The holiday hangout will go online tomorrow! If there's anything in the regular subforums that you're going to want to access over the holidays, copy it now while it's still accessible.
Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Politics] Julia Hall: Obama's Possibly Planted Question and Reactions

12346

Posts

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I can see getting personal about circumcisions since nobody wants to be told that they have the wrong kind of penis, but I can't fathom arguing in favor of tonsillectomies if they're really not necessary anymore.

    In any case, gigEsmalls should have researched things before proclaiming that Obama is a liar.

    President Obama was either lying or talking out of his ass like a fool, which is it?
    They are misrepresenting what Obama said. The "$30-50,000" figure was meant to represent the cost of the procedure, not the surgeon's compensation.
    I choose c) You are a liar who doesn't care about the truth if it refutes your bullshit. Obama was referring to the total cost and he incorrectly equated it with the professional cost. That's not lying and those figures are generally correct - I service and program billing software for hospitals and those figures are approximately right for a surgical procedure.

    And in fact tonsillectomies are over performed, this is widely accepted in the medical community. My fiancee wrote papers about it in nursing school several years ago.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • DalbozDalboz Resident Puppy Eater Right behind you...Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Yeah, just because you needed the surgery after the other option failed doesn't mean that we shouldn't look to antibiotics first.

    I think you're missing the point. I wasn't "Oh, the antibiotics didn't work, let's send him to surgery." This was "Let's keep pumping full of antibiotics for six months while he loses all his weight and can't keep any food down, then keep thinking we can do the same thing in order to avoid a more costly surgery even though it hasn't proven effective for six fucking months already." I was actually very lucky that it didn't progress to rheumatic fever during this time.

  • KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I don't think there is anyone who really believes that a doctor pockets 50 grand for any procedure, let alone Obama.

    I mean, they'd make millions per year if they did.

    So really, at worst he muddled his words.

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dalboz wrote: »
    Yeah, just because you needed the surgery after the other option failed doesn't mean that we shouldn't look to antibiotics first.

    I think you're missing the point. I wasn't "Oh, the antibiotics didn't work, let's send him to surgery." This was "Let's keep pumping full of antibiotics for six months while he loses all his weight and can't keep any food down, then keep thinking we can do the same thing in order to avoid a more costly surgery even though it hasn't proven effective for six fucking months already." I was actually very lucky that it didn't progress to rheumatic fever during this time.

    Not knowing what you were going through in that six month period, I did greatly underestimate how badly your doctor fucked up, but that still doesn't mean that a tonsillectomy should be the first resort, which is the point Obama was trying to make.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    So beyond the planted eleven year old girl calling the health care protesters meanies why isn't anyone here calling out Obama on his lies during his recent town hall meetings?

    What planted eleven year old girl?

    What lies?

    Yeah, the girl was legitimate. LOL

    Until proved otherwise, yes.
    About the lies, here ya go.
    Yesterday during a town hall meeting, President Obama got his facts completely wrong. He stated that a surgeon gets paid $50,000 for a leg amputation when, in fact, Medicare pays a surgeon between $740 and $1,140 for a leg amputation. This payment also includes the evaluation of the patient on the day of the operation plus patient follow-up care that is provided for 90 days after the operation. Private insurers pay some variation of the Medicare reimbursement for this service.

    http://www.facs.org/news/obama081209.html

    Anything more than getting one set of numbers wrong on an example? Or was this repetitive?

    Sigh... if you clicked on the URL I posted you would have had your answer.

    I did read it. I still don't have my answer. If it's seriously just a case of him screwing up his numbers / attributions twice while castigating the fee for service model and its fucked up incentives you're stretching the bounds of English.
    So yes, President Obama is known for lying to push his failed (as of today) agenda.

    Failed as of today? Congress is in Recess. They legally can't vote for or against a damn thing unless a special session gets called. Lousy time-space continuum moving forward at a measured pace?

    tea-1.jpg
  • gigEsmallsgigEsmalls __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    So beyond the planted eleven year old girl calling the health care protesters meanies why isn't anyone here calling out Obama on his lies during his recent town hall meetings?

    What planted eleven year old girl?

    What lies?

    Yeah, the girl was legitimate. LOL

    Until proved otherwise, yes.
    About the lies, here ya go.
    Yesterday during a town hall meeting, President Obama got his facts completely wrong. He stated that a surgeon gets paid $50,000 for a leg amputation when, in fact, Medicare pays a surgeon between $740 and $1,140 for a leg amputation. This payment also includes the evaluation of the patient on the day of the operation plus patient follow-up care that is provided for 90 days after the operation. Private insurers pay some variation of the Medicare reimbursement for this service.

    http://www.facs.org/news/obama081209.html

    Anything more than getting one set of numbers wrong on an example? Or was this repetitive?

    Sigh... if you clicked on the URL I posted you would have had your answer.

    I did read it. I still don't have my answer. If it's seriously just a case of him screwing up his numbers / attributions twice while castigating the fee for service model and its fucked up incentives you're stretching the bounds of English.
    So yes, President Obama is known for lying to push his failed (as of today) agenda.

    Failed as of today? Congress is in Recess. They legally can't vote for or against a damn thing unless a special session gets called. Lousy time-space continuum moving forward at a measured pace?

    How is that weather in Fantasy Land today?

    big l wrote: »
    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    There's no such place as Fantasy Land. Now who's a liar?

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    How is that weather in Fantasy Land today?
    Obtuse and disingenuous, with a 90% chance of condescension.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    I've always written down my question right before asking it so I don't screw it up. Though I've never been to a town hall that was protested. Chiefly because most things don't get protested.
    Guess I am the opposite, I never write questions down. I usually just go over them in my head to make sure I have what I want to say right. Still that question smacks of bullshit.
    That was a Presidential debate hosted by a news organization. They screened everything possible. We don't know the level of screening for this town hall, and considering some of the questions it doesn't seem as if sycophants were the only ones who could apply.

    As you said we do not know what level of screening happened. The entire thing could have been heavily staged.

    For one, even assuming the absolute worst, how is this only quasi-legal? For two, rolleyes.gif

    You are assuming this is the only thing our administration, or even past administrations have engaged in that skirt the legal boundaries. Do I get to eyeroll you when you admit your own bias?

    If I was kidnapped, woke up in a lab, told they were going to replace my vocal cords with those of Tony Jay, and lock me in a sound booth until the day I die I would look those bastards right in the eye and say "Alright you sons of bitches lets do this. This one is for the children."
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    The point is that this doesn't "skirt legal boundaries." Planting someone in a town hall (if that's even what happened) isn't illegal.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    remember pluto? Once a planet but now a pseudo
    funny how information changes the facts that you know
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    It's fun how "republican agenda" (I mean the republican fundies) seems to be damaging the president instead of helping the american people
    Maybe someone should pick up on that

    sc.jpgsc.jpg
  • DalbozDalboz Resident Puppy Eater Right behind you...Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dyscord wrote: »
    The point is that this doesn't "skirt legal boundaries." Planting someone in a town hall (if that's even what happened) isn't illegal.

    It's not illegal, but it's disingenuous and it can cause a lot of people to have a gut reaction that they're trying to control the conversation and not have an actual dialogue. Yes, they all do it, but if they're caught, it can lead to subjective questions.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Once again, is there any proof that the girl wasn't asking her own question, of her own free will (though maybe with some encouragement from mom "yes, honey, you can really ask the president anything you want, I promise")?

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Detharin wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    I've always written down my question right before asking it so I don't screw it up. Though I've never been to a town hall that was protested. Chiefly because most things don't get protested.
    Guess I am the opposite, I never write questions down. I usually just go over them in my head to make sure I have what I want to say right. Still that question smacks of bullshit.

    How many town halls have you been to? She was actually more cogent than a lot of the 40+ people I've seen 'ask' rants to public officials.
    That was a Presidential debate hosted by a news organization. They screened everything possible. We don't know the level of screening for this town hall, and considering some of the questions it doesn't seem as if sycophants were the only ones who could apply.

    As you said we do not know what level of screening happened. The entire thing could have been heavily staged.

    And she might have been a lizard man sent to ensure the continuation of their generations long plot to control the world. Barring actual proof that she was a plant, I'mma go with the assumption that she wasn't a plant. Particularly since not all of the questions fielded at the other town hall he had in Montana were of the 'why are you so awesome?' variety.
    For one, even assuming the absolute worst, how is this only quasi-legal? For two, rolleyes.gif[IMG]

    You are assuming this is the only thing our administration, or even past administrations have engaged in that skirt the legal boundaries. Do I get to eyeroll you when you admit your own bias?

    How is this skirting any legal boundaries or only quasi-legal? And cynicism isn't a bias, it's just a sad shadow of a substitute for wisdom.

    tea-1.jpg
  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    moniker wrote: »

    How many town halls have you been to? She was actually more cogent than a lot of the 40+ people I've seen 'ask' rants to public officials.

    Another good point for either her being a plant, or someone pressing the question upon her.
    And she might have been a lizard man sent to ensure the continuation of their generations long plot to control the world. Barring actual proof that she was a plant, I'mma go with the assumption that she wasn't a plant. Particularly since not all of the questions fielded at the other town hall he had in Montana were of the 'why are you so awesome?' variety.

    And I am going with the assumption that politicians will "play politics" when and if they feel they can get away with it.
    How is this skirting any legal boundaries or only quasi-legal? And cynicism isn't a bias, it's just a sad shadow of a substitute for wisdom.

    Never said it was. What i did say was "I admit however that I would not be shocked to learn a politician with an agenda worked to forward that agenda by any quasi legal means necessary. How do you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving."

    If I was kidnapped, woke up in a lab, told they were going to replace my vocal cords with those of Tony Jay, and lock me in a sound booth until the day I die I would look those bastards right in the eye and say "Alright you sons of bitches lets do this. This one is for the children."
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Look, I'm not saying Detharin fucks goats, I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised if I found out he did.

  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I will neither confirm nor deny my ex girlfriend may have had horns. My theory is she was the devil. The cloven hooves would also lead credence to this theory. However she may in fact have been a goat. Vote Detharin 2012.

    If I was kidnapped, woke up in a lab, told they were going to replace my vocal cords with those of Tony Jay, and lock me in a sound booth until the day I die I would look those bastards right in the eye and say "Alright you sons of bitches lets do this. This one is for the children."
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Detharin wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »

    How many town halls have you been to? She was actually more cogent than a lot of the 40+ people I've seen 'ask' rants to public officials.

    Another good point for either her being a plant, or someone pressing the question upon her.

    You have a strange way of constituting evidence.
    And she might have been a lizard man sent to ensure the continuation of their generations long plot to control the world. Barring actual proof that she was a plant, I'mma go with the assumption that she wasn't a plant. Particularly since not all of the questions fielded at the other town hall he had in Montana were of the 'why are you so awesome?' variety.

    And I am going with the assumption that politicians will "play politics" when and if they feel they can get away with it.

    That's nice. It doesn't imply or require the use of a plant rather than rank opportunism when you notice a photogenic looking girl with her hand raised.
    How is this skirting any legal boundaries or only quasi-legal? And cynicism isn't a bias, it's just a sad shadow of a substitute for wisdom.

    Never said it was. What i did say was "I admit however that I would not be shocked to learn a politician with an agenda worked to forward that agenda by any quasi legal means necessary. How do you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving."

    Never said it was what? And, again, how is asking a girl a question skirting any legal boundaries? Hell, even pretending that she was a plant, how is planting a girl in a town hall in order to ask her a question skirting any legal boundaries?

    tea-1.jpg
  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    You have a strange way of constituting evidence.
    Not a criminal trial, hence i only have to worry about more likely than not.

    That's nice. It doesn't imply or require the use of a plant rather than rank opportunism when you notice a photogenic looking girl with her hand raised.
    Sitting next to a woman who you have been photographed with previously, and is historically been a staunch supporter. Want to chalk it up to rank opportunism due to cute girl, with known supporter, asking question mom helped her prepare? That to me is not that unlikely. More likely than she came up with the question herself, uncoached, and was randomly selected to ask it second.
    Never said it was what? And, again, how is asking a girl a question skirting any legal boundaries? Hell, even pretending that she was a plant, how is planting a girl in a town hall in order to ask her a question skirting any legal boundaries?

    Go back, reread what I wrote. Reread it again. Do that 5 more times then tell me exactly where I said that his incident was quasi legal. Reading comprehension, try it sometime.

    "I admit however that I would not be shocked to learn a politician with an agenda worked to forward that agenda by any quasi legal means necessary." Where does ANYTHING in this statement make the claim that this incident was illegal? What I again said, and just quoted was that I would not be surprised to learn a politician would engage in illegal, or quasi legal activities to further an agenda. My point is that were it to be revealed Obama, or any politician for that matter was revealed to be engaged in illegal, or quasi legal activities related to furthering their own position I would not be surprised. Whether this applies to the current plant, no plant, Obama is a plant person hybrid, is a matter to be discovered.

    If I was kidnapped, woke up in a lab, told they were going to replace my vocal cords with those of Tony Jay, and lock me in a sound booth until the day I die I would look those bastards right in the eye and say "Alright you sons of bitches lets do this. This one is for the children."
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Watch this.
    You are assuming this is the only thing our administration, or even past administrations have engaged in that skirt the legal boundaries.

    Now let's remove the dependent clause in there to get
    You are assuming this is the only thing our administration [has] engaged in that skirt the legal boundaries.

    Implying of course that this is just one of many activities that "skirts the legal boundaries." You should proofread what you post, I guess.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    remember pluto? Once a planet but now a pseudo
    funny how information changes the facts that you know
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I admit however that I would not be shocked to learn a politician with an agenda worked to forward that agenda by kidnapping a young girl and through months of torture and subliminal programming conditioned her to ask a specific question at a town hall meeting.


    I'm not in any way saying that's what happened here. I'm just saying that if it were to happen, elsewhere, I wouldn't be surprised.

    "Despite all the bitching, if Diablo 3 sucks, I will eat my own cock. Counter-claim: If Diablo 3 does not suck, I will have a list of whiners who need to eat cocks." - Zen Vulgarity
  • gigEsmallsgigEsmalls __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    It's fun how "republican agenda" (I mean the republican fundies) seems to be damaging the president instead of helping the american people
    Maybe someone should pick up on that

    President Obama is good for the people??

    big l wrote: »
    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    It's fun how "republican agenda" (I mean the republican fundies) seems to be damaging the president instead of helping the american people
    Maybe someone should pick up on that

    President Obama is good for the people??

    His intent is to help people. Though most people seem to disagree on how effective that help is, and if it could be more effective if structured differently.

    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
    Brave Frontier: Adamski (481 077 56)
    Puzzles & Dragons: Adamski@pa (313 842 296)
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    It's fun how "republican agenda" (I mean the republican fundies) seems to be damaging the president instead of helping the american people
    Maybe someone should pick up on that

    President Obama is good for the people??

    Your contributions to the political discourse are Legend--- wait for it ---arily shitty. The Intertube equivalent of "WE ARE ALL SCARED OF OBAMA" is not useful.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    It's fun how "republican agenda" (I mean the republican fundies) seems to be damaging the president instead of helping the american people
    Maybe someone should pick up on that

    President Obama is good for the people??

    He's trying to to his fullest ability, and his plans are way better than republican pundits want to make you believe
    the us health care system is shit, and no, the world does not depend on copying the US health progress, either.
    If those pundits and people following them actually had better ideas, or would simply not LIE about almost everything they say, just to discredit obama, maybe they wouldn't be as worthy of ridicule as they are right now

    sc.jpgsc.jpg
  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    The GOPers and their apologists/ water carriers will say alot of things about Obama and healthcare, but you know what they won't talk about? Any sort of alternative solution, because they don't have one.

    All they've got left is pissing in the face of the people trying to do something about the current untenable situation. And if they DO offer something, it won't be any more grounded in reality than Mccain suspending his campaign when the economy crashed, or the 2 page mockery of a budget bill they offered to get things back on track when they tried obstructing the stimulus.

  • PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Detharin wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »

    How many town halls have you been to? She was actually more cogent than a lot of the 40+ people I've seen 'ask' rants to public officials.

    Another good point for either her being a plant, or someone pressing the question upon her.

    Is this some kind of really subtle parody of bad logic or are you just really daft?

    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • WulfWulf Disciple of Tzeentch The Void... (New Jersey)Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    So, what about the fact that the little girl is actually a robot*? What now!


    *May or may not be a miss-type which shall be repeated the next time I talk about this girl, despite the fact that I will have half this thread correct me on my facts and perhaps even a team of analysts and a speech-writer and fact checker go over my next post beforehand. ;)

    Yeah, tongue in cheek here folks. That being said, I was talking to a husband and wife surgeon couple, and they were just this side of livid about the repeated miss-representation of the amounts they get paid, and the public opinion about how they make their living. (They live in a Rancher on an acre lot on the Eastern-Shore and only lease a single car, not that it matters, but to give some perspective)

    Everyone needs a little Chaos!
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Really? they get livid?

    If my company bills @ $200 an hour for a callout, but only pays me $40 per hour, I dont get livid when people complain about it being $200 for my work.

    Fuck, they are surgeons, maybe they can implant a thicker skin.

    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
    Brave Frontier: Adamski (481 077 56)
    Puzzles & Dragons: Adamski@pa (313 842 296)
  • WulfWulf Disciple of Tzeentch The Void... (New Jersey)Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Really? they get livid?

    If my company bills @ $200 an hour for a callout, but only pays me $40 per hour, I dont get livid when people complain about it being $200 for my work.

    Fuck, they are surgeons, maybe they can implant a thicker skin.

    At the fact that people are making all doctors and surgeons out to be some sort of fat-cats that are Scrooge McDucking it up in their un-necessary surgery-funded mansions. Not all doctors might be like them, I haven't met every American doctor, but painting them all with the same brush is stupid.

    And I did say 'just this side of livid'... you know, if you wanted to not be a flippant dick :p .

    Hell, let me clarify further. They were hurt to the point of almost being livid. There.

    I mean, wouldn't you be if you did your job from wanting to help people (which you might, in which case good for you!) and suddenly there were people protesting you and screaming that you did un-necessary house calls just to rack up a bill, when there was no way the person was going to get their shit working without you? I would certainly be taken aback. But anyhow, I was just attempting to make a mild topical joke with a dash of relevant personal experience tossed in. C'est la vie.

    Everyone needs a little Chaos!
  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dyscord wrote: »
    Watch this I am a grammar nazi.

    How about we go back to what I originally wrote and you actually read that, because so far nothing you have said has disagreed with my original point. Politicians with an agenda will engage in illegal or quasi-legal activities in order to further their agenda.

    Saying "Obama did not plant the girl" does not in any way negate my point. Personally I think a good old fashioned "think of the children" whether crafted by the administration, or just an overzealous former campaigner is at the best just plain dishonest.

    This is the same shit our previous administration was guilty of, and I would like to see it avoided in the next three and a half years.

    If I was kidnapped, woke up in a lab, told they were going to replace my vocal cords with those of Tony Jay, and lock me in a sound booth until the day I die I would look those bastards right in the eye and say "Alright you sons of bitches lets do this. This one is for the children."
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Do that 5 more times then tell me exactly where I said that his incident was quasi legal. Reading comprehension, try it sometime

    It only took me one additional reading, actually. I don't really even care that much, but claiming you never said something that you wrote on the same page sort of grates.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    remember pluto? Once a planet but now a pseudo
    funny how information changes the facts that you know
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Wulf wrote: »
    Really? they get livid?

    If my company bills @ $200 an hour for a callout, but only pays me $40 per hour, I dont get livid when people complain about it being $200 for my work.

    Fuck, they are surgeons, maybe they can implant a thicker skin.

    At the fact that people are making all doctors and surgeons out to be some sort of fat-cats that are Scrooge McDucking it up in their un-necessary surgery-funded mansions. Not all doctors might be like them, I haven't met every American doctor, but painting them all with the same brush is stupid.

    And I did say 'just this side of livid'... you know, if you wanted to not be a flippant dick :p .

    Hell, let me clarify further. They were hurt to the point of almost being livid. There.

    I mean, wouldn't you be if you did your job from wanting to help people (which you might, in which case good for you!) and suddenly there were people protesting you and screaming that you did un-necessary house calls just to rack up a bill, when there was no way the person was going to get their shit working without you? I would certainly be taken aback. But anyhow, I was just attempting to make a mild topical joke with a dash of relevant personal experience tossed in. C'est la vie.

    The issue isn't that they're all evil goatee scratching island dwelling bastards growing rich off the fat of their unwitting patients. The problem is that the fee for service setup under insurance plans and hospitals with profit sharing labs/techs/what have you that practically begs for unnecessary tests. Unlike integrated clinics/institutes which generally provide better care at lower costs. Doctors and surgeons aren't at fault, the environment which has been constructed over decades is at fault.


    And since I had forgotten to post it earlier when they put it online here's the NewsHour segment.

    tea-1.jpg
  • NarianNarian Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Detharin wrote: »
    Saying "Obama did not plant the girl" does not in any way negate my point.
    You have a point?

    Narian.gif
  • AresProphetAresProphet stop trying to keep your composure I'm only having a laughRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Detharin wrote: »
    whether crafted by the administration, or just an overzealous former campaigner

    Do you not understand the difference between these two?

    One of them means that the adminsitration is using dirty tricks to gain public support.

    The other means that one random campaign contributor is a bit of a toolbag, with absolutely no involvement from the administration.

    You're equivocating the impact of the two when they are nowhere near the same thing.

    Part of me gets livid when people use passive voice in this sort of thing. "The girl was planted" implies all sorts of negative connotations, but it isn't even proper English. It's a passive sentence. It leaves out the most important word to follow: "by". "The girl was planted by" followed by the appropriate agent is the grammatically correct and intellectually honest approach.

    But it's to easy to tell people she "was planted" and let them draw their own conclusions. But the common understanding of the word "plant" in a context like this immediately draws suspicion to the organization who benefits from it (Obama's administration), and not the person most likely to be able to convince a little girl to do something: her parents.

    This whole controversy is nothing more than the result of people being intellectually dishonest with the English language for the sole purpose of generating a controversy. It shouldn't even be a fucking issue. George Orwell is turning in his goddamn grave.

    the latest attempt at closure
    failed after twenty-five drafts
  • edited August 2009
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    The GOPers and their apologists/ water carriers will say alot of things about Obama and healthcare, but you know what they won't talk about? Any sort of alternative solution, because they don't have one.

    All they've got left is pissing in the face of the people trying to do something about the current untenable situation. And if they DO offer something, it won't be any more grounded in reality than Mccain suspending his campaign when the economy crashed, or the 2 page mockery of a budget bill they offered to get things back on track when they tried obstructing the stimulus.

    So if you don't have a plan of the own you shouldn't be allowed to point out the sheer idiocy and flaws in other people's plans? So no alternative means we should go ahead with the full original plan with tax dollars paying for abortions and sex changes? Now I get it! After all it is our duty to follow the Democrats unquestionably like good liberal revolutionaries! If we don't we are unAmerican as comrade Pelosi's has told us.

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy."
    British publisher and writer Ernest Benn [1875-1954]
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    The GOPers and their apologists/ water carriers will say alot of things about Obama and healthcare, but you know what they won't talk about? Any sort of alternative solution, because they don't have one.

    All they've got left is pissing in the face of the people trying to do something about the current untenable situation. And if they DO offer something, it won't be any more grounded in reality than Mccain suspending his campaign when the economy crashed, or the 2 page mockery of a budget bill they offered to get things back on track when they tried obstructing the stimulus.

    So if you don't have a plan of the own you shouldn't be allowed to point out the sheer idiocy and flaws in other people's plans? So no alternative means we should go ahead with the full original plan with tax dollars paying for abortions and sex changes? Now I get it! After all it is our duty to follow the Democrats unquestionably like good liberal revolutionaries! If we don't we are unAmerican as comrade Pelosi's has told us.

    I haven't seen a lot of people pointing out actual flaws, though. Mostly I've seen people who are expressing legitimate concerns claim that accomplishing what the bill sets out to accomplish is hard. Not that it's impossible or unlikely, just difficult. Some quibbling with numbers, too, but then they tend to propose alternative at the same time and so wouldn't be applicable in your hyperbole.

    tea-1.jpg
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    The GOPers and their apologists/ water carriers will say alot of things about Obama and healthcare, but you know what they won't talk about? Any sort of alternative solution, because they don't have one.

    All they've got left is pissing in the face of the people trying to do something about the current untenable situation. And if they DO offer something, it won't be any more grounded in reality than Mccain suspending his campaign when the economy crashed, or the 2 page mockery of a budget bill they offered to get things back on track when they tried obstructing the stimulus.

    So if you don't have a plan of the own you shouldn't be allowed to point out the sheer idiocy and flaws in other people's plans? So no alternative means we should go ahead with the full original plan with tax dollars paying for abortions and sex changes? Now I get it! After all it is our duty to follow the Democrats unquestionably like good liberal revolutionaries! If we don't we are unAmerican as comrade Pelosi's has told us.

    If pointing out flaws means that you use actual data points, and not misleading and outright misinforming talking points, then thats totally fine. Those arent things the majority of the people making news are doing.

    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
    Brave Frontier: Adamski (481 077 56)
    Puzzles & Dragons: Adamski@pa (313 842 296)
  • edited August 2009
    If pointing out flaws means that you use actual data points, and not misleading and outright misinforming talking points, then thats totally fine. Those arent things the majority of the people making news are doing.

    Of course there is bound to be angry ranting, what do you expect when the most extreme of plans considered involve the government pretty much running the whole show? Most simply don't want a government expansion, or tax dollars being stripped from their wallets or more important institutions. Yet that doesn't change the validity of those who point out even the obvious things like "How the hell we are going to pay for this?" and "Why the hell should we cover this freak's sex change?"

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy."
    British publisher and writer Ernest Benn [1875-1954]
  • SurikoSuriko AustraliaRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    If pointing out flaws means that you use actual data points, and not misleading and outright misinforming talking points, then thats totally fine. Those arent things the majority of the people making news are doing.

    Of course there is bound to be angry ranting, what do you expect when the most extreme of plans considered involve the government pretty much running the whole show? Most simply don't want a government expansion, or tax dollars being stripped from their wallets or more important institutions. Yet that doesn't change the validity of those who point out even the obvious things like "How the hell we are going to pay for this?" and "Why the hell should we cover this freak's sex change?"

    So extreme the entirety of the rest of the first world has it.

Sign In or Register to comment.