More Conservative Christian Values

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

I think Ron Pauls answer is lost on many left-wingers. When Conservatives talk about shrinking the size of government, this is exactly what they mean. Because too many people feel they can live their lives irresponsibly and rely on the govt. to pick up their slack, the government has just continued to grow larger and larger until we have finally reached the critical mass that we have today. The only real question is when is is the government too large? For some it's been too large for a long time and they are tired of govt. continuously coming to them for more and more taxes to pay for these irresponsible people. For others it has gotten too large recently. Did anyone notice that the Obama Jobs bill lowers the definition of "Rich" to $200,000 per year? For others, the government can never be too big or do enough for them. Read: They believe others who act more responsibly should pay their bills.

For the most part, I like Paul, I agree with most of everything he says. But when he starts "suggesting" that people, regardless of how they got there, should be denied life saving medical care, this view will prevent him from being taken seriously by most.

This is why the Democrats believe you should be made to purchase health care, There is no way that this country will ever deny life saving medical care and that is also why you should be forced to buy it. This is the same reason you are forced to buy medi-care, a lot of people would opt out, but yet their is no way our society would deny them care when they are 80.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

If I am missing something, please explain.

How about you explain where paul said he's ok with not providing care and letting him die?

How do you interpret this?

Quote

Transcript:
Blitzer >> You're a physician, ron paul, you're a doctor. You know something about this subject. Let me ask you this hypothetical question. A healthy 30-year-old young man has a good job, makes a good living, but decides I'm not going to spend 200 or $300 a month because I'm healthy, i don't need it. But something terrible happens, all of a sudden he needs it. Who will pay if he goes into a coma, who pays for that?

Paul >> In a society that you accept welfarism and socialism, he expects the government to take care of him.

Blitzer >> What do you want?

Paul >> What he should do is whatever he wants to do and assume responsibility for himself. My advice to him would have a major al policy.

Blitzer >> He doesn't have that and he needs intensive care for six months. Who pays?

Paul >> That's what freedom is all about, taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to prepare and take care of everybody --

Audience >> [applause]

Blitzer >> but congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?

Audience >> [shouts of "yeah!"]

Paul >> I practiced medicine before we had medicaid in the early 1960s when I got out of medical school. I practiced at Santa Rosa Hospital in San Antonio and the churches took care of them. We never turned anybody away from the hospital. And we've given up on this whole concept that we might take care of ourselves and assume responsibility for ourself, our neighbors, our friends, our churches would do it. This whole idea -- that's the reason the cost is so high. The cost is so high because they dump it on the government, it becomes a bureaucracy. It becomes special interests, it kowtows to the special interests and the drug company, then on top of that you have the inflation, the inflation devalues the dollar. We have lack of competition. There's no competition in medicine. Everybody is protected by licensing. We should legalize alternative health care. Allow people to practice what they want.

Again...Show me where he says he's ok with not providing him care and letting him die.

You can't, which explains all your theatrics and long drawn out quotes to mask the perspecuity of your bullshit lies.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

If I am missing something, please explain.

How about you explain where paul said he's ok with not providing care and letting him die?

How do you interpret this?

Quote

Transcript:
Blitzer >> You're a physician, ron paul, you're a doctor. You know something about this subject. Let me ask you this hypothetical question. A healthy 30-year-old young man has a good job, makes a good living, but decides I'm not going to spend 200 or $300 a month because I'm healthy, i don't need it. But something terrible happens, all of a sudden he needs it. Who will pay if he goes into a coma, who pays for that?

Paul >> In a society that you accept welfarism and socialism, he expects the government to take care of him.

Blitzer >> What do you want?

Paul >> What he should do is whatever he wants to do and assume responsibility for himself. My advice to him would have a major al policy.

Blitzer >> He doesn't have that and he needs intensive care for six months. Who pays?

Paul >> That's what freedom is all about, taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to prepare and take care of everybody --

Audience >> [applause]

Blitzer >> but congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?

Audience >> [shouts of "yeah!"]

Paul >> I practiced medicine before we had medicaid in the early 1960s when I got out of medical school. I practiced at Santa Rosa Hospital in San Antonio and the churches took care of them. We never turned anybody away from the hospital. And we've given up on this whole concept that we might take care of ourselves and assume responsibility for ourself, our neighbors, our friends, our churches would do it. This whole idea -- that's the reason the cost is so high. The cost is so high because they dump it on the government, it becomes a bureaucracy. It becomes special interests, it kowtows to the special interests and the drug company, then on top of that you have the inflation, the inflation devalues the dollar. We have lack of competition. There's no competition in medicine. Everybody is protected by licensing. We should legalize alternative health care. Allow people to practice what they want.

Again...Show me where he says he's ok with not providing him care and letting him die.

You can't, which explains all your theatrics and long drawn out quotes to mask the perspecuity of your bullshit lies.

When Paul was asked by Blitzer if the man should die, Paul did not answer the question, instead he went off on some other tangent about what life was like over 50 years ago. When he dodges or refuses to answer the question, just like any other politician, I know he's full of shit.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Just in case you think CNN would be above such a thing:

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/19/new-hot-air-video-the-politics-of-planting/

When you pre screen,at least you won't get questions like the one from the terribly confused Afghan-American women. She claims to be a Tea party member and then ask what Perry would do to protect women's rights in Afghanistan. I'm sorry, did you ask a tea bagger what he would do to help a social cause in a country 10,000 miles away? When you have people that do not even have the slightest clue what their party believes, and then you let them on live TV, it's a mistake.

[jgoose71 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Just in case you think CNN would be above such a thing:

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/19/new-hot-air-video-the-politics-of-planting/

When you pre screen,at least you won't get questions like the one from the terribly confused Afghan-American women. She claims to be a Tea party member and then ask what Perry would do to protect women's rights in Afghanistan. I'm sorry, did you ask a tea bagger what he would do to help a social cause in a country 10,000 miles away? When you have people that do not even have the slightest clue what their party believes, and then you let them on live TV, it's a mistake.

Once again showing that you don't have the slightest clue what the tea party is about. One day you will take off your political blinders, but I think not.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[jgoose71 0]

So let me ask you this:

A wealthy banker makes some bad financial choices and his bank starts to go under. Do we bail him out?

And yes, it is the same thing. Someone makes a bad choice and they expect someone else to come in and pay for their mistake. Ron Paul advocates responsibility for your choices, in case you missed the point. If you can buy health care, you should. Plane and simple.

Why do you bail out one person and not the other?

And if you say it's because his life is on the line, then why would anyone buy health insurance?

Hand outs are a slippery slope.

Edited to Add:

And before you start calling me a "death monger" you need to listen to Wolf Blitzer's scenario again.

There are millions of people out there that want to do the right thing, but can't, just like there are millions of people out there that can do the right thing but don't.

Most of the time, especially when the scenario is laid out plane and simple in front of you like Wolf did, I can tell the difference between the two. Can you?

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[wmw999 2,584]

Let's make it a little more immediate.

You're at the DZ. Someone hooks it in, and is lying there screaming. The only local hospital is government-supported and not charity, and you KNOW that the person doesn't have insurance.

Do you call an ambulance, or do you pile him into a car and go for the closest charity hospital?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DanG 1]

Quote

Once again showing that you don't have the slightest clue what the tea party is about. One day you will take off your political blinders, but I think not.

Educate us. What would the tea party do for women's rights in Afghanistan?

- Dan G

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

“What he should do is whatever he wants to do,” Paul replied. “That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risks."

I don't see any problem at all with this. Man-up, people. I resent you trying to make me responsible for your actions.

Quote

“Are you saying society should just let him die?” Blitzer asked.

What kind of stupid-assed question is that? Oh, yeah...a set-up kinda like the "beating your wife" joke.

Quote

“We’ve given up on this concept that we might take care of ourselves, assume responsibility for ourselves, ....

Yep, hence the birth of the Nanny State.

Quote

...(so now we depend on) our neighbors, our friends, our churches would do it,”

Again, man-up, people. YOU make the decision, YOU live (or die) with the consequences.

It's amazing to me how we, as a nation, have come to be so dependent on the goobermint and others to wipe our tears and pat us o the head.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Do you call an ambulance, or do you pile him into a car and go for the closest charity hospital?.

Nice twist.
You call the ambulance. Where they wind up is their affair.
If there really is a "one or the other" option for ambulances, you call the charity ambulance.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[RonD1120 62]

Well, according to the article, the hypothetical man took responsibility for himself and made choice that could or did cost him his life.

Kind of like skydiving or making base jumps.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

When Paul was asked by Blitzer if the man should die, Paul did not answer the question, instead he went off on some other tangent about what life was like over 50 years ago. When he dodges or refuses to answer the question, just like any other politician, I know he's full of shit.

"Do you still beat your ex-wife?"

yes or no?

...otherwise you're full of shit

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[billvon 3,110]

>Once again showing that you don't have the slightest clue what the tea party is about.

Which would make him a perfect Tea Partyer ironically.

"Keep your government hands off my social security!"

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Just in case you think CNN would be above such a thing:

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/19/new-hot-air-video-the-politics-of-planting/

When you pre screen,at least you won't get questions like the one from the terribly confused Afghan-American women. She claims to be a Tea party member and then ask what Perry would do to protect women's rights in Afghanistan. I'm sorry, did you ask a tea bagger what he would do to help a social cause in a country 10,000 miles away? When you have people that do not even have the slightest clue what their party believes, and then you let them on live TV, it's a mistake.

I thought liberals understood that one of the reasons we are hated around the world is because we stick our noses into others countries business. How do you think the Taliban or Al Qaeda would react to us pushing our western values and morals on their women? Isn't this exactly what liberals are always ranting about?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>Once again showing that you don't have the slightest clue what the tea party is about.

Which would make him a perfect Tea Partyer ironically.

"Keep your government hands off my social security!"

How dare them ask to be compensated when they were forced to pay into the system to begin with. Damn right-wingers, next thing you know, robbery victims will be asking that their money and jewelry be returned. Oh, the outrage!

[jclalor 12]

Quote

I thought liberals understood that one of the reasons we are hated around the world is because we stick our noses into others countries business. How do you think the Taliban or Al Qaeda would react to us pushing our western values and morals on their women? Isn't this exactly what liberals are always ranting about?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

I thought liberals understood that one of the reasons we are hated around the world is because we stick our noses into others countries business. How do you think the Taliban or Al Qaeda would react to us pushing our western values and morals on their women? Isn't this exactly what liberals are always ranting about?

I think liberals would argue that we are hated around the world for backing dictators and making off with their natural resources. Some people like us for all the aid that we provide, but that number is falling.

I believe we should have been done with Iraq and Afghanistan years ago.

My point about the Afghani women was that she had embraced the tea party cause, but yet does not even understand it's most basic fundamental philosophy.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Once again showing that you don't have the slightest clue what the tea party is about.

Which would make him a perfect Tea Partyer ironically.

"Keep your government hands off my social security!"

How dare them ask to be compensated when they were forced to pay into the system to begin with. Damn right-wingers, next thing you know, robbery victims will be asking that their money and jewelry be returned. Oh, the outrage!

You missed the point. I have watched several tea bagger's scream at rallies " Keep the government out of my Medi-care" These people have no clue what medi-care is.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Al Qaeda and the Taliban have never stated that they hate us for backing Dictators and making off with their resources. They dislike that we support Israel whom they have religious differences with.

His main stated opposition to us was over our support for the government of Saudi Arabia. and our having troops there.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Well, according to the article, the hypothetical man took responsibility for himself and made choice that could or did cost him his life.

And I will repeat the same question to you; Who would you expect to unhook the person, who had no insurance, with an otherwise good prognosis, from a vent?

I say your philosophy on this is not the same that
Jesus would have.

• Quote

[billvon 3,110]

>How dare them ask to be compensated when they were forced to pay into the
>system to begin with.

Yep. Like every other political party out there, they want their pork and want other people to pay for it.

It's funny to watch what happens when a Tea Partyer is forced to actually think about their position, whether they actually want smaller government if it means losing their pork:

================
“That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”
================

No wonder the leaders of the Tea Party want to keep their followers from thinking at all costs.

[billvon 3,110]

>You call the ambulance. . . .

. . . and hope someone else pays for it.

We do that all the time. And that's not a bad thing; we do it out of compassion. But there is a cost for that compassion.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Al Qaeda and the Taliban have never stated that they hate us for backing Dictators and making off with their resources. They dislike that we support Israel whom they have religious differences with.

His main stated opposition to us was over our support for the government of Saudi Arabia. and our having troops there.

Then we have a misunderstanding.

What resources have we "stolen" from Saudi Arabia?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>How dare them ask to be compensated when they were forced to pay into the
>system to begin with.

Yep. Like every other political party out there, they want their pork and want other people to pay for it.

It's funny to watch what happens when a Tea Partyer is forced to actually think about their position, whether they actually want smaller government if it means losing their pork:

================
“That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”
================

No wonder the leaders of the Tea Party want to keep their followers from thinking at all costs.

You certainly display an incredible ability to completely misunderstand. I'd hardly call asking for ones money back, pork.

[grimmie 186]

So the people that pay into social security their entire working lives want their money back also when they reach 62.

Is that pork or an entitlement?