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.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Oregon Health Plan Denies Chemo Medicine- Assisted Suicide Offered Instead

Posted by a reader using the title 'Nobody" Thanks.

80 comments:

Blogger said...

Those Socialist countries we are not learning from have already had to ration care and they say it is getting worse.

Two problems under government run programs occur. Governments can’t run anything without inefficiency, waste, fraud, and eventually breakdown. More tragically, by the time people wake up to rationing, the government has already destroyed the private companies and so there is no where else to go. Sorry. You’re dead.!

And liberals have the audacity to call us stupid.

guy faulkes said...

And liberals have the audacity to call us stupid. - Blogger

No wonder BB and POV are so hostile. Nothing must suck more than that moment during each thread when they realize they're wrong,even if they refuse to admit it.

This video puts and end to the argument that the rationing of health care and death panels will not occur.

Sarkazein said...

This video really says it all.

Reader said...

Like the video says, they only have so much money in Oregon to spend.

This stuff is amazing to me. Thanks for posting all this Blogger.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

Lets keep the debate honest. What did the representive of Oregon say that was edited?

Keep in mind this lady was on Medicaid which most of you conservatives oppose and Medicaid had paid for her cancer treatment for the past 2 years.

This from: http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2008/11/sensationalizing_a_sad_case_ch.html

"Readers will recall Wagner as a 64-year-old Springfield resident with end stage lung cancer, a life-long smoker enrolled in the Oregon Health Plan (OHP). Over several years the OHP had paid for extensive cancer treatment and it continued to pay for Wagner's healthcare until her death.
When it became clear that first and second-line therapies had failed and her prognosis was grim, Ms. Wagner's oncologist recommended a costly, third-line cancer drug called Tarceva. Research indicates that 8 percent of advanced lung cancers respond to Tarceva, with a chance to extend life from an average of 4 months to 6 months. The likelihood of no response to the drug is 92 percent, yet 19 percent of patients develop toxic side effects like diarrhea and rash. Based on the low indicators of effectiveness, Oregon Health Plan denied coverage."

I believe Medicare part D pays 33% of the cost of Tarceva.

What does for profit insurance companies pay towards the cost of Tarceva?

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/story?id=3389038&page=1

Gregg said...

Lib,

Blogger wrote on another thread that you don't seem like an "ugly person". While I have much respect for Blogger I must disagree. Your defense of the government getting between a patient and doctor along with your willingness to conclude that Ms. Wagner's life was not worth the expense is the definition of "ugly".

Blogger was dead on (no pun) about rationing. It is inevitable. You justify it as good stewardship of taxpayer money which is hilarious coming from you. That's the point, if there wasn't taxpayer money involved then there would be no problem. I'm sure there's insurance to pay for virtually anything.

The money quote came at the very end of the video when it was pointed out the the evil big pharma gave her the drug for FREE.

LiberaL POV said...

Gregg

We maybe on the same side of this issue.
Are you suggesting taxpayer money should provide medical care for all that need it, including drugs as in the case of the woman in the video?

What is the conservative position on the woman in the video whose only medical coverage came from taxpayer medicaid? Should she not only had her doctor's bills, hospital bills, reasonable drug bills but last hope drug very expensive bills also cover?

Would covering those drugs with little chance of success have meant 100 people that needed basic health care would go treated or we would all face much higher taxes? What is your position?

Gregg said...

Lib,

I don't know how you reach your conclusions and my position is clear.

You said: "...whose only medical coverage came from taxpayer medicaid?" Wrong, she was covered by the Oregon plan.

She could pay for the drugs herself. She could raise money anyway she wanted to. She could turn to family (unless she's related to Obama), churches (not Obama's church they won't help a white woman) and community (not Chicago thug communities) for help. She could buy better insurance. She could appeal to big pharma which worked in her case. Frankly, as long as the choice is hers, I don't care.

With the exception of Medicare and Medicaid which already exist NO MORE TAXPAYER MONEY PERIOD.

Sarkazein said...

POV asks: "We maybe on the same side of this issue.
Are you suggesting taxpayer money should provide medical care for all that need it, including drugs as in the case of the woman in the video?"

WOW! Completely oblivious.

Liberal POV said...

Sark, Gregg , Blogger, and GOP

Ms Wagner ( The lady in the video ) was on medicaid which covered all of her medical expenses except the drug Tarceva because she was in end stage lung cancer and even if it worked if would only extent her life a few months.

This woman could not have gotten for profit insurance as she had cancer and no income.

How could the Oregon plan worked better?

What is the conservative answer here?

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

To be clear the Oregon Plan was medicaid.

Sarkazein said...

The major point of this video is the State offers suicide and the doctor being interviewed thinks this is not the case until the question is asked in such away that he realizes the State is offering this woman a paid for contract hit on herself.
This is one of the things with liberals, since the actual words "death panel" are not included in the Obamacare bills, don't realize that they ARE death panels until it is explained in a certain way.
I just can't imagine being sick with cancer, getting a letter from the government saying "we can't help you with a cure, but we will be glad to put you out of your misery." But, we are better than Sadaam, we won't charge you for the poison".

BikerBard said...

Faux:

Oh, now I get it. You are right, and I am wrong. I see. Thank you so much for your insight! However, you have stumbled upon the title of YOUR biography: "The Audacity of Stupid."

"Go you and call my Fool hither!"
- W.S.

Sarkazein said...

BikerBard is careful in last comment not to say anything.

Nobody said...

To sum up the liberal view -- government makes the decision to deny treatment: okay. Insurance company makes the decision to deny treatment: example of greedy, republican-supported, corporate capitalism. Sorry, but I don't put that much faith in government. To turn over this kind of power to government to make decisions for us denies us the right to make decisions for ourselves. We lose our liberty. Liberals simply cannot see this, or they do, but have become so ideological that they refuse to admit it. Another story I came across -- from an article titled "Tales from the Health Care Crypt." An MS patient is proscribed a new medication, but the socialist health care system in Sweden refuses to pay for. When the patient offers to pay the difference himself, the government refuses to let him do that because to do so would be to set a dangerous precedent and lead to unequal access to medicine. In the same study, Uppsala, a city of 200,000 has only one specialist in mammography. The study estimates that in a few years, the average Swedish woman will not have ready access to mammography. Early detection is the key to successful treatment of breast cancer, but the inevitable shortage of medical treatment in socialized states makes this very difficult. Take some economics courses, liberals. You will find that even government is beholden to a few basic laws of economics.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

Why would the life expectancy in Sweden be 80.63 and the United States be 78?

Liberal POV said...

Biker Bard

I think I get it now, You and I have trouble buying such a lie that the Obama Admin would set up death panels for old people.

Remember these conservative are the same people just a few months ago were and many still do supporting the governments right to secretly detain people, not tell their families or the Red Cross they were in US custody, Torture and hold in secret prisons as long as the government wanted.

This was okay with the right wing extremist as these were people that look different, had a different religion, spoke a different language and customs.

They wanted Bush and Cheney to have the right send Americans to die for the oil industry. Most of those doing the dying were poor or Hispanic, not many from gated communities.

You see Biker Bard these are the same people that supported torture panels much like the Germans of the late 30s and early 40s supported Hitler's inhumanity.

What fools!

Nobody said...

Personal habits of Americans. We eat tons of fast food and don't get enough exercise. I put it back on personal responsibility. Please tell me you are not so naive as to give credit to the Swedish government for longer life!?! Or that socialized medicine receives credit for longer life!?! This is the hardest part for so many liberals to accept -- that with the freedom to choose comes the freedom to make bad choices. Liberals such as yourself, who, I believe act with good intentions, want to relieve people of all responsibility for their bad choices. The end result is to create a government so powerful as to deny Americans their freedom to choose altogether.

Nobody said...

By the way, Lib, you completely ignore the information in my post. Do you not have an opinion on the response the MS patient received from the socialized Swedish health care system? Or the fact that access to care is being curtailed in a country that has generally been held up as the best example of socialized medicine? Convenient, that you make no comment on these items and quickly googled a comparison fact between the U.S. and Sweden that really has nothing to do with the lack of freedom for patients in Sweden.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

I don't think anyone is arguing any country has a perfect system, but fact show 36 countries do better in studies than the United States.

How do you know you will be covered in the case of a very serious illiness unless like Blogger you have Medicare which is a goverment run health care plan or like Ms Foxx you have an even better government ran health care plan?

Gregg said...

"Remember these conservative are the same people just a few months ago were and many still do supporting the governments right to secretly detain people, not tell their families or the Red Cross they were in US custody, Torture and hold in secret prisons as long as the government wanted." -LiberalPOV

Gitmo is open and Obama has ALL of Bush's policies in place. Your beef is with him. Quit living in the past.

Lib,
Your accusation that we are racist is despicable. You are a vile person. I don't like to get personal (certainly not like you do) but I am astonished at your intolerant, compassionless arrogance.

Blogger said...

Nobody wrote: “By the way, Lib, you completely ignore the information in my post.” “Nobody,” welcome to debating liberals. They constantly underestimate our intelligence and obfuscate believing we will follow them into the weeds.

Did you see that poor Secretary of the VA they had sent out to defend the indefensible? Right away, she came out with her prepared talking point trying to discredit the critic by suggesting that his real motive was to sell his own $5 book on the subject. When Chris Wallace would not let her get away with something so lame, she was out of ammunition. It was pathetic.

But this “let’s change the subject” is all they have when you corner them.

At least we have left behind the “Oh yeah, and how about what George Bush did, gambit.” That cliche is so now yesterday.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

You may not be a racist but the Republican party you support is filled with real racist.

Why are all of the southern segregationist states so solid Republican? What percent of whites in Iredell county voted for Obama?

How about all of that sillyiness on Obama's citizenship? Nothing to do with his skin color?
Did they ask about Bush or McCain? Both could have been born outside the US?

Sarkazein said...

POV- Yes the Left did challenge McCain's citizenship status. Even though he was born under the jurisdiction of the US and to two citizens. His father was a career Navy man but the Left challenged him anyway.

Sarkazein said...

POV-

You truly are not in the 21st century. You truly are a racist.

"What percent of whites in Iredell county voted for Obama?"-POV

matt said...

I skipped a few posts, and am not sure how this (once again) turned into accusations of racism...so I might be saying something that has been said or off topic by now...

POV, I think the point is not just this specific case, but the fact that this plan, which is what our national plan would be, correct? Has the ultimate decision of whether or not one can live. What if the drug offered a 50% chance for an extra year? Where is the line drawn and who decides it?

That is not a choice that I believes belongs to the government.

This rationing is evident in Canada, where many cancer patients come to the US for expensive treatments like this described here. I have read many stories of people selling their homes in Canada for the money for these treatments so they can be with their loved ones an extra year or two, where if they stayed in Canada they would be denied coverage and left to die. The health care there has also taken out full dental coverage...so you need a private dental plan in addition to the government's.

Gregg said...

"...not sure how this (once again) turned into accusations of racism." -Matt

That's all they know. Honest disagreement is not possible. If Ms. Wagner were black there would be cries of genocide.

Sarkazein said...

Gregg-Unless Ms Wagner was a pre-born African American. Then they would be celebrating "choice".



"That's all they know. Honest disagreement is not possible. If Ms. Wagner were black there would be cries of genocide."

Sarkazein said...

Google Great Britain's record number of babies born in hallways and on floors . There is a huge shortage of maternity care in GB.
A 17 year old illegal alien can swim across the border here, and be in a private hospital room delivering her fourth child at no cost to her. What a country.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

There's an element of truth here.

"A 17 year old illegal alien can swim across the border here, and be in a private hospital room delivering her fourth child at no cost to her. What a country."

If we are doing this now why not create a uniform policy and funding to deal with it.

Why should your state of Texas and other border states take the hit with increased taxes and insurance premiums?

We are currently pay a very high price form a very poorly managed and ineffective form of universal health care now. Lets get it right.

Sarkazein said...

Or close the border, POV.
The point is, our health-care system is light years ahead of GB's and you Socialists want to bring it down to the rest of the world's level to be fair.

Gregg said...

Sark,

Did you read about the man who collapsed from a ruptured appendix 3 weeks after the NHS (the UK's National Health Service) removed it?

guy faulkes said...

Regardless of what POV and BB say, the lady was denied health care by the government and offered assisted suicide for monetary reasons. This proves that the old and very young will be at the mercy of death panels. The argument is over. The loss of health care to those that need it because of government policies and intervention has been proven. End of Story.

I repeat: No wonder BB and POV are so hostile. Nothing must suck more than that moment during each thread when they realize they're wrong,even if they refuse to admit it.

Blogger said...

Guy says it all. No need for me in this exchange. Guy wrote "Regardless of what POV and BB say, the lady was denied health care by the government and offered assisted suicide for monetary reasons. This proves that the old and very young will be at the mercy of death panels. The argument is over. The loss of health care to those that need it because of government policies and intervention has been proven. End of Story."

Sarkazein said...

Gregg-

But the operation was free. I guess the big question is- what did they remove?

Liberal POV said...

Blogger, Guy and GOP

""Regardless of what POV and BB say, the lady was denied health care by the government and offered assisted suicide for monetary reasons."

No the lady had recieved Cancer for over two years and continued to recieve medical care. The Oregon Health Care Plan ( Medicaid ) denied the Drug treatment Tarceva because of the advanced stag of her cancer.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger, Guy and GOP

""Regardless of what POV and BB say, the lady was denied health care by the government and offered assisted suicide for monetary reasons."

No the lady had recieved Cancer for over two years and continued to recieve medical care. The Oregon Health Care Plan ( Medicaid ) denied the Drug treatment Tarceva because of the advanced stag of her cancer.The most the Tarceva drug could have done is extend her life a 3 to 4 painful months and that was only an 8% chance. The lady continued to recieve treatment.

Anonymous said...

So Lib, do you realize that in defending this position/decision you sound an awful lot like what an insurance executive might sound like making the same decision?

Sarkazein said...

POV is still oblivious to the FACT the government offered to pay for he suicide. Suicide for a woman who can sit at her dining room table, pet her dog, and carry on an intelligent conversation. Oblivious to the FACT the government is operating on 15 year old rules about Chemotherapy. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

You and other conservatives don't want this poor woman to get any care what so ever because she cannot afford it.

You conservatives don't think taxpayer money should go to help our own citizens.
Blogger and Ms Fox have government funded health care but damn sure don't want to see anyone else get on such a program.

What would the Conservative position be on this poor woman?

How much government funded health care is do you suggest and how much pain in the final stages of cancer is enough for conservatives?

If No government funding where do this lady get medical care?

Gregg said...

Lib,

You're kidding, right?

Liberal POV said...

Gregg and GOP

What would the Conservative position be on this poor woman?

How much government funded health care is do you suggest and how much pain in the final stages of cancer is enough for conservatives?

If No government funding where do this lady get medical care?

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

Gregg seem to be at a loss to explain how you conservatives would treat Ms Wagner the lady in the video.

What would the Conservatives position be on this poor woman?

How much government funded health care do you suggest and how much pain in the final stages of her cancer is enough for conservatives?

If no government funding, where does this lady get medical care?
What is your suggestion in this case?

Do Republicans try to find answer or just like to heckle?

Gregg said...

"Gregg seem to be at a loss to explain how you conservatives would treat Ms Wagner the lady in the video."

No Lib, I've already made my position clear (August 25, 2009 5:56 PM). I see no reason to do it again. it would be stupit.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

"No Lib, I've already made my position clear (August 25, 2009 5:56 PM). I see no reason to do it again."

No, your position was not clear there you seemed to accept the principles of Medicaid and Medicare but wanted no additional funding.

Here you criticize Oregon Medicaid for not spending more to extend this dying woman's life a few painful months? What would the conservatives answer have been in this case? What do you think should have been done for this woman that wasn't done by Oregon Medicaid?

Gregg said...

Lib,

I get so sick of dealing with your obtuse insanity that I'm considering moving to Oregon.

The question is not "What do you think should have been done for this woman that wasn't done by Oregon Medicaid?", it is "What do you think should NOT have been done TO this woman that WAS done by Oregon Medicaid?".

She should not have been offered assisted suicide by the death panel that determined it was more cost effective. It's the rationing of life that MUST take place in any socialist health care system.

Do you get it now?

Liberal POV said...

Gregg

No, The conservative position oftered this woman nothing at all.

She would not have recieved the two years of medical treatment and would have died much sooner.
Pain medication would not have been available with the position of those like you and blogger.

What would the conservatives answer have been in this case?

Sarkazein said...

HOMEHEALTH
HEALTH NEWS
'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed
One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today.

guy faulkes said...

POV, Oregon should have given the woman the care they denied her if Oregon wants to run health care. Are you to much of an idiot to understand that fact or are you just in a state of liberal denial? As I said before the argument is over. You have been proven wrong.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Lets be clear on what you say you want. This is federal tax dollars, being spent for very expensive medicine that has no chance of preventing her death more than a few months if she in the 8% of patients it works on and there's a 20% chance it will make her remaining day even more uncomfortable.

Now apply what you say across the country as this is not just Oregon It's Medicaid managed by the State of Oregon.

guy faulkes said...

POV, was care rationed and denied by a governmental body or not? It was nothing you can say changes that.

Gregg said...

Lib,

Please stay off my death panel.

Sarkazein said...

I think I need to make up an argument that POV and BB can win. This way they will feel better about themselves and maybe become Conservatives. It will be called a Quota Debate where no matter the facts, the liberals are declared winners.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg the only people on your death panel is your insurance company, Yourself and your closest relative or power of attorney.

That is who I understand gets to make the decisions.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

What's so hard about answering the question.

What would the conservatives have done for this poor woman and tens of thousands like her?

For profit insurance companies ration health care every day in the name of greed.

Sarkazein said...

POV-

I'll bet an insurance company has never offered one of it's clients a complimentary suicide.
If I heard of an insurance company running a foul as Oregon has, I can pick another insurance company.
I can't pick another Federal Government.

Liberal POV said...

Gregg the only people on your death panel is your insurance company, Yourself and your closest relative or power of attorney.

That is who I understand gets to make the decisions.

Nobody said...

Lib - "What's so hard about answering the question."

How funny! Lib accusing someone else of not answering a question. What about mine? Do you have no opinion about the lack of freedom in a socialized state? Should a person who has the means and wishes to pay for their own care be allowed to do so? Many liberals I know seem to be willing to engage in honest debate, but the more I read here, the more I'm inclined to agree with the assessment of others -- that you are a vile, guilt-ridden person who lacks integrity or the ability to argue a point without retreating to the liberal default position of, "well, you're (fill in the blank -- racist, sexist, greedy, etc).

Nobody said...

Lib,

You like to constantly point out that blogger has medicare. How did you come to know that information and why do take so much glee in constantly pointing that out? In fairness, we should all know your health coverage information. Do you have medicare? Health insurance? One of the many uncovered? If so, why? Can you not afford it? Do you choose not to purchase it so that you can afford other things?

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

I do like to point out that both Ms Foxx and Blogger while running around with silliness of "the sky is falling"." we are becoming socialist". We can have government run health care that would be socialist. " A government run health care program would be terrible"

During all this debate Blogger has Medicare that has paid most of his medical expenses, he chooses any doctor he wants, He has never failed to recieve his Government Social Security check.

The sad part he would have young working family beg with a jar at the local store fror treatment for a child.
I don't mean to sound gleeful but it's a little silly of blogger and Ms Foxx.
I like to ask Blogger if he feels like a socialist when he goes to the doctor and uses his medicare card?
Of course I know blogger should have this coverage
but so should working young families. Health care is a basic human right.
To answer your other question, I do have insurance from a retirement plan. What I pay went from a reasonable $260.00 per month for my wife and I in 2007, to $550.00 in 2008 to a deductible of over $7000.00 this year. To have stayed in the old plan it would have been over $1000.00 per month.

How do you know you will be able to affoord your cover over the next 5 years?

Nobody said...

I don't know that I'll be able to afford coverage in the next 5 years, but I'm not foolish enough to expect life to have guarantees and be free of unexpected sacrifices. I also KNOW the horrors of socialized health care because I've read about it and know that what you are supporting will NOT lead an improvement. As I've said before, I don't trust the government that much. It's funny to me, that the same people who hate the patriot act (which Obama and the Democrats in Congress have left alone) because they "don't want the government to know what books I'm checking out" have no problem with the government knowing the intricate details of your personal health. Got an STD? Government has to know! Want an abortion? Government has to know! The problem with socialism is that every socialist state develops into a police state at some point. Obama says the public option is needed to "provide competition." BS! The first reforms that need to be undertaken are much simpler and involve practically no cost to government: 1. Do away with the current system that prevents people from buying health insurance from other states -- throw open the entire market and allow companies to compete.
2. Cut the tie between health insurance and your job. I don't buy my auto insurance that way. People will not stay in a job they don't like because of the insurance and it will save employers money.
3. Tax breaks for HSAs.
4. If you want to pass a law barring insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, fine, but also pass a law that requires people to purchase a minimum policy at age 18 or 22, like liability coverage on your car. If you don't do this, then people will simply wait until they get sick to buy health insurance.
Notice how this provides competition and a guarantee of minimum coverage without government cost AND allows individual freedom and choice. These are all ideas put forward by different conservatives, the people you accuse of having no ideas or answers. It's not that we're the party of no, we're just the party of no more government control of our lives. (Sorry for the length, everyone)

Sarkazein said...

Nobody- Include in there, a salary cap for trial lawyers. Allow them only 6% of any case instead of 40% and put a cap on the total. Make the lawyers pay a "windfall tax" on anything over the average annual salary. Define the word "negligence" to mean negligence.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

Thank you for bring something to the table for improving current health care problems.
Some of your suggestions don't seem that different from my understanding of what's being planned.
I agree everyone should pay for some form of health care if they have income. I also agree that jobs and health care should not be linked.

I'm in full agreement with baring insurance companies from denying coverage for preexisting conditions.

I think you will have trouble backing up the following statement "The problem with socialism is that every socialist state develops into a police state at some point."

Canada, Finland, Sweden, most of all Europe and Japan are all free societies. I guess Cuba could meet your definition of a police state state but I can think of no others.

guy faulkes said...

POV, Oregon should have given the woman the care they denied her if Oregon wants to run health care. Are you to much of an idiot to understand that fact or are you just in a state of liberal denial? As I said before the argument is over. You have been proven wrong.

August 27, 2009 12:49 PM

Sorry for the re-post Blogger, but poor POV has information retention disorder. He also cannot remember that we have all supported changes to health care, but we oppose the socialized medicine atrocity that that his Messiah supports.

In reality, the debate is not health care or any logical person would be for keeping that which is working and improving that which is not. Obama only is concerned with a power grab for big government. He does not give a hoot about health care.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

So the Republicans have changed from the lie about death panels to power grab as a means of supporting the insurance industry?

Guy myths are hard to keep up withas they from day to day.

guy faulkes said...

POV, don't keep expounding on your stupittity. :)

The death panels are contained within the bill that is the power grab for big government socialism. Do you not even understand that? The issues are connected.

guy faulkes said...

Sorry for posting two times in a row, but I wanted to ask POV what he meant by "Guy myths are hard to keep up withas they from day to day."

As they do what? Get more logical? Educate liberals such as POV? Disturb the preconceived ideas of aforesaid liberals? Make POV want to cry?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Gregg said...

It's odd that Lib doesn't like "religious extremist" but does like to play God.

Gregg said...

"Some of your suggestions don't seem that different from my understanding of what's being planned." - LiberalPOV

There's your evidence that Lib doesn't know much about the various bills now circulating. In fairness to him the many Republican ideas and amendments don't get much play on the MSM.

"Nobody" makes a better argument than LiberalPOV. Wouldn't you agree Lib?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

What I meant to type was GOP myths are hard to keep up with as they can change from day to day, but I also like Guy's myths so take you pick.

Now if you're still believing the silliness of death panels, please explain who would be on a death panel and what the objective would be? Who gets to appoint such a panel? How would it work? These are just basic questions that should tip you off that you have been played for a fool by your own party.

Now I understand the Republican torture panel that Cheney, Rice and Rumsfelt served on.

guy faulkes said...

POV, I believe Simon Jester answered your questions about death panels on the Veterans thread along with making some very interesting comments about you. Everyone will need to read the last few posts on that thread.

Blogger said...

Nobody "(Sorry for the length, everyone)

It was worth the time Nobody.

Blogger said...

Guy "but poor POV has information retention disorder"

Hey, that's a good one. I will recommend it for the Diagnostic Systems Manual used by psychiatrists and psychologists.

Nobody said...

Lib,

You stated, "I think you will have trouble backing up the following statement "The problem with socialism is that every socialist state develops into a police state at some point."

I should have said that every socialist state develops into a police state 'at some level.' It's what I get for posting at 6:30 am before work. Let me try to support my statement. You included Sweden as a list of states that are free, but must have forgotten my earlier post on the MS patient who wanted to pay for his own medication but was not allowed to by the government because it might lead to "unequal access to medicine." Not 1930's Germany, for sure, but not what you would call a 'free society.' A few years back, France passed a law limiting workers to working only 32 hours per week, even if the workers wanted to work more. It was an attempt to lower the chronically high unemployment rate that is characteristic of socialist states. They even created a special investigative unit to prosecute people who were working more in violation of this law. I would consider these examples of police state actions -- the limiting of one's personal freedoms by government for "the public good." Loss of freedom sometimes occurs in small increments. The key to stopping it is recognizing what is happening before we lose more freedom than we realize or can regain.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

All government do such things and if you are looking for antidotes I'm sure we could fill blog after blog with insurance and local government antidotes.

If we have a free society how about all the conservatives here that would cheer a law banning baggie pants, sexy clothing for teenager or adults,at one point long hair, marriage between same sex couples, tell a woman she must bear a child if she becomes pregnant. Want the CIA or government to have extreme powers but that must be secret away from public knowledge.

Because you found a bureaucratic gotcha doesn't make Sweden less than a free society.

Thanks for reasonable and thinking responses.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

Two problems under government run programs occur. Governments can’t run anything without inefficiency, waste, fraud, and eventually breakdown.

The postal service is a wonderful service for less than $0.50 I can send a letter any where in the United States. The people I know at the local extension office provide services of all types and all are hard working and dedicated. Local fire fighters and EMS don't need a profit incentive to preform the heroic work they do.
The National Park Service gets high marks.
Tell me about any problems you have personally had with Medicare or Social Security?

You're right from time to time we do get corruption and cronyism in government. That's where a free press,open meetings, access to government documents comes in with free and open elections.

This is likely why Obama was elected as the last admin failed on many of the above.

Gregg said...

"If I'd known the difference between 'antidote' and 'anecdote,' my friend would still be alive today." -Ron White (comedian)

Well, at least you spelled "antidotes" correctly.

Nobody said...

Lib,

My question stands unanswered -- should a person who has the means and wishes to pay for their own treatment be allowed to? Should a person who wants to work more be allowed to? You call these a "bureaucratic gotcha?"

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

Sorry, my answer to both would be yes, but I would not condemn France and Sweden on these two issues.

The people of both countries have very high standards of living and are free countries.

Sarkazein said...

Sentenced to death on the NHS
Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors warn today.

By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent
Published: 10:00PM BST 02 Sep 2009
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.