Chilly Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Imagine an interview between McCain and Dan Rather http://thatvideosite.com/view/115.html
KD in CA Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Backing off? Uh, no. I agree with him and no is saying we create it simply by creating "another layer of unsustainable government bureaucracy." The goal is healthy kids and citizens and we need to find a way to make that happen as if healthcare is a basic "right." What part of that don't you agree with? I don't agree that anyone has a "right" to demand someone else take care of them. Do you really not understand that "health" and "healthcare" are not the same thing? And do you really not understand the bureaucracy and waste that would result from declaring healthcare as a basic right of citizenship? You really think that taxpayers should be paying a million dollars for a lung transplant for a guy who has smoked 2 packs a day for the last 40 years? Can you really not see beyond surface of this issue? And apparently you are forgetting (or ignoring) that the vast majority of people in this country have every right to be healthy -- be eating a proper diet and exercising as recommended by public health agencies.
Chilly Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 I thought McCain won the first 20 mins or so, Obama had some good rebuttals, and on many questions they were both ridiculous. Also, did anyone notice the ugly woman in the back row with the blue shirt? She looked really, really hot for Obama. I think she wanted the rooster.
Max Fischer Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 You're talking like we live in a third world country and kids are dying on the streets. I don't mean to be condescending but you do realize that millions of kids don't have real healthcare, including dentistry, basic health and when they do go its to the very expensive, budget busting emergency rooms? The CHIP programs are not adequate. No, kids are not dying in the streets by the score but millions of kids are simply not healthy which is killing our budgets. This is not about give-a-ways, just simple common sense. A healthy kid is a healthy adult.
DC Tom Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 I don't agree that anyone has a "right" to demand someone else take care of them. Ironic that this is the first thing I read after getting back from the ER with my wife. On a slightly different subject...I just got back from the ER with my wife (torn ligament in her knee). Missed the debate. Can some rational people - say...X. Benedict, Blue Fire, GG, and John Adams - give me a run-down?
/dev/null Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Can some rational people - say...X. Benedict, Blue Fire, GG, and John Adams - give me a rub-down?
Chef Jim Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Ironic that this is the first thing I read after getting back from the ER with my wife. On a slightly different subject...I just got back from the ER with my wife (torn ligament in her knee). Missed the debate. Can some rational people - say...X. Benedict, Blue Fire, GG, and John Adams - give me a run-down? Let me put it this way. I think we can all agree that your wife suffered far less pain than we all did. Here's to a speedy recovery. Hers not ours.
Max Fischer Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 I don't agree that anyone has a "right" to demand someone else take care of them. Do you really not understand that "health" and "healthcare" are not the same thing? And do you really not understand the bureaucracy and waste that would result from declaring healthcare as a basic right of citizenship? You really think that taxpayers should be paying a million dollars for a lung transplant for a guy who has smoked 2 packs a day for the last 40 years? Can you really not see beyond surface of this issue? And apparently you are forgetting (or ignoring) that the vast majority of people in this country have every right to be healthy -- be eating a proper diet and exercising as recommended by public health agencies. You're dodging and weaving and using the simple tactic of putting words in my mouth. Look, why is it so hard to understand that health and healthcare are synonymous? There's no simple answer and personal responsibility is a key factor, but why not explore feasible ways to make sure citizens have affordable healthcare? Why do you hate this basic right to happiness? Why do you hate America?
DC Tom Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Nice edit. Keep dreamin' big guy...someday, your Prince Charming will appear.
Chilly Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 On a slightly different subject...I just got back from the ER with my wife (torn ligament in her knee). Missed the debate. Can some rational people - say...X. Benedict, Blue Fire, GG, and John Adams - give me a run-down? Outside of some behavior quirks and what not, pretty much the same thing the campaigns have said. The one new thing McCain proposed (right at the beginning of the debate) was a plan to have the government buy up mortgages that were way inflated vs the current cost of the house, and refinance them at the current cost of the house, in order to stabilize home prices. Any comment on that? You know the economic side of things way better than I do, I'd be curious as to your take on it. Some jabs back and forth, McCain seemed really weird at times and at other times did really well; Obama seemed his usual cool self. Nothing earth shattering. Oh, Obama Godwined the debates, mentioning the holocaust and preventing another one.
Booster4324 Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 You're dodging and weaving and using the simple tactic of putting words in my mouth. Look, why is it so hard to understand that health and healthcare are synonymous? There's no simple answer and personal responsibility is a key factor, but why not explore feasible ways to make sure citizens have affordable healthcare? Why do you hate this basic right to happiness? Why do you hate America? Ugghh
DC Tom Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 You're dodging and weaving and using the simple tactic of putting words in my mouth. Look, why is it so hard to understand that health and healthcare are synonymous? Because they aren't. One can be healthy and not avail themselves of any health care. Conversely, one can have all the health care available in the world, and not be healthy. Your particular idiocy - that health means universal health care - is why the public health system in this country is such a mess. And yes, I'm sure part of your response will be along the lines of "Most people agree with me." Shared idiocy is still idiocy.
Chef Jim Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 I don't mean to be condescending but you do realize that millions of kids don't have real healthcare, including dentistry, basic health and when they do go its to the very expensive, budget busting emergency rooms? The CHIP programs are not adequate. No, kids are not dying in the streets by the score but millions of kids are simply not healthy which is killing our budgets. This is not about give-a-ways, just simple common sense. A healthy kid is a healthy adult. Millions of kids are not healthy? You're kidding me right? Those that are not healthy I know where that blame can be pointed to. I do feel that if a child is sick and the parents can't afford to take them to the doctor something should be done. But because mom and dad have $1,200 in car payments and a $4,000 mortgage and all the toys is the reason they can't afford it...sorry folks.
KD in CA Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 You're dodging and weaving and using the simple tactic of putting words in my mouth. Asking you questions isn't 'putting words in your mouth'. And I notice you didn't answer any of them. Look, why is it so hard to understand that health and healthcare are synonymous? Uh, because they're not. There's no simple answer and personal responsibility is a key factor, but why not explore feasible ways to make sure citizens have affordable healthcare? I never said I was opposed to exploring feasible ways to make sure citizens have affordable healthcare. That's not what we're discussing. We're discussing creating a legal obligation for the government to provide healthcare to 300MM people.
Max Fischer Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Millions of kids are not healthy? You're kidding me right? Those that are not healthy I know where that blame can be pointed to. I do feel that if a child is sick and the parents can't afford to take them to the doctor something should be done. But because mom and dad have $1,200 in car payments and a $4,000 mortgage and all the toys is the reason they can't afford it...sorry folks. You don't have to do much basic research to know that there are tens of millions of kids that don't have BASIC health insurance. It's easy to blame the parents but most simply can't afford it. And those that could should pay their way AND possibly make sure they don't put the bill on other tax payers.
Max Fischer Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Is happiness a right? Right to happiness, but you don't have to be.
Booster4324 Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Because they aren't. One can be healthy and not avail themselves of any health care. Conversely, one can have all the health care available in the world, and not be healthy. Your particular idiocy - that health means universal health care - is why the public health system in this country is such a mess. And yes, I'm sure part of your response will be along the lines of "Most people agree with me." Shared idiocy is still idiocy. Well, first I would put nutrition before health care. Health care is important though. Sure, some can be healthy w/o ever seeing a doctor, while others will stay sick no matter what health care is provided. The masses though, will benefit from MORE & CHEAPER health care if we can provide it. With our current economy that seems unlikely. Pretty sure we don't substantially disagree there. More likely you just typed out the first thing that came to mind to slam Max. As to Max's point about it being disastrous financially as set up currently, aren't there an awful lot of defaults on those type of medical bills?
DC Tom Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Outside of some behavior quirks and what not, pretty much the same thing the campaigns have said. The one new thing McCain proposed (right at the beginning of the debate) was a plan to have the government buy up mortgages that were way inflated vs the current cost of the house, and refinance them at the current cost of the house, in order to stabilize home prices. Any comment on that? You know the economic side of things way better than I do, I'd be curious as to your take on it. Interesting. I don't know the economics nearly as much as I do mortgage bonds (curse of my current contract). Apparently, I know it better than McCain, since I know that individual mortgages can't be transferred out of the pool that backs the bond (at least, not easily. To the best of my knowledge, it's not possible. I can check at work tomorrow, but I'm damn sure it's never happened on a Ginnie-backed bond), hence buying up "individual" mortgages isn't nearly as realistic as it sounds. I can think of a few other problems with the idea, too (such as the expense of it - the government buys the mortgage, refi's the mortgage, then accepts payments on it for thirty years...that's a lot of cash going out for an uncertain payback, well more than the $840B bailout just passed. And what do you do if people don't pay their refi'd mortgages? Foreclose? Re-refi?). Sounds like a statement made to counter Biden's "Let's revalue the principal of everyone's mortgage" bloviating last week...about as stupid and ill-considered. I can see more ways to make McCain's statement (I resist calling it a "plan") work, but fewer risks to the taxpayer in Biden's. Mostly, though, I just find myself asking "Does anyone in government know anything about the economy?" Buncha morons... Some jabs back and forth, McCain seemed really weird at times and at other times did really well; Obama seemed his usual cool self. Nothing earth shattering. Oh, Obama Godwined the debates, mentioning the holocaust and preventing another one. For the second time; he mentioned the holocaust in the first one. Still a better (i.e. more marketable) statement than McPalin's "We Love Israel". "We hate the holocaust" means largely the same thing in this context, but sells better.
Recommended Posts