Printable View
Yeah right ..label me with the rest of the bleeding heart liberals. The last thing I'm concerned about is the abortion issue. Though the politically correct way of thinking about the issue is about the result and not about the ways of fixing the problem which is so typical of the rights way of thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
Say your against a position but having no realistic solution is so typical of your way of thinking !
Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
Kind of like how you people couldnt shut up about Clintons penis for the past 12 years?
Do you really think I give a rats ass about abortion? Whether abortion is legal or not is not going to effect me one way or another. What I do care about is one group of people thinking they are morally superior to the rest of us because of some fairy tale book and then proceed to push this idiotic bullshit down other peoples throats. People have been victimized for centuries by these do-gooders and all one has to do is tune into FOX News for 5 minutes to know its the same old song and dance.
1st PAGE--by Zedleppin--look it up--in his post several paragraphs down.Quote:
Originally Posted by wkhey4
It was he/she that moved this thread to abortion.
Clinton's penis was and is the last thing on my mind--LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zedleppelin
And here are some pro-life DEMOCRAT politicians that I am certain you will be voting against too--LOL
Pro-life Democratic politicians look to future after Casey convention speech :: Catholic News Agency (CNA)
And to help you out a little bit. There are pro-choice Republicans and pro-life Republicans. There are pro-choice Democrats and pro-life Democrats. It's a mixed bag of people from every political party--from every race--and from every religion. So it's not worth the time to talk about--because it has been continually discussed for the last 40 YEARS. And I am tired of people like you including it into every single topic of interest. It's more than obvious that's the only thing you know.
There is one other thing I know, and that is abortion is not a constitutionally protected right, so I guess that trumps what you know. :smokin:Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
if it wasn'tIf you look at history,most conflicts throughout world historyQuote:
Originally Posted by Zedleppelin
are fought over religious beliefs. If you take religious beliefs-religion
out of the equation you'd have a world far more advanced then it is now.
The opiate of the masses and the reason for our backwards way of thinking. is the preponderating belief of a supreme being that actually cares and has a grand scream for our eternal salvation
Constitution protected right implys, it is in the US Constitution. Roe -vs- Wade was a case decided by the US Supreme Court, and is always subject to being reviewed again, should someone pursue a new appeal. So you are absolutely correct it is not a constitutional protected right. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Zedleppelin
Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
Seems to me like there are only about four politicians in favor of legalization period. We can't even get a federal mmj bill, legalization is a long way off. If it comes in states, which I hope it will, it will be through small-d democracy. Initiatives, petitions, whatever. Once we get it legalized at the state level, we'll have to fight against idiotic regulations from the legislators who still won't bother listening to their constituents. And even after we do all that work in the states, if we elect the wrong president they'll be perfectly willing to use federal law against marijuana.
I'm just not seeing any groundswell of support for marijuana among federal politicians. Precious few at the state level are even willing to stand up for medical marijuana, much less full legalization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangwomyn
When the high court makes a decision on a case like Roe v Wade it is the law of the land until it is overturned. It has been in effect for 40 years now--and is highly doubtful that it will ever be over-turned. Liberals like to use this topic to judge politicians. Nothing else appears to matter to them--it's always abortion--which again they will throw into every single topic.
They use it as a litmus test as to whom they are going to vote for.
It's a non-issue today. And there are much more important things in our lives that should be discussed--other than abortion.
The fact is--that every single woman in this country today can obtain an abortion--yet we are still discussing a 40 year old law. Today 40% of the women in this country having babies are not married--so as we see--it is a minut minority of women that choose to have abortions--yet again we're still talking about it.
More Single Women Are Having Babies - ABC News
California is going to legalise it--and I believe I heard that we may see it on our ballot in 2012. Ron Paul conservative--Rand Paul his son who is leading as a new senator from Kentucky is for legalising it along with Tom Tancredo here. I really can't think of any others right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by donniedorko
BUT it's going to be very interesting to see how the Federal Government responds to California this November. It may be all out war.
A here is Diane Fienstein--a long term major democrat Senator in California who is against legalizing it there.
So as we see again--this is not a left/right issue--we are at odds with both sides of the isle.
Feinstein Joins Ranks of Politicians Against Legalizing Pot - LAist
I also make no apologies, I just pointed out that a comment was thoughtless and ignorant with no relation to the poster who made the comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zedleppelin
I was also surprised to see this topic discussed instead of the candidates.
I have a feeling there will be more posts deleted, it would be more useful for posters to highlight where each candidate stands, instead of trying to debate.
It's not likely that anyone is going to change their core beliefs. We should be highlighting where our candidates stand, and hopefully those on the fence or otherwise unaware might be affected.
If the abortion issue or healthcare issue is that important, find the right place and make a thread, stop cluttering up otherwise useful places for discussion.
edit:
Also, anyone who watches John Stewart regularly automatically has more credibility than anyone who watches cnn, foxnews or any other mainstream media outlet. Just 'sayin. Last night's show was awesome, and last week's sanchez story was just fantastic.
John Stewart is my hero, I think of him as a modern day Will Rogers, someone who will say what should be logical but still needs to be said. I would love to be able to attend his return to sanity rally. A few of my favorite Will Rogers quotes:
A fool and his money are soon elected.
A holding company is a thing where you hand an accomplice the goods while the policeman searches you.
A man only learns in two ways, one by reading, and the other by association with smarter people.
A remark generally hurts in proportion to its truth.
About all I can say for the United States Senate is that it opens with a prayer and closes with an investigation.
Advertising is the art of convincing people to spend money they don't have for something they don't need.
Alexander Hamilton started the U.S. Treasury with nothing, and that was the closest our country has ever been to being even.
All I know is just what I read in the papers, and that's an alibi for my ignorance.
Will Rogers died in 1935 and it apprears that as much as things change some things stay the same.
I would classify myself as a bleeding heart liberal. I suspect much farther to the left than most of those reading this forum, in fact much farther to the left than most.
Great quotes. :thumbsup: He's up there with Twain imho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenster
Good One--here is one of my favorites:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. Adrian Rogers, 1931
...he didn't have the writers that stewart has working "daily" for him
great quotes anyhow!
sorry, i just finished the teddy roosevelt biography and twain was a thorn in the otherwise fawned over president's side
Glad you enjoy those quotes but you do realize that Will Rogers was a political humorist, comedian, actor much like John Stewart and he died inQuote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
1935. Adrian Rogers, on the other hand, is a pastor, conservative that spent several terms as the President of the Southern Baptist Convention who was born in 1931.
For me Will Rogers represents all that is good about political humorists and Adrian Rogers represents all that is wrong with religion mixing with politics.
Those are the kind of things that sound good in theory, but in practice not so much. What are people who are disabled supposed to do, be left out to die? This is a medical marijuana forum, presumably there are people here who are either disabled or borderline, so might not be the best audience.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenster
Well--judging from the mindset of many in the undereducated political world--comics do more damage than truth does. There are many in this country that somehow make into the voting booth--that can't tell you who the vice-President of the United States is--and are easily influenced by Hollywood--and Saturday Night Live.
So you can take your comics--and I'll take what makes sense to me.
Wow, you obviously don't know who Will Rogers is.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
The disabled are and have been taken care of in this country. Right now my medical insurance premiums just went up another 10% mid-year to pay for someone else's colonoscopy five years down the road from now. Someone who more than likely is capable of paying for a simple castastropic medical insurance policy but is more interested in that new car stereo.Quote:
Originally Posted by donniedorko
Will Rodgers was very well liked in this country--but I wouldn't consider him any kind of political genius of his time. IOW--I wouldn't set his statements in stone--and then vote by them or form a political ideology from them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zedleppelin
"When government is big enough to give you everything you want, it will also be big enough to take everything you have"--Thomas Jefferson
Allow me to rant before it gets deleted or something, but there are two crises with regards to our current healthcare 'system'. We're discussing nearly one fifth of our economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
The first crisis is of access. This affects about 10-15% of people in this country. It's a large problem and needs to be addressed. Recent legislation has done some positive things like the creation of additional 'high-risk' pools and programs for those who can't get covered under current rules, guarantee issue of policies to children, etc.
The second crisis is one of cost, and it affects nearly everyone, more than 90% in my opinion. This crisis reaches across many different parts of our economy, and it's going to be difficult to reform a problem that affects so many people. That's why it's difficult to pass a bill to solve all of our problems.
We're starting to see insurance companies play by the new rules, but they still will find their loopholes. After all, we had to pass the legislation before we can see what's in it, of course there will be loopholes.
Politicians suck.
Glad to hear you are an expert on this matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
We already had a law in Colorado passed in 2008 that added $3.00 to every premium in this state to help those with pre-exisiting conditions get coverage.
Back in the 1990's--in our small Sub-S business--we could group together to get the same kind of rates as large corporations. Our employees were covered and we could afford to pay for it. Then group for small business imploded leaving small business people out in the dark. We had to purchase private policies for ourselves just to keep it affordable--and then donate to our employees pay-checks additional so they could get a private personal policy. Right now my spouse and I alone--(very healthy--btw) avid exercises and eating habits pay $925.00 per month for a lousy high-deductible ($10K deductible policy.) And Athem/Blue Cross just raised it to over $1000 per month--because of Obamacare.
If you walk into our hospital emergency rooms--they are filled with people complaining about common colds and sore throats--because they do not want to pay for that doctors visit. In my opinion--I think there should be N.P's in every Walgreen's--or pharmacy across this country--where they can accept walk-in patients for a small fee--for these type of common symptons--which would bring everyone's medical cost down.
In the end we all end up paying for the uninsured in this country.
It seems like you are criticizing rightwinger, I would like you to clarify. I would consider myself an 'expert' in this field, and everything he has said about insurance is spot on.Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangwomyn
There are already programs in existence that help uninsured people get covered.
What's your beef? Cost? Access? Quality of coverage? Please elaborate.
I think you meant to quote mustangwoman instead of me, because this post seems more targeted at them.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
I've been in this industry for nine years, and my father has been in this industry for 35+ years, so what you posted is common knowledge for me.
Cliff Notes: We have serious issues and two major crises in our healthcare system, cost and access. Obamacare doesn't do much to address either. At least there will be more politicians employed by all of the growth in government. Our current two party system makes it nearly impossible to pass meaningful reform. At least there are two more elections before obamacare forces us onto the government roster.
My beef is the cost of medical insurance. Small business cannot afford group insurance. Today I would guess that the over 40 million Americans who aren't covered are working for small business in this country--and continually head to the emergency room for common symptoms that could easily be taken care of in clinics--and pharmacies. I don't think Obamacare addresse's this issue. This bill in no way reflects on how to reduce the cost of medical treatment--it just takes from one fund (Medicare) to pay for another program. Here we are taking 500 billion dollars out of Medicare--when the baby boomer population--which is the largest generation in history-is now entering Medicare and will continue to do so for the next 15 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
I am with you on this point--I can't think of any Federal Government program that has been operated efficiently. Social Security bankrupt--Medicare bankrupt and Medicade bankrupt. Even the senate cafeteria is in red ink--LOL.
In another note--last year I called Anthem--Blue Cross--Blue Shield to complain again about the yearly rate increase--and listened to a 10 minute recorded apology. Their stated reason for the continual rate increases was the pharmacutical industry that has been pushing all these new drugs on the market--for many things none of us have even heard of. Restless leg syndrom--all the erectile dysfunction pills--etc. etc. etc.--that we all end up paying for. I think some of these pills should be paid out of pocket by the patient for a lot of this.
In conclusion--my daughter is a nurse practitioner working out of a local hospital handeling all the mothers having babies that are on medicade. What she tells me is that more and more pediatricians are refusing to see babies that have Medicade coverage. They accept a few--then the rest go somewhere else. Medicade apparently pays around .87 cents on the dollar--so doctors are reluctant to accept new patients.
In my opinion people's health should never be a for profit business. I remember back in the dark ages when pharmaceutical companies could not advertise on TV. Unfortunately, as long as we have a system of health care where there is big money to be made premiums will go up.
There can be finger pointing to big pharmacy in regards to increased health care costs and the continuing prohibition of marijuana, two subjects near and dear to my heart.
The pharmacutical industry in this country is the largest lobbyist in Washington D.C--against the use of medical marijuana.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reenster
They're too busy in that chemical lab making up a new weekly pill for us to try--LOL Profits and politicians never mix well for the American public. We always get the sharp end of the stick.
If that!Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
I don't know any other industry where when they are billed, they come back and say,"Sorry we're only going to pay X amount".
If I take my car to the mechanic and he bills me $500, I can't say "Well I'm only going to pay $250".
The whole industry/field/system is screwed up. From the medical education schools to billing practices of the medical offices to the insurance companies down to the patients who won't practice a bit of common sense and got see a general practitioner instead of going to the ED for a common cold!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaiBuddhaMan
Unfortunately they do end up in our very expensive hospital emergency rooms for "free" medical care. One hospital in Texas spent over 200K last year for one single homeless man that kept coming into the emergency room for a variety of tests. BTW--they never could find anything wrong with him. Overall this one hospital billed Medicade for over 500K on a total of 18 continual frequent visitors.
Until that stops--and there are other places for these type of people to go--we are not going to be able to stop the sky-rocketing costs of health care.
That's nothing. We had a patient & their family who had insurance. The family didn't want to pull the plug. The patient had been dead for several weeks (brain). Staff could smell the stench of the rotting body. We have the tech to keep a body going for a long long time (too long in my opinion), but people have got to learn to deal with death. It's a part of life. That family racked up over 1.4 million in bills. I don't blame the insurance for not covering all of it as it's not their fault the family can't let go.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
500k for 1 homeless guy in Texas. Shit happens all the time here in CO.
Are you an Expert on Social Security & MedicareQuote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
You might want to take the time to read what I responded to. I have taken the time to repost it so you don't have to.
FYI I am disabled on Social Security and if you consider living on $600 - $1200 (the average social security check) a month being taken care of then you sure have an interesting point of being taken care of. I pay close to $200 a month just in copays & premiums (deducted from my social security check). I don't even qualify for extra help from Social security because of my husbands Piddly unemployment check. (the company he used to work for went Belly up)Quote:
The disabled are and have been taken care of in this country.
Several Medications I take are only available in Name Brand & can not be substituted due to my health condition I am very limited in the Medications I can take.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaiBuddhaMan
Definitely-
There are millions on social security disability and many are non-deserving of it. They find the loop-holes and raid it. Then the other problem is government itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangwomyn
What started out as a great plan for the elderly in this country (back in the 1930's) to take care of them when they aged turned out to be the greatest ponzi scheme--better than Bernie Maddof ever thought of. Currently--employees/employer contributions are 12.4% of gross payroll though-out ones entire life of working. Do the MATH. Our government uses it as a slush fund--meaning they take the money--spend it on wars--foreign aid--and anything and everything other than the well being of our disabled and retirees. Then if you're lucky enough to hit the age that the government decides you can obtain YOUR money--they give diddly sqwat back to you in a monthly check. If you meet your demise before the government age and are not married the government simply confiscates it. Now--if you did your math on gross income multiplied by 12.4% over ones working lifetime--you would realise that there should be no-one in this country that would be having to eat dog food. A simple guaranteed passbook money market guaranteed fund would far out-do what social security pays out. IOW--it not anyone's fault that you're getting 600-700 per month other than the government's mis-management of social security.
Today--we have Michael Bennet running for senator who wants to keep this slush fund--and Ken Buck who wants younger people to be able to invest in "safe--guaranteed" private sector funds that the government can't get their hands on--and should they meet their demise early--their heirs can inherit it. Democrats typically like to scare the elderly out of this proposal using the stock market jirations--and making certain that you don't know about guaranteed insurance annuities--C.D's and money market accounts.
Go get em girl...I too am on social sec disability from an on the job injury plus other health issues and I can definatly support your statement that we on social sec are not very well taken care of...yes we might have insurance but there are co-pays and medicine costs that still must be paid out of pocket and of course there is always the mortgage and utilities etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangwomyn
so yes there are many people who are being let down and under cared for in our system that need help but sadly there is not much more help available.
Your the one that said.
That statement has noting to do with people that are non-deserving, and let me assure you getting approved for Social Security Disability is not easy, thus most that are on Social Security Disability are deserving as it usually requires an appeal to get approved as almost always are denied at the first stage. In fact many give up because the approval process is so difficult.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangwomyn
Look I know people who are perfectly capable of working-that get social security disability. One guy with back pain that somehow got it--that rides around on his Harley Davidson all day long. Another young woman who has some kind of new disease--that no doctor can verify-get's it. Social Security disability comes down to how good your lawyer is--and how many times one person stays after it. Then another that worked a total of 2 weeks her entire life--got addicted to hard core drugs--and gets social security disability benefits--and has received it for DECADES.
So don't tell me there's no fraud in social security disability benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
First off I NEVER said there is No Fraud, I said that most are deserving, but I guess that don't fit your agenda, so you twist my words. Secondly Winning a social security appeal is a time consuming matter, in my case it was close to 18 months - 2 years (which is normal) before I won my appeal with no income in the mean time. Please tell me how many peeps are willing to starve (no income) to fraud the government.
It is also necessary to have credits to receive social security disability, that means working more than 2 weeks, usually close to 10 years credits which means they either worked more or are drawing on a family members credits.
I am also glad that you think its fraud cause a doctor can't find a disease. Just because a persons condition doesn't have a known disease doesn't mean they aren't disabled.
But once again what does that have to do with your statement that the disabled are taken care of ?????
Give me a break--I personally know this "young" woman. She put in a few years of work--decided she no longer wanted to work--went to 50 different doctors in this state until she found "one" that agreed with her. She stayed after it for about 3 years--and has and will continue to get social security disability benefits for the rest of her life.Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangwomyn
Now if you want to POINT your finger at someone as to the reason why someone like you whom is actually disabled gets diddly sqwat in a monthly check why don't you blame someone like her--who has raided this system along with a few hundred thousand of them? Would you prefer to fix this system or just unload more debt on your children and grandchildren in order to up your monthly check? That's basically where the rubber meets the road in this discussion.
This is the entire point. Government has never been consistent or efficient with taxpayer money. Once they are in control of your money--they will grow and expand to others who are not as deserving. Then they will want more money to do it again.
And that is exactly what is going on with social security today. Now they're talking about raising the age for retirement benefits--and they'll do it.
Please don't look down your nose at me because you're sick. You aren't the only one, and no one is out to get you. Show some respect to those who are trying to help you. You seem to have an aggressive attitude toward me which is undeserved.Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangwomyn
To answer your question, yes, I would consider myself and our agency to be medicare, not so much on the social security. Do you have a specific question or anything?
rightwinger correctly posted that there is already coverage for the uninsured, the underinsured, and the poor. You seem to take issue with the fact that he seems to be against socialized medicine. I'm not sure though, I don't care. If you think he needs to clarify that there isn't enough coverage, then say that. But don't treat rightwinger like a liar, because he's telling the truth even though it hurts.
I asked you to clarify and I don't see where you did. Are you saying there is a problem with access to your care, or are you unhappy with the cost? Are you unhappy with current subsidies or something? It's like you're saying you can't find coverage or get care, which is untrue.