting to happen all because a bunch of people are too lazy to do what needs to be done the right way.

Its also a really nasty fcked up ploy to trap voters !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don’t know who won but I know who lost.

The American people.

So Micky, where in your argument is the part where people do not get denied care?

And haven’t we been operating with your preferred free-market system for years? And 40 million uninsured would say that’s not working out so well. As would those paying too much for their insurance because they’re overpaying to compensate for the 40 million. It simply doesn’t work.

The Tea Party crowd cheering and shouting “Yes! Yes!” at the prospect of just letting someone without health insurance die was one of those defining moments we see at times, one of those moments when a group of people are suddenly and unrepentantly exposed for what they truly are. There is no way you can defend it. No way. These people say that they are Christians. Religion is a big part of their act. But there is certainly nothing Christian about this.

Let’s see. Let’s see. Perhaps there are and have been certain people who do deserve to die, I suppose. It is just, I did not know that someone who is sick and without medical care, for any reason, should be one of them. I thought this went out of fashion with Charles Dickens. Certainly there are many people in our country who suffer and even die for want of medical care, but the point is, most all of us agree that this is an evil thing, something that should be changed, or prevented. The argument is, how do we achieve this end?

But here we have the Tea Party conservatives. They have a much better solution. Why worry about it? JUST LET THEM DIE, and forget about it. Life is hard, if someone for some reason is not self reliant enough, or smart enough, or responsible enough, or whatever enough to get medical care, then JUST LET THEM DIE. Very simple. Very succinct. Very utile. And also very much the philosophy of Satan the Devil, rather than Jesus Christ, or any other benevolent God you can think of, or imagine. Perhaps on judgement day these people will be surprised to hear God Almighty’s pronouncement of the fate that THEY may have in store:

LET THEM NOT DIE, FOR ETERNITY.

@ Klo

The very point Ron Paul made during that question was that before Medicare and Medicaid, it was the churches that helped pay for the care of the poor. America is the most generous nation on Earth. The difference is that true charity is a voluntary act, where the contributor knows where his or her money is going and how it will be spent. Forced confiscation by the government which spends the money in what is usually the most wasteful method is simply morally wrong and highly inefficient.

Even if the people want it, but that’s another issue.

“Last fall, Rand Paul briefly caused a stir when he suggested that his libertarian principles would require him to have opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Paul danced around the subject, refusing the let himself be pinned down.

Tonight his father and political idol, Ron Paul, appeared on “Hardball” and said, very forthrightly, what his son merely implied:

Rand’s statements on the law (which he later retracted) came during his first week as the Republican nominee for Senate in Kentucky in 2010. Ron’s criticisms of the law came on the day he declared his third run for the presidency.”

” Paul said he would vote against the law because it imposed unfair rules on what private business owners can and can’t do on their own property. Essentially, they should be free to discriminate if they wish, Paul says, however distasteful that may be.”

“Paul’s alliance with neo-Confederates helps explain the views his newsletters have long espoused on race. Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report,published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” read one typical passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with “‘civil rights,’ quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.” It also denounced “the media” for believing that “America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.”…”

” December 1989, a section of hisInvestment Letter, titled “What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author–presumably Paul–wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.””

#################

theres more, much more

so, a dead society would kill all of themselves for one man right ?
Help me out here with the most fcked up logic I’ve heard.

Ever hear of one man sacrificing himself for the good of everyone ?
A society populated with those individual citizens is the kind of society that survives instead of the society full of the one ass hole(s) like you depending on and dragging down everyone else.
They all may be kind enough to make that sacrifice for you but what does it say about you who would take advantage of an entire civilizations charity so you could be the only man left on earth ?
First of all there’d be no procreation without a mate so humanity would die because of your selfish greedy ass.

The prime directive whether religious or not is a populated humanity, not self, but only individualism and not the collective can propel that…

fcking idiot