This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Howard Dean on Tort Reform, Trial Lawyers and Health Care

i THOUGHT THE DEMOCRATS REALLY WANTED HEALTH CARE REFORM. DEAN REALLY EXPOSES THEY DON'T WANT IT BAD ENOUGH.

77 comments:

Sarkazein said...

This may be part of the get rid of Dean thing many of the Democrats have been on for years. He just gave us a peak at his battle to keep his seat. The Tort reform answer was probably more in defense of his personal problems within the DNC. It must be mostly Democrat lawyers trying to get rid of him.

Blogger said...

Because Dean is speaking to shouting protesters, by his actions he is saying “we don’t give a damn about what our constituents think, but we are scared as hell of lawyers who control our party.”

Blogger said...

Or, "we know on which side our bread is buttered, and it ain't you guys."

Blogger said...

Sarkazein, this is the very first time I disagree with you. I think if there were such a thing as an honest Democrat, he or she would say: "The trial lawyers own us so get used to it."

Sarkazein said...

Blogger-
Perhaps he had an episode like the scream. An involuntary blurting out of the truth. It will be awful having to listen to what he and other Democrats say to "clarify" his out-burst.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

Do you know of some cases where a malpractice judgement was awarded that wasn't justified?

If you know of such a case please inform us.

The famous case of the McDonald's coffee while not a malpractice case had great merit.

In The McDonald's case the woman didn't spill the coffee or order it. The cup melted as it was passed over her. Fact two she was not the first but over 100 people had been scalded in similar cases and McDonald's had settled out of court.

Fact three this woman had to under go many skin graphs and her final award was much smaller than the millions reported.

Sarkazein said...

Blogger- Is Dean merely stating what he has come to accept and figures - "If I have to accept the trial lawyers, you have to accept the trial lawyers...we have no choice?"

Blogger said...

Sarkazein. My interest in this subject is that tort reform is something they might be interested in in the interest of bipartisanship.

Democrats keep saying, because of the money the trial lawyers give us, tort reform is a no go--a deal breaker.

To me that shouts volumes about Democrats' interest in bipartisanship.

Fortunately, many Americans are letting them know they see through this duplicity.

Blogger said...

It is a no brainer as to why trial lawyers buy off Democrats. Democrats are the ones who write the confounding laws that create the fodder for lawyers’ to pillage. True Conservatives threaten to undo the boondoggles. Lawyers hate us.

Bushrod Gentry said...

Search the net and it's easy to find examples of the need fot tort reform. Here are 3 of my favorites: 1--Carl Truman of Los Angeles won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand. The neighbor didn't notice that Carl was trying to steal his hubcaps. 2--Terence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania was leaving a home that he was burglarizing when the garage door opener malfunctioned. He could not re-enter the house because the door from the house to the garage locked when he closed it. The family was vacationing, so Mr. Dickson lived for 8 days on a case of Pepsi and a large bag of dogfood that he found in the garage. Mr. Dickson sued the homeowners and won $500,000. 3--Kara Walter of Claymont, Delaware won $12,000 and dental expenses when she knocked out a couple of teeth falling from a nightclub bathroom window. She was sneaking in to avoid the $3.50 cover charge. I bet that there are a few people that eagerly support such freelance socialists in their struggle to redistribute the wealth. I am not among them.

Sarkazein said...

Blogger- I have always believed, it is a lawyers job to turn black and white into gray. The health-care bills are hundreds of pages long so lawyers can find lots of gray areas. Just like the large number of people who need to hire a lawyer to get their Social Security benefits. The Left's health-care proposals will keep the trial lawyers in loot for decades.

guy faulkes said...

Blogger, I have to disagree with you. Locally I know many honest conservative Democrats. They vote for the most conservative candidate as do I. Party affiliation means little. There are pro trial lawyer, big government Republicans just as there are Democrats. We have to get over looking at party and start looking at people. We have to judge candidates by their actions, not their rhetoric. I would much rather have a honest enemy rather than a "friend" that lies to me and stabs me in the back.

However, I do have to admit finding an honest conservative Democrat politician is much more difficult than finding an honest conservative Democrat. To a lesser extent, the same can be said of Republicans.

Blogger said...

Bushrod, you miss the point (not surprisingly) If you have been paying attention you will know that the lawyers add 1/3 Trillion dollars in costs to health care.

Health Care reform was suppose to be about reducing costs. There can be no cost cutting without tort reform.

If you want to study up on it Wikipedia has an article.
Tort Reform

Blogger said...

"keep the trial lawyers in loot for decades." Thanks Sarkazein for adding to the point.

Guy I think I did say true Conservatives, not Republicans.

Blogger said...

Guy, there may be Democrats who are honest with others, but I don’t see how they can be honest with themselves. How do they justify to themselves staying in the same party with Nancy Pelosi and her brood. I could not do it and be true to myself.

guy faulkes said...

Blogger, you may have a point, but I stayed in a party with a big government Republican such as Bush. Granted, Bush was no where near as bad as Obama, but but advocating big government is sort of like being a little bit pregnant or a little bit dead. You do or you don't; you are or you're not. I feel I am pretty honest with everyone, including myself.

I do wish we had a conservative party and a liberal party rather than a Republican and Democrat party in order to do away with the yellow dogs in both existing parties.

liberal POV said...

Blogger
How many cases know of some cases where a malpractice judgement was awarded that wasn't justified?

Blogger said...

Liberal, not on point as usual. The point is that until we have tort reform there can be no cost cutting. So the whole reform effort remains a farce, hopefully going down in flame.

oatz said...

I have to ask myself, are the Liberal/Progressive/Democrats, or LPDs, among us, aware of how crazy they sound? I'm sure a lot of them are kind to children and puppies, and very few are hard-core crazy but they certainly sound like there is a serious wiring problem in their heads.

For example, they talk incessantly about "choice", as in a woman's right to choose. Or "choosing a life style", which is code for appeals to the gay and lesbian community. But even though the LPDs preach "tolerance" and "diversity" in terms of certain other "choices" they are utterly intolerant. School choice comes to mind. As does any healthcare choice other than the so-called public option for health care insurance.

Reader said...

Here are a few for you to read Lib.

http://somd.com/news/headlines/2009/10212.shtml

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,635206489,00.html

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/354/19/2024

Sarkazein said...

Blogger-

Regarding: the interest of bipartisanship.
Bipartisanship means to Democrats, "agree with us".
Bipartisan is the same as bisexual. And you know what has to happen to be bisexual...one has to act homosexual. The same with being bipartisan with the Democrats, they want you to do things, and continue to do things that are un-natural.

Liberal POV said...

Oatz

We Just want the choice of a public option. How is that hard for you to get your head around?

Blogger said...

Thanks Reader for contributing substantive articles to the discussion.

Blogger said...

Liberal, how many times will we have to repeat. A government controlled health system will drive the private section out. Then the government system, loaded with fraud, waste and incompetent management, will be too expensive to keep as we are learning from other Socialist countries. Then we have a mess.

Add to that, the public system we now have going under in a few years. Yet the president wants to rob 1/3 Trillion from this failing system and load Trillions of debt on generations to come.

As I keep asking. Did your mama not ever tell you that money does not grow on trees, that there is no such thing as a free lunch, now I add another, you can't get blood from a turnip?

Give me a break!

Blogger said...

Liberal, you want to bail water into the boat in the middle of the perfect storm and is already going down.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger


" The point is that until we have tort reform there can be no cost cutting."

What are the other ways of policing bad medical care?

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/036480.html

http://www.chicagomedicalmalpracticelawyerblog.com/examples_of_medical_negligence/

,
Give me examples of judgement that were not justified.

All I'm asking is do you know what your blogging about or just passing along the Fox News and Newsmax line?

Seperate urban myth from reality. I don't know where the truth is , but I don't think it as simple as you suggest.

aDaughterOfYaHWeH said...

"All I'm asking is do you know what your blogging about or just passing along the Fox News and Newsmax line?"

Liberal POV,

Do you even know what you are blogging about or are you yourself just repeating lines from CNN, MSNBC, and so forth. It is funny how Liberals love to point fingers at Conservatives for simply robotically repeating what they hear of FOX news, however to me it seems that MOST Republicans I know are not that uneducated, they look not to the media but to the facts and what is REALLY going on, but on the other hand it looks to me as though the Liberals are doing exactly what they accuse the conservatives of doing! "Pot calling the kettle black" come to mind?

Liberal POV said...

aDaughterOfYaHWeH

Give me examples of judgement that were not
justified.

What are the other ways of policing bad medical care?

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/036480.html

oatz said...

The news that President Obama will cut off aid to our ally Honduras did not make many headlines this week but it should have. Barack Obama is openly siding with Marxists Raul Castro, Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega in punishing the government of Honduras.

Not only that but Obama misread the laws to come to his conclusion.
Hans Bader reported at the DC Examiner:

The Obama Administration is about to cut off humanitarian aid to Honduras, one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere. Earlier, the Obama Administration blocked travel to the United States by the people of Honduras.

Both actions are foolish responses to a recent ruling by the supreme court of Honduras refusing to approve the return to power of the country’s bullying ex-president and would-be dictator, Mel Zelaya. Zelaya was earlier arrested by soldiers acting on orders of the Honduras Supreme Court, replaced by his country’s Congress with a civilian successor, and forced into exile. Zelaya’s removal came after he systematically abused his powers: he sought to circumvent constitutional term limits, used mobs to intimidate his critics, threatened public employees with termination if they refused to help him violate the Constitution, engaged in massive corruption, illegally cut off public funds to local governments whose leaders refused to back his quest for more power, denied basic government services to his critics, refused to enforce dozens of laws passed by Congress, and spent the country into virtual bankruptcy, refusing to submit a budget so that he could illegally spend public funds on his cronies.

State Department lawyers, who are not experts on Honduran law, plan to declare the ex-president’s removal a “military coup” to justify cutting off aid, even though Honduras has a civilian president, and the ex-president was lawfully removed from office (although his subsequent exile may technically have violated Honduran law).

Liberal POV said...

GOP ( Grumpy Old People ) Know Nothings, Fox News and Rush Groupies

Take a reality check and read the article by Charmaine Noronha on the reality of the Canadian Health Care system.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/canada/articles/2009/08/30/canadians_defend_health_care_system/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+World+News

Anonymous said...

Okay, I get it. If you want to be forced to buy the amount and kind of healthcare insurance that the government wants you to have, then support Obamacare. If you think that healthcare in Canada or England where delay, dilution and denial are part of the norm, then support Obamacare. If you think that this is a good time to increase the public debt, then support Obamacare, but don't be surprised if there,s opposition.

Gregg said...

One more Nonny, if you're uninterested in truth or too lazy to learn the facts and you hate Republicans then support Obama care.

oatz said...

A gateway pundit has a great picture of Liberal POV on its web site concerning AstroTurf support for Obamacare in Denver.

Sarkazein said...

Oatz-

I see the picture. That is exactly my mental image of all Liberal POVs.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_L6pDyjqqsvY/SpqjUsCsDsI/AAAAAAAAdj4/Sj4B5v9BqyA/s400/dems+for+health+care.jpg

Sarkazein said...

Oatz-
This guy must be one of the non-grumpy, youthful Obama-care supporters Liberal POV writes about, if it is not the POV himself.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg and GOP

I don't hate Republicans I just think they're are silly.

Fox News will do that.

Nobody said...

Lib,

Try this one: http://www.fumento.com/fumento/edwards2007.html

John Edwards made millions suing ob/gyns when babies were born with cerebral palsy. Also, you said, "We Just want the choice of a public option. How is that hard for you to get your head around?" Why? When so many of us have pointed out the pitfalls of socialized medicine, when the likes of Pelosi, Barney Frank and Obama are on record having said at some point in their careers that a "public option" is the best way to ultimately arrive at a single payer, socialized system, why can you not understand our opposition and suspicion? Your desire for a public option should really be stated in this way: "Health care shouldn't cost me anything. If someone else is rich enough to pay for their own, let them, but make them also pay for mine through a public option that will be funded with their tax dollars."

Nobody said...

Almost forgot -- you stated: "GOP ( Grumpy Old People ) Know Nothings, Fox News and Rush Groupies" Nice to see that, once again when you're getting spanked you revert to the liberal tried-and-true tactic of name-calling. Do you just try to make people so mad that they can't think straight, thereby leveling the playing field for you?

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

What's your position? No law suits for medical mistakes that cost the family a loved on or a loved one with extreme handicaps?

"Did a medical mistake cause your child's cerebral palsy? Unfortunately, medical mistakes are the cause of thousands and thousands of cerebral palsy cases. Doctors and hospitals sometimes make mistakes during delivery. The following are just a few of the mistakes made during delivery that have caused children to be born with cerebral palsy:
Leaving the child in the birth canal too long causing a lack of oxygen to the brain
Failure to recognize and treat seizures following delivery
Failure to detect a prolapsed cord (the umbilical cord can wrap around the child's neck, cutting off oxygen to the brain)
Excessive use of vacuum extraction
Improper use of forceps
Failure to perform a cesarean section in the presence of fetal distress
Not responding to changes in the fetal heart rate
Failure to plan a C-section (a high birth weight infant could compromise normal, spontaneous, vaginal delivery)
Failure to respond to the mothers changing conditions, such as high blood pressure or toxemia
Failure to timely diagnose and treat jaundice
Failure to timely diagnose and treat meningitis
The doctors and nurses caring for the expectant mother and unborn child are responsible for providing safe and effective care before, during, and after birth. When proper procedure is not followed, and the standard of care is broken, permanent brain damage to the unborn child can occur. So how can you tell if a medical mistake occurred during the birth of your child? The following are indicators that a medical mistake may have caused your child's cerebral palsy:
Emergency delivery with forceps, vacuum extraction, or cesarean section.
Your child required resuscitation (CPR) after birth.
Following delivery, your child was transferred to a different hospital, or spent time in the NICU (neonatal intensive care unit).
Your child had seizures immediately after birth, or within the first 3-4 days of life.
Your child required special testing after birth, such as an MRI, or brain scan.
Your child required oxygen to facilitate breathing after birth.
A specialist was called to care for your newborn."

Gregg said...

"No law suits for medical mistakes that cost the family a loved on or a loved one with extreme handicaps?" -LiberalPOV

How can you possibly get that from anything that nobody said (I'm not sure if I intended the pun or not)?

I'm going by memory but I believe Edwards made his millions by claiming that the cerebral palsy was caused by doctors that did not do a c-section. Ultimately his argument was rendered invalid but not before the C-Section rate went up dramatically. John Edwards is a sleazeball.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

You did not pick a case that wasn't justified, you just attacked Edward's success in winning such cases.
Pick any one of Edward's cases and show why it should not have been awarded. Some very good attorneys couldn't do what you are attempting to do.
No case of malpractice was won without a legal fight by some very good attorneys.
In most cases some very big mistakes were made by those in the medical field for such an award to have been made by the court.

Like I often say what conservatives think they know just ain't so.

Most of the GOP is very angry right now, but most of that anger is based on myths and FOX news and hate radio fueling any kind of misinformation they can get listeners worked up about with little or no effort to explain the larger problem of context of issue. Read your history as to who the Know Nothing were.

Look at this post you just made. You believe out lawing malpractice law suits will fix medical cost problems. You don't ask why the suits have been filed or what damages the little person who may have had the wrong leg removed will have to live with or not live at all.

You refuse to look at proven results in Canada because you know it must be flawed information or a plot to trick you. That's a Know Nothing or a Rush Groupie.
Check out Blogger here he's such a Dido head even though he gets his medical bills paid for by the wonderful program Medicare, he thinks the world will end if other have similar coverage.

Now why do you GOP ( Grumpy Old People ) think that because I and other liberals believe that Americans are like one big family or insurance block and all pay into a government fund that goes to provide medical care when we need it. You think we are looking for something for nothing. How the hell do you get there?

Gregg said...

"You believe out lawing malpractice law suits will fix medical cost problems." -LiberalPOV

Who advocates that?

What's a "dido head"?

Reader said...

Blogger,I remembered a guy, from Canada, who we purchase things from every 6months or so for our business. I don't know why I didn't think to ask him some questions about their health care system...so I decided to do so this morning.

I asked his opinion on what they are offered in Canada...here is his response.

"What works for us may not work for you. At least not quickly. There is too much to change and too many jobs would be lost.
Switching to what we do could be a good thing but if it's done too quickly it could end up being a catastrophe.
Cheers,
Ron"

I replied and asked if there are waiting periods...again, his response.

"It can take 4 months to get an appointment to see my doctor. If I need one now I can go to the clinic and wait 2 to 4 hours. If the clinic is closed I can go to the hospital and wait 2 to 8 hours. What I do is just give my name and take off till half hour before my name is called or come 20minutes before closing.
We are short doctors because they all take off to the USA where they can make twice as much.
Ron"

Nobody said...

Wow. I don't know even where to begin with your ridiculous post. First, not once did I say that malpractice suits should be outlawed. You might need to take a basic reading comprehension class. I do believe that a lot of ambitious lawyers will file suits in the hope of winning a jackpot. Edwards did this. Are you saying that as long as you hire a slick attorney, you should be allowed to win millions at the expense of someone else even when they did not do anything wrong? Perhaps you missed this quote, "Yet Edwards won his cases not because scientific evidence favored him but because of his smooth-talking "trust-me" demeanor -- and heart-wrenching pleas in which he ghoulishly sometimes pretended to be the voice of the unfortunate child crying out for justice." I remember reading back before the 2004 election that Edwards forced one ob/gyn into bankrupcty, closing his practice in this way. Question: will this icrease availability of medical treatment? I would have tried to find this, but I have a family and a job. Most conservatives do and we don't have time to prove you to wrong, as you are. You say that I refuse to look at proven results -- one: how do you know I haven't looked and read about the Canadian and British single payer systems? You do not know me or anything about me. Second: Why don't you do what you constantly demand of us -- prove what you're saying is right. Give us your sources, and none of that liberally biased CNN, MSNBC, indymedia crap (if you can discard Fox, we can discard your sources). "Americans are like one big family or insurance block and all pay into a government fund that goes to provide medical care when we need it?" Thank you, brother Marx. Problem with that is, every family I know has a deadbeat uncle or brother-in-law who just mooches off everyone else. Why can't you support the concept of individual responsibility. We should all have freedom, including the freedom to make bad choices and fail. But we learn from the consequences of bad choices. Remove the consequences, and no one learns. I grow weary of responding to you. You are so set in your ideology, you are completely unconvincable and to debate you is a waste of time. I am a well-read, college educated working professional and I will not be belittled by someone who apparently has all the time in world to simply make demands on others to prove why they believe what they believe. I know what I know and I've read enough to know it. It is the liberal who bases what he knows on emotion, rather than fact. The arguments put forward by the conservatives here are always more logical, more clearly stated and supported by information more than anything you post. You're kind of like Craig Dudley light.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

I'm not a big fan of wikipedia but for this complex issue it's a good beginning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems#Malpractice_litigation

Liberal POV said...

Reader

You're asking the right people and the right question.

I think Canada switched in 1962 and no political leader would dare suggest changing to the United States health Care system.
Ask your friend if free loading is a problem for the system?

Ask if he gets to choose his doctor?
How long does it take for you to get in to see your doctor for non emergencies?

Sarkazein said...

POV- What do you not understand about the word imploding?


im·plode (m-pld)
v. im·plod·ed, im·plod·ing, im·plodes
v.intr.
To collapse inward violently.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

You believe the Canadian system is about to fail?

Where does you information come from?

The Canadian Syytem is not only more effetive than the US system but much less expensive.

The U.S. spent 15.3% of GDP on health care in that year; Canada spent 10.0%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems

I know wikipedia is just a starting point. If you find someting different let me know.

Gregg said...

Lib, do you follow news events at all?

"You believe the Canadian system is about to fail?
Where does you information come from?"

Guess what? Medicare and Social Security are also imploding. Get a clue.

What's a "dido head"?

Sarkazein said...

Unbelievable! POV, your butt cheeks are keeping you from hearing the news.

Sarkazein said...

add to comment above:

"You believe the Canadian system is about to fail?

Where does you information come from?"=POV

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

Sorry, Gregg it should have been Ditto Head. I know you're out of logical arguments when you start attacking my spelling and typing. My elementary schooling came under a Republican president. I do the best I can, but sometimes forget spell check.

Gregg said...

No Lib, I just want to know what you think a "Ditto Head" is? I don't care how you spell it.

Gregg said...

Lib,

I'll elaborate.

You wrote: "Check out Blogger here he's such a Dido head even though he gets his medical bills paid for by the wonderful (broken and bankrupt) program Medicare, he thinks the world will end if other have similar coverage."

I take it that you think the belief you assign to blogger came from Rush. Am I wrong? So you know what blogger believes and you know why he believes it, Rush. You call him a "Ditto Head" because of it.

Overlooking the obvious arrogant absurdity I simply posit that you not only don't know what Rush says or blogger thinks but you called blogger a name that you have no idea the meaning of. You will now most likely google after the fact now that your pinned down. If you do that it proves my assertion that you didn't know what you were saying when you said it. I can't prove it but you know in your heart. Even if you do google you will find a post that supports your preconceived notion so I doubt that you will correctly answer the question.

What's a "Ditto Head"?

Reader said...

I don't know about you all, but these are the most important things he said:

"What works for us may not work for you. At least not quickly. There is too much to change and too many jobs would be lost.
Switching to what we do could be a good thing but if it's done too quickly it could end up being a catastrophe."

"We are short doctors because they all take off to the USA where they can make twice as much."

You did read this didn't you Lib? You know, when people say more negative things than positive, that means it's a negative thing. You have to think about what he said, "if it's done too quickly", three months is pretty darn quick to me and spells catastrophe. Please God, open this man's eyes that he may see.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

My definition of a ditto head is those that believe all of the fear propaganda being sold on the internet, hate radio and Fox News. That propaganda is being fed to those silly enough to believe it at the moment by insurance, pharmaceutical, some medical, tobacco,soft drink, sugar, industries and I'm sure others that have a financial interest in maintaing the status quo.

I don't mean to single Blogger out but he's the one I know who is receiving medicare which is wonderful program which Blogger has paid into and deserves.

I feel sure blogger has always been able to choose his own medical services and has had few if any rejections for service.
There is absolutely no reason a broader program would not work as well. That is basically the Canadian Health Care program, that Blogger thinks would be a bad system. He already has that program but is convinced by right wing lies ( Death Panel, denied services, long waits, Government dictating doctors) and inflamitory words ( Socialism, Fasism, Obamacare, Government take over, Chavez) He can't see his own experience is the reality not the dittohead world.
Gregg there's big money to be made keeping folks like yourself, Blogger,Guy and Oatz pissed.

It would make no difference what Obama does Fox News, Hate radio and the huge number of right wing hate blogs must keep those like yourself pissed.


Those that believe such silliness and nonsence are ditto heads.

Liberal POV said...

GOP

Reader made a great move today. Reader ask a Canadian about the Canadian that lives in Canada and is treated by the Canadian system what his experience was. That is reality. Hate Radio, Fox News and Right Wing or left wing blogs is not reality even if sometimes true.

Gregg said...

Well Lib, I agree that Reader has added substantive dialogue to the debate. That's what we conservatives do. She's particularly good at it.

Your definition of Ditto Head is WRONG WRONG WRONG. So it's proven: you don't know what you're talking about. However, I must admit that your accusations about Blogger are much more hideous than the actual meaning...so your still mean and rude as hell.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg


Wait you and Blogger support Cheney's torture panel and want to deny health care coverage for millions of Americans and you call me mean and rude?

Gregg said...

Lib,

There's no such thing as "Cheney's torture panel" and no one is advocating "deny(ing)" anybody anything. Another flawed (actually ridiculous) premise. Where is the flaw in mine?

I'm curious, do you think your hideous, mean and rude accusations that blogger and I (and the rest) believe without thinking are convincing?

Sarkazein said...

Gregg-
This is really weird, POV agreed to the definition of a Ditto head as stated by the conservative commenters many posts ago. He said he admitted he really didn't know and thanked us for the clarification. Now, only months later, he goes back to his definition he had already admitted was incorrect.
His disorder explains his problem. He has severe short-term memory loss. This has to effect his quality of life... someone PLEASE pull the plug!

Sarkazein said...

How long before I can take the extension off my flag pole and lower the flag back to it's normal height?

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

What do you call top Bush aides, including Vice President Cheney, micromanaged the torture of terrorist suspects from the White House basement, the group included then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, then-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, then-secretary of state Colin Powell, then-CIA director George Tenet and then-attorney general John Ashcroft.

"According to a top official, Ashcroft asked aloud after one meeting: 'Why are we talking about this in the White House? History will not judge this kindly.'"

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/34845prs20080410.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/04/10/BL2008041002069.html

guy faulkes said...

History will not judge this kindly.'"

This is the pertinant description of the Obama Administration, if the polls mean anything.

Sarkazein said...

"What do you call top Bush aides, including Vice President Cheney, micromanaged the "defeating" of terrorist suspects from the White House basement, the group included then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, then-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, then-secretary of state Colin Powell, then-CIA director George Tenet and then-attorney general John Ashcroft."-POV

(changed one word to the correct word in the above POVism)

I call them 100 times the man Obama is as he waffles like a sissy trying to decide on a new pair of earrings.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

I know you support Cheney's perversion for torture but do all conservative support where this policy?
You and Cheney support the following?

"The New York Times, in a report on January 12, 2005,[23] reported testimony suggesting that the following events had taken place at Abu Ghraib:
Urinating on detainees
Jumping on detainee's leg (a limb already wounded by gunfire) with such force that it could not thereafter heal properly
Continuing by pounding detainee's wounded leg with collapsible metal baton
Pouring phosphoric acid on detainees
Sodomization of detainees with a baton
Tying ropes to the detainees' legs or penises and dragging them across the floor."

Sarkazein said...

POV- you have posted that garbage so many times, I am guessing it is part of your perversions.

Sarkazein said...

POV- Are you wearing a leather mask...might explain your spelling.

Gregg said...

Lib,

What does Cheney have to do with any of that?

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

He was the leader that created the environment, planted the seed. He ordered the torture and even choreographed some actions.
This monster is alway out there and Cheney fed it and encouraged its growth. He had a much to do with it as any war criminal in history has ever had.
Go read the minutes of the white house meetings.

Gregg said...

Lib,

You're losing it.

Sarkazein said...

Gregg-

He never had it.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg, Sark

These people kept documented the torture panel's meetings.

Its all out there on the internet for you to read.

Gregg said...

Sark,

And he'll never will have it.

Sarkazein said...

Another Abu Graib is discovered and Hillary is on the war-path. She will not put up with booze and hookers for anyone except her hubby, of course:


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/01/eveningnews/main5280465.shtml

Liberal POV said...

Anger Junkies ( GOP )

Do any of you think the Bush Admin went too far?

"The New York Times, in a report on January 12, 2005,[23] reported testimony suggesting that the following events had taken place at Abu Ghraib:
Urinating on detainees
Jumping on detainee's leg (a limb already wounded by gunfire) with such force that it could not thereafter heal properly
Continuing by pounding detainee's wounded leg with collapsible metal baton
Pouring phosphoric acid on detainees
Sodomization of detainees with a baton
Tying ropes to the detainees' legs or penises and dragging them across the floor."

Anonymous said...

buy valium online valium drug identification - valium side effects hives