Does the birth control debate...

[4est_4est_Gump]

This is an example of what's been wrong with the system all along. It's not doctors or other health professionals making decisions for patients. It's corporate profits.

We'll be much better off when there is no profit in medicine...



We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we're asking young people to do. Don't go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we're encouraging our young people to do that.
Michelle Obama

“And guess what this liberal will be all about? This liberal will be all about socializing, uh, uh… would be about basically about taking over the government running all of your companies.”
Maxine Waters

"You cap your health care budget, and you make the political and economic choices you need to make to keep affordability within reach."
"And it's important also to make health a human right because the main health determinants are not health care but sanitation, nutrition, housing, social justice, employment, and the like."
Donald Berwick
Death Panel Czar

“Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes.”
Paul Krugman

When man (and not his creator) confers rights, then everything is a right to be granted or denied as men clamor and jostle for their perceived rights. When everything is a right, rights are cheap. When rights are cheap it is easy for the government to award and dismiss them.
A_J, the Stupid

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Before, Obama’s coalition had been split. His birth-control mandate was fiercely opposed by such stalwart friends as former Virginia governor Tim Kaine and pastor Rick Warren (Obama’s choice to give the invocation at his inauguration), who declared he would go to jail rather than abide by the regulation. After the “accommodation,” it was the (mostly) Catholic opposition that fractured. The mainstream media then bought the compromise as substantive, and the issue was defused.

A brilliant sleight of hand. But let’s for a moment accept the president on his own terms. Let’s accept his contention that this “accommodation” is a real shift of responsibility to the insurer. Has anyone considered the import of this new mandate? The president of the United States has just ordered private companies to give away for free a service that his own health and human services secretary has repeatedly called a major financial burden.

On what authority? Where does it say that the president can unilaterally order a private company to provide an allegedly free-standing service at no cost to certain select beneficiaries?

This is government by presidential fiat. In Venezuela, that’s done all the time. Perhaps we should call Obama’s “accommodation” Presidential Decree No. 1.

Charles Krauthammer, NRO

If a Republican did something like this (or telling bondholders to pound sand, or picking out green winners [bundlers] to give tax money to) the Left would be screaming about Fascism...

 

[Liar]

On the blogosphere today;

Mike Huckabee, the former Governor who pimped the Personhood amendment onto Mitt Romney, signed an all Republican bill into law in 2005 that mandated cover for birth control for every employer but churches. Exactly the same as Obama.

And now Huckabee is raging about Obama's "war on religion".

So yeah. It's theatre.

Can someone in the media please ask the Huck if he also waged war on religion, and if he will officially apologize to the Catholic church for that, or pretty please shut his lying cake hole?

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlo...or-contraception-mandate-before-he-opposed-it

 

[Peregrinator]

It's not pennies idiot. Apparently you can neither count, nor learn from history/observation. Pardon for the redundant question, of course you can't, you've shown no history of learning much at all. Great at 'suck up' though.

You happen to think very little, actually not much at all. Oh, you read shit, but you don't think, you parrot. You're shallower than Walden's Pond. Interesting that hadn't Thoreau gone to jail none of us would have ever been subjected to reading that tripe. But he did have one thing right, "No man should be subjected to taxation for that which he is morally objected to." EVER.

I'm not really interested in your 'moral relativism', nor your financial relativism either. Both of which are on the path of indenturing my progeny forever. I should write a new monograph to companion Snyder's "A Nation of Cowards", it will be entitled, "A Nation of Slaves."

Ishmael

I love it. Early morning, drunk, crank, insulting, and not a word of logic or information in the long-winded and dutifully signed post.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

On the blogosphere today;

Mike Huckabee, the former Governor who pimped the Personhood amendment onto Mitt Romney, signed an all Republican bill into law in 2005 that mandated cover for birth control for every employer but churches. Exactly the same as Obama.

And now Huckabee is raging about Obama's "war on religion".

So yeah. It's theatre.

Can someone in the media please ask the Huck if he also waged war on religion, and if he will officially apologize to the Catholic church for that, or pretty please shut his lying cake hole?

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlo...or-contraception-mandate-before-he-opposed-it

You forget State's rights and our Constitution.

The Federal Government, under the Progressive control of the Federal Government, is trying to destroy the Constitution in favor of a French-Revolution or South Africa Constitution style document that gets away from a charter of negative liberties into a laundry list of "rights."

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I love it. Early morning, drunk, crank, insulting, and not a word of logic or information in the long-winded and dutifully signed post.

I'm sorry, but after reading your last little gem, I have no idea where you end and Socialism begins. You're lashing out at the people who recognize this; you are in denial.

 

[Peregrinator]

We'll be much better off when there is no profit in medicine...

I disagree. I think people who work in health care should be A) allowed to do what they've trained to do rather than being held in check by bean counting halfwits at a far remove and B) able to earn as much as the market will bear.


Since you seem to be capable of civil discourse this morning, I'd like to hear what you think of insurance companies countermanding the orders of physicians on the basis of cost. If you'd like a specific example, I was in the ED once, finishing up some paperwork, when the doctor on duty--rather kindly, I thought; he was a great doc, a born educator and an excellent leader--asked me if I'd like to see him do a lumbar puncture. I had never seen one live, so I said sure, and went and talked to the patient. Got permission to watch, a formality, really, but I like to be respectful of patients when it's not some sort of immediate life threat, and asked about what was ailing him. Checked back in with the doc, who was consulting with a nurse anesthetist. Doc was requesting anesthesia for the procedure.

This is a very, very painful procedure of some delicacy. It's a long, rather thick needle inserted into the the lumbar spine via the skin of the lower back. The patient can't be allowed to move much during the procedure, or the landmarks for the puncture might be missed, and the test for meningitis can't be run on the cerebrospinal fluid. So the usual strategy is to snow the patient a bit with something like propofol, and have a couple people hold the patient in position (on his side, curled up fetal-like) in order to minimize pain--as well as the chance of having to repeat it--and maximize success.

Nurse anesthetist advises doctor that "insurance won't pay for the propofol."

This is some asshole in some office somewhere with a calculator, beholden to some other asshole who cares more about the bottom line than best practice, telling a physician he has to do a procedure with greater chance of failure and infinitely greater chance of patient suffering, because some dipshit somewhere is worried about a few ducats.

I wouldn't mind a profit being made on the equipment, on the running of the hospital, on the drug even, and a salary being earned by the two nurses, one nurse anesthetist, and physician. As long as the patient gets the best care possible.

Is that horrible of me?

 

[Liar]

You forget State's rights and our Constitution.

The Federal Government, under the Progressive control of the Federal Government, is trying to destroy the Constitution in favor of a French-Revolution or South Africa Constitution style document that gets away from a charter of negative liberties into a laundry list of "rights."

Maybe. But you're diverting.

States' rights are not what they are squawking about. Have you heard the phrase "war on state sovereignity" from them? What they in fact ARE squawking about is the exact thing they themselves did.

 

[Peregrinator]

I'm sorry, but after reading your last little gem, I have no idea where you end and Socialism begins. You're lashing out at the people who recognize this; you are in denial.

I'm lashing out at an asshole who called me an idiot without even making an attempt to counter argue and then went on an incoherent rant about Thoreau and how worried he is about his progeny's money, though I note from long history that he doesn't give a tinker's damn what happens to their water supply.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Maybe. But you're diverting.

States' rights are not what they are squawking about. Have you heard the phrase "war on state sovereignity" from them? What they in fact ARE squawking about is the exact thing they themselves did.

Contraception is not what they're squawking about. It's everywhere for free. It's about the Federal Government going down the road where you can own your own business, hell, they love Capitalism, but you are not to be left to your own devices in running it, government is your business partner...

I typed in free contraception and the name of my city and got three solid hit and we're TINY, like Iran and Venezuela...

"Abortion is the sacrament to the religion of liberalism"
Rush Limbaugh

What is up with these people on the left? *Why do the same folks who passionately defend the life of a whale, a spotted owl, a baby seal, a toad, and a death-row serial killer get extremely angry at the mere suggestion that a woman consider not killing her baby? *Why? I can only conclude that it is a spiritual thing. *
Lloyd Marcus

"The most dangerous place for an African-American is in the womb."
Pastor Clenard Childress, Jr.
__________________
"We know that the number of government jobs has been increasing steadily, and that the number of applicants is increasing still more rapidly than the number of jobs. … Is this scourge about to come to an end? How can we believe it, when we see that public opinion itself wants to have everything done by that fictitious being, the state, which signifies a collection of salaried bureaucrats? … Very soon there will be two or three of these bureaucrats around every Frenchman, one to prevent him from working too much, another to give him an education, a third to furnish him credit, a fourth to interfere with his business transactions, etc., etc. Where will we be led by the illusion that impels us to believe that the state is a person who has an inexhaustible fortune independent of ours?
Frédéric Bastiat

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I'm lashing out at an asshole who called me an idiot without even making an attempt to counter argue and then went on an incoherent rant about Thoreau and how worried he is about his progeny's money, though I note from long history that he doesn't give a tinker's damn what happens to their water supply.

There you go again...

Socialism in the name of Gaia.

The water supply is just fine in everyone's mind save a few secular moral busybodies.

"It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
CS Lewis

 

[Peregrinator]

There you go again...

Socialism in the name of Gaia.

The water supply is just fine in everyone's mind save a few secular moral busybodies.

And a whole lot of scientists. Look into glaciers in the West. Look into water rights. Look into water disputes.

And please point me to the socialism in saying that Ishmael is a hypocrite.

 

[CNYCarol]

Does the birth control debate...

Wow, is everyone blind?

The birth control debate has nothing to do with birth control!

The Birth Control debate is about POWER. The Power of a dictitorial government to SHRED our Constitutional Rights, in this case the First Ammendment.

First he demands that ALL employees be provided FREE birth control. Religious Institutions have employees and include include Churches and Hospitals, 25% of which are Catholic. Catholics are adamant that birth control is a sin.

Therefore Obama is dictating that the Catholic church provide FREE birth control to all employees.

Recently, it seems as if he has moderated his dictate. FALSE!

What he did was demand that Insurance Companies provide birth control FREE OF CHARGE.

SO, when your insurance rate goes up, will you continue to ignore the truth?

That your Churches and Hospitals have been forced to pay higher insurance premiums to cover your abortions and contraception?

Therefore your Church AND Hospital has been forced to pay.

If he can strip "Religion and the free exercise thereof..." from the Catholics, he can strip away anything he wants from everyone.

"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me."



Heil Obama, Heil Obama, Heil Obama

 

[Peregrinator]

Catholics are adamant that birth control is a sin.

Bullshit.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I disagree. I think people who work in health care should be A) allowed to do what they've trained to do rather than being held in check by bean counting halfwits at a far remove and B) able to earn as much as the market will bear.


Since you seem to be capable of civil discourse this morning, I'd like to hear what you think of insurance companies countermanding the orders of physicians on the basis of cost. If you'd like a specific example, I was in the ED once, finishing up some paperwork, when the doctor on duty--rather kindly, I thought; he was a great doc, a born educator and an excellent leader--asked me if I'd like to see him do a lumbar puncture. I had never seen one live, so I said sure, and went and talked to the patient. Got permission to watch, a formality, really, but I like to be respectful of patients when it's not some sort of immediate life threat, and asked about what was ailing him. Checked back in with the doc, who was consulting with a nurse anesthetist. Doc was requesting anesthesia for the procedure. (1)

This is a very, very painful procedure of some delicacy. It's a long, rather thick needle inserted into the the lumbar spine via the skin of the lower back. The patient can't be allowed to move much during the procedure, or the landmarks for the puncture might be missed, and the test for meningitis can't be run on the cerebrospinal fluid. So the usual strategy is to snow the patient a bit with something like propofol, and have a couple people hold the patient in position (on his side, curled up fetal-like) in order to minimize pain--as well as the chance of having to repeat it--and maximize success.

Nurse anesthetist advises doctor that "insurance won't pay for the propofol."

This is some asshole in some office somewhere with a calculator, beholden to some other asshole who cares more about the bottom line than best practice, telling a physician he has to do a procedure with greater chance of failure and infinitely greater chance of patient suffering, because some dipshit somewhere is worried about a few ducats.

I wouldn't mind a profit being made on the equipment, on the running of the hospital, on the drug even, and a salary being earned by the two nurses, one nurse anesthetist, and physician. As long as the patient gets the best care possible.

Is that horrible of me?

1. I'm always into "civil" discourse. You just get pissed as hell when I point out the obvious, that you are a fan of government intervention in the name of doing good.

I can give you daily examples because as you know, my wife is a specialist in case management. The doctor gets interfered with because as good as he may (or, surprisingly often how not) he has other concerns to worry about and oftentimes orders litigation preventative care and tests; the hospital and the insurance companies have actuary studies to prevent inefficiencies, ironically, it is the same thing government says it will do once it has control of health insurance, but as we already see, in this case, they actually add cost and inefficiency because government makes political decisions.

You cannot argue personal anecdote because it does several things:
1. It promotes emotional rather than rational.
2. You get to be the arbiter of fact, and in this case, as I have had to repeatedly point out to you, at the point of treatment, not at the business end where every cost has to be justified.
3. You get to personalize the discussion in order to control it and if anyone counters your point, they are countering you personally and then can be characterized and dismissed by ad hominem.

In all of your carefully laid out diatribe there, the people who have to repeatedly make this decision are mischaracterized as only carting about ducats when, in fact, they are caring about maximizing scant and precious resource in order to serve as many needs as possible. If YOU were allowed to rule at the point of treatment every time in every case, then, by attrition, you would begin to deny others even basic care, but you don't see that and that is the problem with altruism, you deal with the seen benefit and never, ever, for a second concern yourself with the long-term unseen consequences of your immediate action.

Bastiat wrote extensively about his and I have repeatedly begged you to go online and download for free "Sophisms of the Protectionists," "The Law" and similar works but you are simply too busy fighting the c&p noble war on Man Made whatever you-call-it-this-week to be bothered with such trivial "fiction." That type of reading seems to consume the bulk of your "studies."

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And a whole lot of scientists. Look into glaciers in the West. Look into water rights. Look into water disputes.

And please point me to the socialism in saying that Ishmael is a hypocrite.

 

[Peregrinator]

1. I'm always into "civil" discourse.

<snip>

noble war on Man Made whatever you-call-it-this-week to be bothered with such trivial "fiction." That type of reading seems to consume the bulk of your "studies."

Response 1: Your first sentence is a lie, as indicated by your last sentence and a half. There is nothing civil in characterizing education as you have. Placing studies in quotation marks is a directly insulting parenthetical. The "whatever-you-call-it-this-week is an exhausted and long-debunked talking point arising from a Republican strategy memo, as repeatedly posted and explained. You have, yet again, ignored factual information in order to make some sort of cheap point.

Ignoring what I quoted above, I will now patiently attempt to address the rest of your post, in order to demonstrate to your obvious ignorance the true meaning of the phrase "civil discourse," with which you demonstrate but a passing familiarity here.

 

[Peregrinator]

Very well argued. When you see you're mistaken in two ways in a relatively short post, just use an emoticon.

 

[blunt_trauma]

grumpy boys.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Response 1: Your first sentence is a lie, as indicated by your last sentence and a half. There is nothing civil in characterizing education as you have. Placing studies in quotation marks is a directly insulting parenthetical. The "whatever-you-call-it-this-week is an exhausted and long-debunked talking point arising from a Republican strategy memo, as repeatedly posted and explained. You have, yet again, ignored factual information in order to make some sort of cheap point.

Ignoring what I quoted above, I will now patiently attempt to address the rest of your post, in order to demonstrate to your obvious ignorance the true meaning of the phrase "civil discourse," with which you demonstrate but a passing familiarity here.

 

[mark197205]

Someone's channelling busybody.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

grumpy boys.

But I wore my mules...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Someone's channelling busybody.

Fuck off nigger.

 

[mark197205]

Fuck off nigger.

You could be twins.

 

[Liar]

Contraception is not what they're squawking about. It's everywhere for free. It's about the Federal Government going down the road where you can own your own business, hell, they love Capitalism, but you are not to be left to your own devices in running it, government is your business partner...

Straw man. And more diversion.

I didn't say birth control is what they're squawking about. Whay they're squawking about is forcing Catholic affiliated businesses to pay for things that are against the owners' religion and/or moral consciense. In this case birth control. This is what they are squawling about. This is what they explicitly say they're squaking about, however much you want to reframe it.

If they were squawking about what you're squawking about, why are they saying that they aew squawking about something else?

Are they or you lying?