PDA

View Full Version : No Political Connection 2 Suggested Cancer Policy



Gayle in MD
11-19-2009, 09:35 AM
While many RW pundits, have tried to suggest that this government study is connect to the Health REform, or the Health Reform Bill, or the Obama administration, as every morning talk show presented facts which do not fit support the accusation.

As Kathleen Sebilius has stated, the government is not suggesting any change in self exams, nor in the freguency of standard proceedures for detecting Breast Cancer.

G.

No one is better at creating outrage over imaginary injustices or threats than the modern-day right-wing.

LWW
11-19-2009, 09:43 AM
If dearest leader says there wasn't then there wasn't ... but hey, it's you who would possibly have died under the new Obamacare, and yet you cheer it on.

You have made dearest leader proud.

LWW

pooltchr
11-19-2009, 11:07 AM
Gayle, you are absolutely correct....as of today.

What you are seeing is the first baby step toward rationing of healthcare. Ask yourself where this will lead. Try thinking for yourself for once.

If a government "advisory panel" makes recommendations, do you expect a government run healthcare insurance plan to ignore it? Obamacare is all about cutting costs. If the recommended changes become policy, look at all the money that will be saved. (Ignore the potential loss of life for a minute, just look at the savings)
Now ask yourself how much the government needs to save in order to pay for Obamacare.

If you want to really know what is happening in Washington, follow the money!

Steve

pooltchr
11-19-2009, 04:10 PM
We have one local hospital in town that actually ran the numbers. Over the past 10 years, had they been following the suggestions of the "advisory panel", 300 women per year would have not been diagnosed with the disease, and probably would have died. That's 3000 possible deaths from just one hospital. With 3 major hospitals in town, along with several private clinics, that would conservatively amount to 10,000 lives lost in 10 years, in just one city.

But, I guess the government is probably right. It just costs too much for all those tests!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Steve

DickLeonard
11-19-2009, 04:37 PM
LWW you are one sick PUP. I am searching for the delete button to eliminate your cruel senseless posts. Dick Leonard

wolfdancer
11-19-2009, 06:04 PM
not only is he "sick", but he makes others sick, after reading his petty tirades. They are purposely insulting, just to draw attention to himself.
Problem is, it doesn't matter if you reply directly to him, or just speak of him, as I am doing in this post...as long as his name is being mentioned, we are both feeding his ego. Who else posts on 10 different message boards, besides somebody with "I ain't getting enough, attention deficit disorder"

llotter
11-19-2009, 08:05 PM
Yes, Sebilius lies the administration out of predicament that the latest pronouncement of the death panel created. The White House got caught flat footed by starting to ration medical care before their healthcare bill becomes law. Sebilius contends that the pronouncement means nothing but that is a lie. The panel's output is used as a guide for how government pays benefits and influences private insurance plans also.

wolfdancer
11-19-2009, 08:36 PM
Gayle, I have figured out why the right targets you:
1 Timothy 2:15
"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women[a] will be saved[b] through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."
Save yourself...Get pregnant!!!!

DickLeonard
11-19-2009, 08:38 PM
LLotter wait till you have your testicles put thru the manOgram and you'll be saying there has to be another way and there is. Ultra Sound and it is Painless.####

wolfdancer
11-19-2009, 08:40 PM
seems to be that you are arguing that this new proposed health bill, has some serious faults in it...a "blade runner" clause, maybe....and this somehow makes it worse then nothing, which is what many poor, and poor seniors now have.

pooltchr
11-19-2009, 10:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DickLeonard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LLotter wait till you have your testicles put thru the manOgram and you'll be saying there has to be another way and there is. Ultra Sound and it is Painless.#### </div></div>

Yeah, but would government healthcare pay for it??

Steve

pooltchr
11-19-2009, 10:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gayle, I have figured out why the right targets you:
</div></div>

Maybe they just target blind, partisan idiots. Some people just happen to fill the bill more than others.

Steve

Gayle in MD
11-20-2009, 07:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">not only is he "sick", but he makes others sick, after reading his petty tirades. They are purposely insulting, just to draw attention to himself.
Problem is, it doesn't matter if you reply directly to him, or just speak of him, as I am doing in this post...as long as his name is being mentioned, we are both feeding his ego. Who else posts on 10 different message boards, besides somebody with "I ain't getting enough, attention deficit disorder" </div></div>

Sounds a lot like Sara Palin! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Gayle in MD
11-20-2009, 07:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gayle, I have figured out why the right targets you:
1 Timothy 2:15
"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women[a] will be saved[b] through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."
Save yourself...Get pregnant!!!! </div></div>

Exactly! And they try to argue that the bible isn't sexist? Isn't racists? Doesn't promote violence?

Religious fanaticism always leads to violence. Just look what is beginning to happen at those Teabagger parties, violence, just as we knew they would lead to, and after no outcry from the Republican Party, which has looked the other way as the signage, and hateful unamerican rhetoric has continually grown into what is now, as predicted by our own Homeland Security, a dangerous situation.

This RW rheotric is leading up to some horrible event. Unchecked Religious fanaticism always does. But then, the right has shown all along that they are unable to determine real threats, from imaginary threats, hence, bin Laden is free, and Iraq is in shambles.

G.
No one is better at creating outrage over imaginary injustices or threats than the modern-day right-wing.

pooltchr
11-20-2009, 08:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No one is better at creating outrage over imaginary injustices or threats than the modern-day right-wing.


</div></div>

I guess that's why we actually had a war on terror under Bush, but it no longer exists under Obama.
"If we don't say the words, it isn't real"

We had very real and well deserved outrage after 9/11.
This administration slaps the country in the face by bringing the terrorists back to the scene of the crime in order to create a media circus and allow them to cover the anti-American garbage that will be spewed in our faces during the "trial".

Steve

Radical lefties are sick people!

LWW
11-20-2009, 09:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DickLeonard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LWW you are one sick PUP. I am searching for the delete button to eliminate your cruel senseless posts. Dick Leonard </div></div>

It's called tough love brother. Truth isn't always pretty ... but it is always truth.

LWW

LWW
11-20-2009, 09:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">not only is he "sick", but he makes others sick, after reading his petty tirades. They are purposely insulting, just to draw attention to himself.
Problem is, it doesn't matter if you reply directly to him, or just speak of him, as I am doing in this post...as long as his name is being mentioned, we are both feeding his ego. Who else posts on 10 different message boards, besides somebody with "I ain't getting enough, attention deficit disorder" </div></div>

That's just precious coming from the one who violated a promise of secrecy.

LWW

Bobbyrx
11-20-2009, 10:15 AM
Steve, what do you think the reaction from the left would be if say, the insurance industry had done the same study and gotten the same results, instead of the government?

LWW
11-20-2009, 10:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve, what do you think the reaction from the left would be if say, the insurance industry had done the same study and gotten the same results, instead of the government? </div></div>

<span style="color: #6666CC"><span style='font-size: 26pt'><span style='font-family: Impact'>MURDER AT THE HANDS OF BIG INSURANCE, BIG MEDICINE, BIG PHARMA, BIG OIL, H-H-H-HALLIBURTON, CH-CH-CH-CHENEY, AND MOST OF ALL B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!!</span></span></span>

LWW

llotter
11-20-2009, 10:36 AM
I think what I was saying is that the administration habitually lies to comply with PC. Both the poor and the elderly are currently covered by medicaid and medicare respectfully and each is driving us deeply into bankruptch and both are unconstitutional.

The alternative is not to 'do nothing' but to get the cost of healthcare down by phasing the government out of that arena and then the cost would drop dramatically because the cost would necessarily match what individuals are willing to pay...that is how the marketplace works.

pooltchr
11-20-2009, 11:04 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve, what do you think the reaction from the left would be if say, the insurance industry had done the same study and gotten the same results, instead of the government? </div></div>

I can not predict what the crazy left would say about anything. I'm sure we have one poster on here who is torn between loyalty to the female population who would be negatively affected by this "advisory panel" recommendation, and loyalty to whatever the administration dictates they support.

Nothing they do or say makes any sense. But they will stoutly stand against reason, if it means taking the opposite stand from anyone on the right.

Imagine the confusion they would have if half of the right stood by the recommendations, and the other half opposed it. Oh, the horror of actually having to agree with someone on the right!!!

LOL

Steve

wolfdancer
11-20-2009, 12:45 PM
this belief of yours that you are so smart, and that people that fail to agree with your views, are so dumb.....It flies against convention.....
There must be some site out there, that would be Utopian for you, where everybody marches to the same drummer's beat.....Viola!!! I searched for you, and found one .......AZBraggart.com/

pooltchr
11-20-2009, 01:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">this belief of yours that you are so smart, and that people that fail to agree with your views, are so dumb.....It flies against convention.....
There must be some site out there, that would be Utopian for you, where everybody marches to the same drummer's beat.....Viola!!! I searched for you, and found one .......AZBraggart.com/ </div></div>

You are a jerk.

Steve

LWW
11-20-2009, 02:14 PM
He's a hater. Haters hate. It's what they are. Asking why is like asking why does a crocodile bite ... because it's a crocodile.

Once you accept Gayle and the sock puppet for what they are, they are no longer aggravating.

LWW

pooltchr
11-20-2009, 08:30 PM
I don't find him or Gayle agrivating at all, because I don't care what they think. What I do find amusing is Wolfie accusing the 3 of us of trying to impress anyone with how smart we are, when that is the sole purpose of everything he posts. One of them is so insignificant it's sad, and the other just follows along like a little puppy, peeing on the floor all the way.

Steve

Gayle in MD
11-21-2009, 10:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve, what do you think the reaction from the left would be if say, the insurance industry had done the same study and gotten the same results, instead of the government? </div></div>

Do you have any concept at all of what a Government Study actually MEANS?

Obviously, not!

Also obvious that the Obama Administration's Health people are against the changes suggested.

You righties on here are experts at twisting reality.

BTW, Richard Clarke did not make the decision to fly the bin Ladens and the Saudis out of the country after 9/11....
he was asked to impliment the decision, which was made by others, obviously, higher up in the Bush Administration.... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif
G.

Bobbyrx
11-21-2009, 10:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BTW, Richard Clarke did not make the decision to fly the bin Ladens and the Saudis out of the country after 9/11....
he was asked to impliment the decision, which was made by others, obviously, higher up in the Bush Administration....
</div></div>
BTW, AGAIN, I never said he did, I quoted FactCheck.org....THEY said he did, thus making your use of them, to support your posts, hypocritical, because obviously you don't believe them either.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also obvious that the Obama Administration's Health people are against the changes suggested.

You righties on here are experts at twisting reality.
</div></div>
Speaking of twisting reality, please show me where I said Obama's Administration Health people were for it, against it, or anything else.

Gayle in MD
11-21-2009, 10:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BTW, Richard Clarke did not make the decision to fly the bin Ladens and the Saudis out of the country after 9/11....
he was asked to impliment the decision, which was made by others, obviously, higher up in the Bush Administration....
</div></div>
BTW, AGAIN, I never said he did, I quoted FactCheck.org....THEY said he did, thus making your use of them, to support your posts, hypocritical, because obviously you don't believe them either.
<span style="color: #000066"> No, they did not say that he made the original decision....they said he responded to a request, he himself, said He didn't recall from where....</span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also obvious that the Obama Administration's Health people are against the changes suggested.

You righties on here are experts at twisting reality.
</div></div>
Speaking of twisting reality, please show me where I said Obama's Administration Health people were for it, against it, or anything else. </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">You show me where I said you did? You made an insinuation which you loged at Democratics, and hence, I am addressing that insinuation.

Anyway, this is MY THREAD! You jumped into it and again, changed the subject of the thred....

Factcheck is a great site, IMO, as long as one can read....
and doesn't twist what they're reading.

</span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Gayle in MD
11-21-2009, 11:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BTW, Richard Clarke did not make the decision to fly the bin Ladens and the Saudis out of the country after 9/11....
he was asked to impliment the decision, which was made by others, obviously, higher up in the Bush Administration....
</div></div>
BTW, AGAIN, I never said he did, I quoted FactCheck.org....THEY said he did, thus making your use of them, to support your posts, hypocritical, because obviously you don't believe them either.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also obvious that the Obama Administration's Health people are against the changes suggested.

You righties on here are experts at twisting reality.
</div></div>
Speaking of twisting reality, please show me where I said Obama's Administration Health people were for it, against it, or anything else. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Bin Laden Family 'Evacuated' From US
9:11am UK, Wednesday September 03, 2003

Members of Osama bin Laden's family were allowed to fly out of the US shortly after the September 11 terror attacks, a senior official has said

Even though American airspace had been shut down, the Bush administration alloweda jet to fly around the US picking up family members from 10 cities, including Los Angeles, Washington DC, Boston and Houston.

Some 140 high ranking Saudi officials were also on the plane.

The revelations come from former White House counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke.

He said the Bush administration sanctioned the repatriation of the family in the immediate aftermath of the attacks.

'Repatriation approved'

"Somebody brought to us for approval the decision to let an airplane filled with Saudis, including members of the bin Laden family, leave the country," he told Vanity Fair magazine.

Mr Clarke said he checked with FBI officials, who gave the go ahead. "So I said, 'Fine, let it happen'."

He first asked the bureau to check that no one "inappropriate" was leaving.

"I have no idea if they did a good job. I'm not in any position to second guess the FBI," he said.

But Dale Watson, the FBI's former head of counter-terrorism, said the Saudis "were not subject to serious interviews or interrogations".

Permission to fly

Federal authorities gave permission for the plane to fly.

Tom Kinton, director of aviation at Boston's Logan airport, said: "We were in the midst of the worst terrorist act in history and here we were seeing an evacuation of the bin Ladens! ... I wanted to go the highest levels in Washington."

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the US who is said to have organised the exodus, met President George Bush on September 13, 2001, two days after the terror attacks.

It is not known if they discussed the repatriation plan.

'No secret flights'

The White House has declined to comment on the claims, but sources told Vanity Fair the Bush administration was confident no secret flights took place.

Mr Clarke, who headed the Counter-terrorism Security Group of the National Security Council, said he did not recall who requested approval for the flights, but believes it was either the FBI or the State Department.

Special Agent John Iannarelli, the FBI's spokesman on counter-terrorism activities, said: "I can say unequivocally that the FBI had no role in facilitating these flights one way or another."

The wealthy bin Laden family broke ties with bin Laden years before the September 11 strikes.

</div></div>

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/200806412758358


You obviously have a problem with words....you twist them around to what you want them to say...I think that's one of the symptoms of the Elephant Flu...

Bobbyrx
11-21-2009, 11:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> No, they did not say that he made the original decision....they said he responded to a request, he himself, said He didn't recall from where....
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You obviously have a problem with words</div></div>

LOL, from FactCheck.org AGAIN: "And by the way, the man who gave approval for the flight wasn't Bush or even any of his close aides, it was former White House anti-terrorism chief Richard Clarke, now one of Bush's strongest critics."

No need to twist anything. It says what it says.....

Bobbyrx
11-21-2009, 12:03 PM
from your "source"
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mr Clarke, who headed the Counter-terrorism Security Group of the National Security Council, said he did not recall who requested approval for the flights, but believes it was either the FBI or the State Department.
</div></div>
Even Clarke says in YOUR source the request came from the FBI or the State Department, not Bush.... "He did not recall who requested approval for the flights " Amazing how a few years and a few million dollars can improve one's memory when it's book writing time. And even THEN he never said Bush requested the flight....which took place 9 days after 9/11, not hours as you said in your first comment, when the airways were again open to commercial flights....

Gayle in MD
11-21-2009, 01:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> from your "source"
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mr Clarke, who headed the Counter-terrorism Security Group of the National Security Council, said he did not recall who requested approval for the flights, but believes it was either the FBI or the State Department.
</div></div>
Even Clarke says in YOUR source the request came from the FBI or the State Department, not Bush.... "He did not recall who requested approval for the flights " Amazing how a few years and a few million dollars can improve one's memory when it's book writing time. And even THEN he never said Bush requested the flight....which took place 9 days after 9/11, not hours as you said in your first comment, when the airways were again open to commercial flights.... </div></div>

Within hours of the attack, the effort was underway, to get them all out.

As I stated originally, Clarke was not the person who gave the original request.

Did you ever read any of those Fun With Dick And Jane books?

G.