|
 SleepyF0x
I bleed nicotine...
Registered: 09/23/07
Posts: 4,150
|
 Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option!  [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11082991 - 09/18/09 12:10 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
you should start thinking, here's a place to start
http://www.naph.org/
Quote:
As providers of universal access, we know the great potential of providing universal coverage through health care reform.
Quote:
From naph.org -- sounds like they don't oppose universal health care, and sounds like they are even looking forward to it.
thanks for that site.
rofl, owned.
--------------------
Everybody's a ninja...
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11090316 - 09/19/09 05:33 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sombie said:
Regular checkups save the American people money.
how does me getting my prostate probed by aliens or doctards save you money, getting check ups doesnt prevent cancer, it just allows for early detection
Quote:
And what do you mean make the medical community wealthier? Can you not try to fix anything in this country without being called a puppet for a special interest group?
not when you're a puppet for special interest
Quote:
Of course any republican could have stopped their partisan bickering and come over to help with the solution but they did not.
the did, they denied support for the bill, it's the simple solution with the cheapest outcome
Quote:
So we are left with a bill that keeps the insurance companies happy, but that was not the intention.
because the special interest puppets you call blue dogs wanted to ensure their retirement
Quote:
People today are denied coverage, even when they have paid for insurance their entire lives.
um... charity hospitals, non-profit hospitals, free clinics... none of
them turn anyone away regardless of how much you make and since they
make up nearly 2/3 of our hospitals, I'd have to assume the puppets for
special interest wouldnt want you to know this
Quote:
From naph.org -- sounds like they don't oppose universal health care, and sounds like they are even looking forward to it.
because it increases their funding, just as it does for a lot of other
people, but the site also proves the point that there is affordable
health care for everyone, some people are just too stupid to make use of it
as such, I believe their too stupid to live
|
GI_Luvmoney
Vote Republican!
Registered: 05/10/09
Posts: 939
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11090438 - 09/19/09 05:56 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: GI_Luvmoney]
#11090502 - 09/19/09 06:06 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
wanna try posting things relevant to discussion?
|
GI_Luvmoney
Vote Republican!
Registered: 05/10/09
Posts: 939
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11090692 - 09/19/09 06:36 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I thought a paranoid video of a left wing radical being brainwashed by Republicans was relevant.
|
 acid_kiss
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/08
Posts: 97
Last seen: 13 years, 8 months
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11093407 - 09/20/09 05:13 AM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sombie said:
We spend at least 50% more then any other nation per capita (that means per person) on our healthcare, yet we don't have the whole nation insured like they do, and we don't have better medical outcomes either.
And we have the best health care in the world because we pay more for it, its privatized, and profit motives drive innovation. Yes, waste and fraud play a factor but if we don't have better medical outcomes here why to people come from around the world to get medical treatments here?
Why are we not on waiting lists to get a family doctor, or to get a simple procedure? I know, our private system sucks ass. Can't wait to get me some of this.
Why take one of the only industries that we are a leader in and destroy it?
Oh yeah, because they want to slow or stop our economic and population growth to save the earth and we can all hold hands in some big rainbow hugging circle jerk and save the earth.
But please, show me some evidence of the Quote:
we don't have better medical outcomes either
And please provide a few examples of something the government does more efficiently than the private sector. Then I'll think about public health care.
|
TGRR
Horrible Bastard
Registered: 05/22/07
Posts: 2,084
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: acid_kiss]
#11095475 - 09/20/09 03:36 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
acid_kiss said:
And we have the best health care in the world because we pay more for it, its privatized, and profit motives drive innovation.
Actually, America is #37 in the world, not the best.
Sorry about that.
--------------------
What can we do to help you stop screaming?
Official Mr Shoebat lackey.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US 
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: TGRR]
#11097498 - 09/20/09 09:53 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry if this is a repost; I've been off these boards for a while:
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Sombie
Moonrock eater
Registered: 12/07/02
Posts: 2,643
Loc: Stafford, Virginia
Last seen: 14 years, 1 month
|
|
Yeah the Idea that we "have the best healthcare in the world" is simply a myth pushed by the insurance companies.
Any honest look tells you that it is not the case, every study done has shown it is not the case. I'm not just saying this because its my opinion, but rather simple fact. Study after study has shown that our healthcare is not the best.
We pay more and get less. If you are extremely rich, and can pay for treatments yourself, then you are fine.
If you are middle class or poor (but to well off for medicade) then it sucks. Even if you have employer based insurance or spend thousands a year on your own insurance you can be dropped at any time. Insurance companies even have people whos job it is to try and find loop holes so they can deny you coverage. To them its not about saving a life, its about the bottom line.
And acid kiss, if you think healthcare reform is a conspiracy to kill off the human race to save the earth, well I never thought I would say this to anyone but, you are a paranoid, delusional, wacko who really needs to lay off the acid.
Sorry, I can't watch the videos, I'm on linux based ubuntu and haven't set up all the different shit yet. If you care to just make your own arguments.
And TGRR Nice Spider Jerusalem icon!
--------------------
"America... just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable." - Hunter S Thompson
Check out Agio
Follow my NFL Blog
|
Sombie
Moonrock eater
Registered: 12/07/02
Posts: 2,643
Loc: Stafford, Virginia
Last seen: 14 years, 1 month
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11097940 - 09/20/09 11:28 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Something to chew on.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090917/hl_nm/us_usa_healthcare_deaths
fourteen 9/11s every year due to our healthcare.
--------------------
"America... just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable." - Hunter S Thompson
Check out Agio
Follow my NFL Blog
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11099455 - 09/21/09 10:10 AM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yeah the Idea that we "have the best healthcare in the world" is simply a myth pushed by the insurance companies.
Not a myth, and not "pushed" by insurance companies. It is a simple fact, amply proven by all available evidence.
Remember that "best" is not a synonym for "perfect", or even for "inexpensive" or "universal". It is just the best that is currently available on the planet. Not the cheapest, not "free" at point of delivery to all comers - just the best.
Quote:
Any honest look tells you that it is not the case, every study done has shown it is not the case. I'm not just saying this because its my opinion, but rather simple fact. Study after study has shown that our healthcare is not the best.
As has been shown repeatedly in thread after thread after thread in this forum, with ample links to credible sources, your statements are false. The US leads the world in neo-natal care, medical imaging technology (and - more importantly - AVAILABILITY of that technology), survival rates for all serious medical killers such as cancer and heart disease, percentage of citizens who undergo preventive testing such as colonoscopies, mammograms, prostate exams, pap smears, etc., introduction of new drugs, and more. In actual fact, the only areas in which the US fails to top the charts is in "universality" and in amount of dollars spent annually per capita for health services.
Oh, and the US fails to top the charts in life expectancy, but as any honest debater with two brain cells to rub together must admit, the life expectancy metric as measured by every single country in the world is dependent on far too many other factors to be of any real use in determining the level of health care in a country - ANY country - and is therefore irrelevant to any serious conversation on health care. Anytime you get some clown triumphantly shouting that "Eleven (or whatever) countries have longer lifespans than the US, so there!" you can safely ignore every other statement he utters.
Quote:
We pay more and get less.
It is entertaining indeed to read your posts. Are you slinging this bullshit to be a troll or because you are just woefully ignorant of the subject matter? In the US, you pay more but you get more. FAR more in most cases, which is why those who can afford it fly into the US to be treated.
Quote:
Even if you have employer based insurance or spend thousands a year on your own insurance you can be dropped at any time.
Actually, no, you can't. At least, not legally. The insurance company cannot violate its contract with you with impunity. And of course flaws in the insurance system (assuming there are any) are not the same thing as flaws in healthcare. Medical care in the US remains the best available.
You would do well before making your next post to review some of the existing threads where all this stuff has been covered to death. You will look less foolish.
Phred
--------------------
|
Sombie
Moonrock eater
Registered: 12/07/02
Posts: 2,643
Loc: Stafford, Virginia
Last seen: 14 years, 1 month
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Phred]
#11100080 - 09/21/09 12:32 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah you right, I am a troll because I trust the WHO studies showing our healthcare is ranked 37th in the world.
We are just a bit above Turkey.
I said, if you are extremely rich and can pay for your own treatments then we are good. We have good doctors and we have good equipment.
It is not, however, significantly better then places like the U.K. and we have less doctors per person then other countries.
If you think rich foreigners coming here for treatment shows how good our medical care is then you are mistaken. Our medical care today goes to he with the most cash. and thats not right.
Long ago our fire departments were privatized and the results were similar to what we have today. The WHO takes all factors into account, such as infant mortality, life expectancy, cost of care, access to care, distribution of the cost of care, among other factors.
To say "we have the best health care in the world because people come here for treatment" is a simplistic and frankly misleading way to look at it.
If we have the best healthcare in the world, then please explain to me how we are ranked 26th on infant mortality rates and 24th on disability adjusted life expectancy?
Is not the most important thing how many people live and for how long?
"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane."
— Martin Luther King, Jr.
--------------------
"America... just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable." - Hunter S Thompson
Check out Agio
Follow my NFL Blog
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Phred]
#11100428 - 09/21/09 01:30 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Phred, the argument isn't about who has the best medical technology; we can probably all agree it's the United States. The argument is which healthcare system is best for its citizens. Not just the wealthy ones - for all citizens. Millions of people who work their asses off in the United States can't afford health insurance (I'm not talking about the unemployed). Those that have insurance are constantly fighting their insurance companies over their coverage, pre-existing conditions, etc. I have great medical coverage, and I fight with my insurance company (Anthem Blue Cross) all the time, because they try not to pay for things I'm covered for. I LOVED the medical care I had in the military, and wished I had something similar today.
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Sombie
Moonrock eater
Registered: 12/07/02
Posts: 2,643
Loc: Stafford, Virginia
Last seen: 14 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Phred, the argument isn't about who has the best medical technology; we can probably all agree it's the United States. The argument is which healthcare system is best for its citizens. Not just the wealthy ones - for all citizens. Millions of people who work their asses off in the United States can't afford health insurance (I'm not talking about the unemployed). Those that have insurance are constantly fighting their insurance companies over their coverage, pre-existing conditions, etc. I have great medical coverage, and I fight with my insurance company (Anthem Blue Cross) all the time, because they try not to pay for things I'm covered for. I LOVED the medical care I had in the military, and wished I had something similar today.
Yeah, growing up in a military family I got access to the military provided health care, and it was good. Not perfect, but far better then what I have now.
--------------------
"America... just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable." - Hunter S Thompson
Check out Agio
Follow my NFL Blog
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11100633 - 09/21/09 02:10 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yeah you right, I am a troll because I trust the WHO studies showing our healthcare is ranked 37th in the world.
You uncritically accept whatever you are told if it fits with your preconceived notion of reality. It has been demonstrated in previous threads that the WHO report is unabashedly partisan tripe which measures not actual health care excellence, but ideological considerations. Just because some organization somewhere makes some dubious claim doesn't make it true. The WHO claim is - on the face of it - absurd, as anyone who has looked at the list of countries ahead of the US can tell. Anyone with a lick of common sense, that is.
Quote:
I said, if you are extremely rich and can pay for your own treatments then we are good. We have good doctors and we have good equipment.
Your conception of "extremely rich" is laughable. Poll after poll after poll, run by all flavors of organizations in the US, has shown that the vast majority of Americans - in the high eighty to low ninety per cent range, depending on which poll you look at - is either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the health coverage they currently receive. The fact is that - while some insurance companies sometimes do try to dodge some of their responsibilities - by far the vast majority of health insurance claims go through without a hitch.
We are not talking about "extremely rich" people here, dude, unless you consider ninety per cent of Americans to be extremely rich.
Quote:
Our medical care today goes to he with the most cash. and thats not right.
But see, this is where you are just spewing absolute bullshit. Unless somehow you can persuade the readers that roughly eighty-five-plus per cent of Americans have the most cash.
Quote:
It is not, however, significantly better then places like the U.K. and we have less doctors per person then other countries.
Again, you are spectacularly uniformed on this topic. I very strongly suggest you review the information presented in recent threads on this subject. Pay particular attention to the following areas in the UK: cancer survival rates, dentistry, neo-natal care, and denial of medication and "heroic" measures to the elderly, for starters.
Quote:
he WHO takes all factors into account, such as infant mortality, life expectancy, cost of care, access to care, distribution of the cost of care, among other factors.
Actually, no, it doesn't take all factors into consideration, it looks at five areas - three of which are undeniably ideological rather than medical, and the other two of which have dubious relevance to the measurement of the excellence of medical care - life expectancy, for example. As for infant mortality, the US leads the world in this area. By a LOT. There is nowhere else in the world with more advanced neo-natal care than the US. No place else even comes close.
Quote:
To say "we have the best health care in the world because people come here for treatment" is a simplistic and frankly misleading way to look at it.
If that were my only argument, you might have a point (though not much of one). But that is far from my only evidence. My evidence is the numbers. The statistics. The reason people come from all over the world for US medical care is that these people, too, are capable of looking at results and grasping what they mean. We have already established that US medical care is not the least expensive in the world. Why then would people spend all that money to go to the US, then spend even more money on medical care they could get for less money elsewhere? Because they have been duped?
Seriously.... explain to the audience in what way it is "misleading" to point out what everyone knows - when the chips are down, people don't fly to Cuba or Italy for medical treatment, the fly to the US.
Quote:
If we have the best healthcare in the world, then please explain to me how we are ranked 26th on infant mortality rates...
Several reasons, the main one being that the US counts as a "live birth" those which almost no other countries do. So if a kid just barely alive at birth croaks forty-five minutes later, it is counted as an infant death. In the UK (as just one of dozens of countries) it isn't. Hell, in the UK, if the kid is below a certain weight at birth, post-natal care is denied to it if it is born in a NHS hospital. Kids that would be treated (and often saved) in any US hospital are quite literally left to die in UK hospitals.
Quote:
... and 24th on disability adjusted life expectancy?
As has been pointed out in countless threads already, life expectancy is an almost useless metric for determining the quality of health care in a country - ANY country. Genetics, diet, fitness levels, obesity, violent deaths, auto accidents, drug use, and more all play huge roles in what that number turns out to be. And as a matter of fact, depending on how closely you subdivide that number, the US actually leads the pack in several categories. For example, if you look at the life expectancy of those eighty years old or more, the US is the leader. It leads by even more by the time you look at ninety year olds.
But I digress. Life expectancy is a poor metric indeed for judging the quality of medical services in a country, even if the US happens to do well in certain areas of it. I just found it an interesting side note which almost no one ever mentions.
Quote:
Is not the most important thing how many people live and for how long?
You show here your lack of understanding of the myriad factors which can lead to premature death.
Phred
--------------------
|
DieCommie
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11100647 - 09/21/09 02:13 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Top 20% doesn't seem bad to me at all. I wish I was top 20%.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11100653 - 09/21/09 02:15 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sombie said:
Yeah you right, I am a troll because I trust the WHO studies showing our healthcare is ranked 37th in the world.
The WHO study specifically mentions as a factor in their rankings government control as a positive. That is most definitely, thus, not a measure of quality of care, now is it?Quote:
We are just a bit above Turkey.
According to socialists measuring the system by a socialist metric. Quote:
I said, if you are extremely rich and can pay for your own treatments then we are good. We have good doctors and we have good equipment.
Which, there you go, is actually related to quality of care as opposed to cost of care. We have the best doctors and the best equipment and can get the best care. You don't even have to be insanely rich to get it, like you do in the countries they are fleeing.Quote:
It is not, however, significantly better then places like the U.K. and we have less doctors per person then other countries.
It most definitely destroys the UK and the EU in cancer and heart disease, as I have pointed out with links to cancer and heart disease survivability comparisons. Suffice it to say that in the UK and EU my five year survival rate for the two cancers I had would put me at just slightly above 50% (75% times 75%). In the US it's over 90%(both above 95%)Quote:
If you think rich foreigners coming here for treatment shows how good our medical care is then you are mistaken. Our medical care today goes to he with the most cash. and thats not right.
Really? You think people with no money should get the same as people with money? That is, of course, absurd on its face. Unless you're a communist, in which case there is no money anyway. Quote:
Long ago our fire departments were privatized and the results were similar to what we have today. The WHO takes all factors into account, such as infant mortality, life expectancy, cost of care, access to care, distribution of the cost of care, among other factors.
I have no idea what nonsense you are trying to derive from the fire department.
Yes, the WHO does take those things into account, which is precisely why they aren't a measure of the quality of care. By the way, almost everybody in this country has access to care, rich or poor. I suspect there are isolated areas with nearly zero population density that do not have a hospital within several hundred miles. Alaska wilderness, for instance. But that is irrelevant. Distribution of the cost of care? How about it should be 100% borne by the recipients of the care? When your ideal is a socialist ideal you are no longer a dispassionate observer of the quality of care, which is why their ranking is bullshit. Quote:
To say "we have the best health care in the world because people come here for treatment" is a simplistic and frankly misleading way to look at it.
Nope, although that is a straw man. He didn't use that as the only metric, just an indication that we clearly have the best care.Quote:
If we have the best healthcare in the world, then please explain to me how we are ranked 26th on infant mortality rates and 24th on disability adjusted life expectancy?
Personal behavior. Aren't we one of the fattest countries in the world?Quote:
Is not the most important thing how many people live and for how long?
As a descriptor for the quality of health care? No. Not at all. We have more fatties, more drunks and more junkies than anywhere else in the world. We like to live fast. We don't exercise. I'm sure you'd like to lead ChiCom style calisthenics but I can assure you I will not be attending your class, Komrade. With greater personal freedom comes greater responsibility for the consequences of that freedom. As an FYI, if I'm going to have to pay for your health care, and it is me who is going to get stuck with the bill and not you, then I am going to be crawling up your ass to make sure you don't waste my money taking drugs, smoking, drinking, and eating like a fat fucking pig. I might also want to restrict how many fucking babies you can have and demand compulsory gym attendance.Quote:
"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane."
� Martin Luther King, Jr.
Ah yes, "justice". You are equally entitled to purchase whatever health care you want. You are not entitled to steal my money to buy it for you and to waste my money once you do. Justice is you being responsible for your self without forcing anybody else to make up for your failings to either work sufficiently to contribute and get rewarded or to take care of yourself properly.
--------------------
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
|
Quote:
Millions of people who work their asses off in the United States can't afford health insurance (I'm not talking about the unemployed).
Oh, now this is just utter bullshit. Define "millions". Two million teenagers working minimum wage jobs at Mickey D? Ten million (or more) illegal aliens getting paid under the table and sending eighty per cent of what they get back to the old country?
Quote:
Those that have insurance are constantly fighting their insurance companies over their coverage, pre-existing conditions, etc.
But that's just it - all available evidence shows this to be by far the exception rather than the rule. Unless you want to try to pretend that the almost ninety per cent of Americans responding to the polls are lying when they say they are either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the health care they currently receive. When you say "those that have" what you really need to say is "some that have".
Quote:
I LOVED the medical care I had in the military, and wished I had something similar today.
You make my point for me. It is universally recognized that the most reviled and demonstrably worst health care provider in the US is the VA. Well... maybe the department which provides health care to Native Americans (whose name escapes me at the moment) could give them a run for their money. If you are pointing to the worst health care provider in the country - by any objective study ever done - as one you LOVED, how then can you try to present any other provider - ALL of which outdo the VA by large margins - as somehow problematical?
Phred
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Phred, the argument isn't about who has the best medical technology; we can probably all agree it's the United States. The argument is which healthcare system is best for its citizens. Not just the wealthy ones - for all citizens. Millions of people who work their asses off in the United States can't afford health insurance (I'm not talking about the unemployed). Those that have insurance are constantly fighting their insurance companies over their coverage, pre-existing conditions, etc. I have great medical coverage, and I fight with my insurance company (Anthem Blue Cross) all the time, because they try not to pay for things I'm covered for. I LOVED the medical care I had in the military, and wished I had something similar today.
If you wish you had something similar today why don't you fucking buy it for yourself? I've never had to fight with my insurance company because, unlike almost every asshole with a problem, I read the policy I subscribed to. What a concept, read the contract. Or, better yet, just pay for it as you need it, whether from general funds or a specified medical health savings account. Wow. Pay your own bills! What a concept!
The number of Americans in the US who are between medicare/medicaid and being able to afford health insurance is quite small. Most people without health insurance are without it by choice and the number who would rather be without it and take the money but can't is most certainly larger. Every 20 something single male who thinks it's great that he has company health insurance is an idiot.
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Bill O'Reilly supports the public option! [Re: Sombie]
#11100851 - 09/21/09 02:47 PM (14 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sombie said:
Is not the most important thing how many people live and for how long?
Seeing as the rest of the crap you spewed was thoroughly demolished earlier I concern myself with this one moronic statement.
No. It's not. I'd rather have a good life and go out at 70 than be hooked up to machines or a colostomy bag and make it to 90. Quality of life is what is key.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. 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. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Kratom Capsules for Sale 
Cultivation Supplies 
All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order
Edit 
Reply 
Xochitl
afoaf
1 2 3 all )
daussaulit
Learyfan
