Gramma’s off her meds again
What is happening in the picture? Tell us in the Comments
Picture by: dunno source. Caption by: Omegasuperman via Our LOL Builder
-
-
Copy & paste this:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous George thought he felt | Help thy neighbor… Next »
Gramma’s off her meds again
» 150 comments
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
Eva on Rule En-horser MsWormwood on Poor Eating Practices Geary on 90s Jokes Geary on And Then There Was One Geary on Undercover Loss Bob the eternally un… on Undercover Loss Gutt on 90s Jokes Wyt on 90s Jokes Doveswing on Seems Legit Whatever on And Then There Was One 
Cheezburger Company BlogPrint on Demand
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Nope. Not Weird At All.
Lolcats - Lolcats n' Funny Cat Pictures
Itz way past
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
I love puppies!
Animal Capshunz - All of the Internet's Animals. Captioned
Lame Pun Otter
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Take That, Schrodinger
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
And Here We Have the Wild Barfing Rainbow Monkeys of Borneo
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
Good Day Sunshine!
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
You're Doing It Wrong
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
Gives New Meaning to 'Going Commando'
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz
The Dude Illustrated With a VHS Tape of "The Big Lebowski"
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Brian Knobbs Totally Looks Like Bebop
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Switcheroo Animal Pocket Knife
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
She’s about to tell Obama where he can shove his Death Panels, along with a little something else.
::sits back to watch the show::
Wouldn’t she rather be about to apply for an executive part in one of the panels?
Obamacare is all about invigorating the younger generations. As such, he would never appoint someone who is about to be euthanized to any sort of executive role.
No, no. Little old women (in black, usually) are the sturdiest, strongest, and healthiest beings there are. They frequently reach ages of around 530 years (but, as women are prone, lie about their age). She’s in her prime, this one.
Still getting euthanized. We can’t have her sucking up all our social security money now, can we?
@Blarg. You DO realize that Danbala is Swedish, right? And therefore has had national healthcare ‘since forever?
National healthcare =/= active redistribution of healthcare from everyone to only those not nearing the “end of life” phase.
National healthcare =/= taxing the extra benefits of any plan that is above and beyond what the public option provides.
National healthcare =/= “just take a pain pill.”*
Oh, wait, sorry, I forgot to be sarcastic and/or funny with this post. My bad.
::ahem::
Of COURSE I know where Danbala is from. That whole stalking thing would have been difficult without that knowledge, now wouldn’t it?
*Which, by the way, I did hear on AP radio news that John Kerry got hip surgery! I guess he’s not to keen on the “just take a pain pill” mantra either.
;p
Apparently you didn’t forget to be a lying stack of shit.
DIAF
Apparently you forgot to wash your mouth out with soap
he didn’t forget, it was just shitty soap
i made a punny!
You make fun of my shitty wok? What next, you make fun of shitty wall I build to keep out damn Mongorians?
South Park soothes the savage breast.
If it slips through moderation, it’s fair game. Shit shit shit!
What did I lie about, pray tell?
Dammit I’m A Fail?
Well someone is feeling a bit trollish this morning. Just dying for a flame war, aren’t ya?
Yes, yes, just DYING for it….
-Bites Blarg’s legs off, before removing the skin from his face and setting him on fire-
That’ll teach you to troll next time, eh?
so eager for it he’s trolling with himself
And taunting Danbala. That’s just asking for trouble.
I like the “Just take a pain pill approach”. *holds out hand for socialised opioids*
Have you bothered to read the bill? These panels are about encouraging, not forcing, everyone, not just the elderly, to take active charge of making statements about when they would wish a DNR or No Heroic Measures directive to be applied to their healthcare.
But actually reading the bill and seeing logic is not any fun at all. Much more fun to say things like ‘down the chute, granny!’
Neither is simple extrapolation, apparently.
Let’s see here…provisions to encourage people to limit their consumption during the most expensive periods of their lives, thereby saving a cash-strapped government a significant amount of money…nope, can’t see where that could be headed.
Except that no one is encouraging people to LIMIT their consumption of healthcare. I’ve read that section of the bill, line by painstaking line – copying it into Word and making notes as I went, researching and looking up things I didn’t understand – and it encourages people to make their wishes known, so that those wishes can be respected.
It doesn’t give any preference to one set of wishes over another, and those who say it does are either lying or ignorant. This idea that the government is pushing DNR orders or whatever is just bullsh*t, and if people would take the time to read the bill for themselves they’d see that.
Something that most people miss when they’re talking about it, is that the bill simply provides for PAYMENT for a DEDICATED visit to discuss end of life issues. This means that the doctor or his/her representative can take more time and explain the various alternatives, options, and implications without feeling like they’re losing money. They don’t have to cram this discussion into a regular office visit; they can take the time it deserves and get paid for it.
As it stands right now, a lengthy discussion about this topic won’t be reimbursed for any more than a three-minute visit for a “Doing okay? Need refills? Have a good day” visit. If a patient comes in and wants to talk about end of life issues, the doctor can choose to:
a. Rush them through a hurried summary and maybe tell them to go online and look around for more information,
b. Take the time that the topic deserves, answer the patient’s questions and provide all the information they need, and lose money, or
c. Falsify their billing so that they can get paid for a Level 5 encounter instead of a Level 1 or 2.
Economic realities being what they are, and penalties for Medicare fraud being what THEY are, most providers will choose option a. As a result, because of the complexity of the issues and the confusion of the terminology and the fear factor, a lot of people put off making those types of decisions, simply because they don’t understand and don’t have anyone to help explain things to them.
There are people who DO NOT want to be kept alive via artificial means for any reason whatsoever, but who do not have a Living Will or DNR or medical power of attorney documents in place to ensure those wishes are honored – because they don’t understand them and, therefore, fear them. And I know this for a fact, because I’m related to two of them. If, God forbid, the day comes that one of my parents suffers a catastrophic brain event or something, it’s going to be a MESS because they won’t set up Living Wills – “it’s too complicated” – and they believe that my being their daughter will give me the legal authority to “just tell the hospital” what their wishes are. And it probably won’t.
A few phrases from the text of the bill:
‘‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner
of the continuum of end-of-life
services and supports available”
THE CONTINUUM – that’s everything from one end to the other.
“‘‘(ii) effectively communicates the individual’s
preferences regarding life sustaining treatment,
including an indication of the treatment and
care desired by the individual;”
See all those references to what THE INDIVIDUAL wants?
“‘(B) The level of treatment indicated under
subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication
for full treatment to an indication to limit some or
all or specified interventions.”
FULL TREATMENT – that’s one end of the continuum – to a limit on some or specified interventions – that’s the middle of the continuum – or a limit on all interventions – there’s the other end of the continuum.
My mother is a registered nurse, and she has chosen to have DNR and limited interventions late in life. This is not due to her trying to save money so as to pass it on to me. This is due to a personal knowledge of what those procedures/interventions would cause to happen to her in the end of life. CPR breaks many ribs in folks ove 65, and is therefore extremely painful–and in hospitals (the ideal setting), it has been shown to save lives maybe 15% of the time. Intubation is very uncomfortable (rubs the throat raw), and makes it impossible to talk. Once a patient is intubated or hooked up to a feeding tube, it is very difficult to get most hospitals to unhook an unconscious and terminal patient, even if they had written requests to not have such procedures in end of life. I could go on, but don’t want to depress you-all more.
Why not? Everyone needs a living will/DNR to avoid shitting in a bag and choking around a respirator for the remainder of their miserable lives.
Tell it likes it is, VG. It ain’t pretty, and everyone wants to pretend it might not happen. But boy howdy does it.
It sure does. And is so d-d hard to watch.
*hugs DT*
Sure is. Agonizing on the one left to make the decisions.
*huggles*
Amen, my friend.
Yeah, fu(k that. I’m going to Mexico to stock up on enough pharmaceuticals to be able to end it all if I want to when I’m old. Viva la pharmacia!
many good points (Albeit depressing ones), VT and DT
but it seems to me, most people protesting the public option, or protesting end-of-life counseling are ones who are unaffected in the current situation.
people i’ve talked to, working professionals all, would benefit from the new revisions and public option, alot of times due to preexisting conditions, current health insurance companies refusing to aid the elderly (alzheimer’s in my neighbor’s case) because the probability of success is only like 60% and not profitable enough, refusing to pay out after the person has been in the plan for 10+ years… it’s absurd. more so – how is this current system good?
when a company refuses to pay out to a client who’s been paying into them for 10 years but can give their executives gross salaries and bonuses in the millions it’s a sure sign the current system is bad.
Interesting how you think the status quo and the public option are the only two possible outcomes. Perhaps any other proposal is somehow secretly racist?
you again huh? i see you’re pride is still wounded from my vicious and pointed responses to your ineptitude at reading previous posts and snaggin tid bits of words from the middle of various pargraphs, merging them into an inconclusive whole, then running willy nilly with it like a jacked up hyena.
and it’s interesting to note that you say, “Interesting how you think the status quo and the public option are the only two possible outcomes.” – i don’t believe i’ve stated in my post that I thought those were the only two possibilities.
in fact, i don’t think i was talking about those two being the only possiblities at all, merely pointing out the benefit of the public plan.
if you asked, perhaps in a less dickish way, then i might have told you that there are two major things I’m looking for in the health reform: removal of the pre-existing condition excuse and some sort of regulation on the health care industry themselves (both of which need to happen anyway with or without a public option) – my examples showed just how screwed up the current system is. the inclusion of a public health care plan wouldn’t really be a necessity if the prices and availability were actually as reasonable as the republicans and their supporters make it sound.
“Vicious and pointed”, huh? LOL, whatever gets you through the night…
You’re of no use to me — why would I possibly ask you what you think?
i have no idea why you keep asking, yet you do. i just assumed you were instigating.
Again, I didn’t ask. I don’t see why you’ve having so much trouble with that concept.
“why would I possibly ask you what you think?”
my bad, i was under the assumption that in the english language we used this bent symbol, ?, at the end of a question. hence, thinking you were enganged in conversation and asked a question by the common symbol with which we used to designate i felt it prudent to answer.
i’m not so sure it’s me who’s having trouble with the concept, chuck-o
All that edumacation and you’ve never heard of a rhetorical question, huh?
(See, I did it again! How tricky…)
for rhetorical questions to truly be effective they are typically spoken so the inflection place do the words can be accurately interpreted.
you keep putting a question mark i can keep sayin you’re askin a question, which, technically you are, be it rhetorical or not, so bleh.
if yar had dem der brains ya wudda realizz’d it and stopped lookin a fool.
In all seriousness, your machinations are hysterical — they’ve livened up an otherwise dull afternoon. So please, by all means, continue dancing for my amusement.
If I knew where you lived, I’d mail you a dollar.
my machinations, huh? you think i’m setting this up as some elaborate plot to make you look dull-witted? i mean, i’d like to think i was that good, but it’s too easy when you just throw yourself out there like that. and i appreciate it as well, you’ve entertained me for a bit this afternoon during an otherwise dull day at work.
as for dancing though, i do swing dance pretty well, although i’m still learning and haven’t had much time outside work to get to the club. bummer. was alot of fun. i put a linky up there if you want to check it out, i think they’re mostly VA, DC & MD locations but you never know, if you head to DC for some vacation might be an interested place to drop in to. just sayin’
No, I’m just amused at the lengths you’ll go to maintain your image of self-importance — like how you had to mention your work hours in hopes it would make you seem more important.
damn man, i mention a site that might be worth checkin out and instead of thanks you try and bash me for sayin i can’t go ‘cuz of work. now you’re just showing your ass.
besides which, nothing of what i’ve said has been for my self-image, merely pointing out how bull-headed and thick skulled some peopel (i.e. you) can be.
i musta really hit home on a few of those bits up above since you’re pretty adamant on posting back even when you keep saying you won’t. it’s an interesting irony, i think.
I never said I wouldn’t respond — that’s the fun part — I just said I’d never ask you what you think. (Which extends to your website recommendations. Why would I possibly care?)
It’s funny — all you’d have to do would be to quote whatever supposedly racist statement I made to make this all go away. But you don’t — you insult, you opine, you distract, but you refuse to put your money where your mouth is. Why is that, I wonder?
dhoti, i quoted it and my response a few times in the other post, and when i started quoting here you started get all snippity about it, too, claiming to know what you wrote. hence it’d be simply redundant to post it here since even when i posted it you refused to look at it and ran off on another tangent like you typically do. you’re just diggin’ your hole deeper. lemme know when you hit china, i could do with some of that general tsao’s chicken. mm, tasty stuff.
(also, doesn’t help trying to be all high and mighty if you’re just being a douche, if you have a valid point to back up i’d be agreeing with you, but this all stemmed from me pointing out her resume and my interpretation of her actions based purely on her actions as well as established precident and the supreme court’s actions, which when i backed up statements with facts you called “identity politics” so, bleh, besides egging you on there’s really not much a point, but i do what i can. and you’re amusing, sort of like an rabid racoon, fun to poke with a stick but only if you got a fence between you and it)
Prove it. Which post?
go back and read it, i’m not going to go quote you the whole damn thing **AGAIN**
it’s the Sonia Sotomayor LOL, scroll bout half way down, start at the end of our rant there, then scroll up, you’ll see i quoted it and a few other things along the way.
Wow, what a shocker — wallfly refusing to cite, like a coward. Yet again.
I’ll lead by example. You went off the rails in your post at 8/13 7:23: you said “i’ve never once brought up her race” (untrue, you just did), you declared that I was using race as “some clever ploy” (not only did I never mention it, you never quoted where that supposed ploy came from), made some “last all-white bastion of power” comment that made no sense, then wrapped it all up with a “now, not saying your racist dhoti”.
So, to recap: you got mad at me for pointing out your circular argument, so you played the race card because it was the easiest way out. And then you became typical wallfly, insulting, dodging, refusing to cite, repeating the same lies. Nice job, mate.
/facepalm
dhoti, you’re an idiot, it’s as simple as that. here’s what started it: this is your post (again, and again)
Dhoti: “Your argument is circular — you’re dismissing my concerns about her record by saying that her record is sound and therefore nothing to be concerned with. I’m guessing you’re supporting her ultimately for another reason, then? (Which is fine — it just doesn’t make any sense to bother discussing her record in that case.)”
This in response to:
Me: “The New Haven firefighters result was established in previous cases, she ruled on precident and not only that but the ruling was very close, both there and when it was brought up higher. If you’re doubting her that’s fine, just wanted to point out almost half the current supreme court (or prev. at this point) ruled in her favor.
A peer calling her “a bully on the bench” doesn’t mean much, again, going by someone’s words rather than her actions (besides, in something like law the prosecturos and defendants have a tendency to be cut throat, it’s nothing new).
The USA v. Juncal – haven’t reviewd that one, I pulled it up and will read it in a moment.
Basically, I don’t see how your pont is valid – she’s got a good resume. The only spin i’ve seen is on opponents picking apart her speeches and trying to use her words out of context to make her look racist.
If she were a bad judge, I’d be with you on this, but she just doesn’t seem to come across as such.”
which was in response to:
Dhoti: “- Ricci v. DiStefano: not only am I still unconvinced that her ruling wasn’t ridiculous, I don’t buy the CYA spin after the fact
- USA v. Juncal
- The Second Circuit clerk who called her “not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench” (not in her record per se, I know…)
- And of course those wonderful press club comments…
Like I said earlier, I think the “out of context” spin is only accepted because her opponents decided not to spend the political capital on her, not because it’s actually true.”
You notice how I’m using the full posts not just part of a sentence to validate my point by using them out of context?
I made this statment after the first response I made to your “Your argument is ciruclar…” statment:
Me: “to add to that, i’ve never once brought up her race in any of my arguments for her – it’s only the people who’ve been opposing her that have consistently brought it up. if you’re trying to imply that by ignoring of her race it’s some clever ploy to hide that i’m only approving of her as a nominee (now judge) because of her ethnicity, i think you seriously need to rethink your approach. what it comes across as, if you guys haven’t noticed it, is that you’re afraid of losing what last all-white bastion of power you got.
now, not saying your racist dhoti, but if that’s the point you fall back when it’s never been brought up, it begs the question whether or not you’re opinions are being skewed by the color of her skin.”
I made that statment because of this sentence in your post I quoted above,
Dhoti: “I’m guessing you’re supporting her ultimately for another reason, then? (Which is fine — it just doesn’t make any sense to bother discussing her record in that case.)”
And, to boot, here’s the URL (also made it a linky): punditkitchen.com/2009/08/12/political-pictures-sonia-sotomayor-american-idol/#comments
Seriously, what are you having so much trouble understanding? Are you that damaged?
He’s just always gotta have the last word, that’s all, wallfly.
Was that so hard? (Apparently, because it took about 50 posts and a 90% irrelevant wall-o-text.)
You’re still wrong, of course — you’re inserting racial overtones where there are none. (Before you start whining, the standard of proof here is not “does wallfly believe it?”, because by now it’s obvious you’d rather die than concede, but “would an average person’s most likely interpretation of that statement be racist?”, and the answer to that is clearly no.)
But hey, it’s still easier than trying to actually defend your argument on logical grounds, right? I’m sure you’ll keep stubbornly lying anyway, LOL…
See? Told ya.
lol, i think you’re right rando.
but… i just can’t stop.. one last post, i gotta do it: dhoti, 100% of that “wall-of-text” was relevant, if you read it you would understand that it serves to validate everything i’ve been saying. i didn’t quote it earlier because in our other discussion i quoted them to you as well because you apparently forget what you post after you post it, hence i felt it redundant to post it again (i was, i apologize, giving you too much credit as far intellect goes)
and, of course you think i’m wrong, you didn’t read the post nor did you argue any valid point in what i posted, so why should you bow to reason when you can live in your deluded fantasy world? i mean, it is the internet and all, so you can get away with it, but man, if you’re like this in real life i’m suprised no one’s strangled you by now.
Wow, and you call me condescending. No use to you? It’s a g-d LOL website. There’s nothing useful about any of this!
he’s still upset because i pointed out he was being racist in a different thread
He stays butthurt for a while. I’d get used to this if I were you. Me, I just take it and run with it.
Not at all — it’s just that, when you had to stoop to identity politics to back yourself up, I decided you were pond scum, and not even a particularly intelligent form of pond scum.
“b..b..but i’m not pond scum! i’m vicious! and pointed! and i don’t capitalize, which must mean i’m cool!”
it would seem he does, eh Rando?
and, dhoti – apparently, from my understanding based on our posts in the other thread, “identity politics” must when you use someone resume, backed up by interpreting their action based on exsiting evidence (in the cases brought up i was using precident as well as the outcome and supreme court’s outcome on one of them). the only problem is you keep saying it isn’t that. it gets confusing because the only one who brought race into it was you, hence you were being racist. and, as you say, “Not at all — it’s just that, when you had to stoop to identity politics to back yourself up, I decided you were pond scum, and not even a particularly intelligent form of pond scum.” that would mean you must consider yourself pond scum, assuming “indentity politics” isn’t what I did but what you did.
c’mon, hit me on my typing again, though, that was a good shot. here, i’ll misspell thngs fo r u to picque on.
Normally, after having had something explained to you repeatedly, it would be wise for you to pick a different tactic — repeating the same provably false argument just makes you look stupid, or at least criminally stubborn.
So, once again, with feeling — when *you* randomly decide that something I said is racist (I guess because you were upset that I didn’t agree with your precious little opinions), that means *you* introduced race. Finally got it?
look, dhoti – in the other thread, I quoted where *you* brought race into, i quoted where *you* used something i said out of context and then quoted it all again because you were too mule headed to read it.
as you said, “Normally, after having had something explained to you repeatedly, it would be wise for you to pick a different tactic — repeating the same provably false argument just makes you look stupid, or at least criminally stubborn.” i was amused because i was thinking the same about you. i mean, hell, the best thing i can say is go reread (or actually read) the post from before and you’ll see where it occurred and where i clarified it later on where it occurred (more than once i believe).
i’ve seen you make some valid arguments but man, sometimes it seems like you just try to be obtuse about things for the sake of it.
lets see… if two people walk into a courtroom, one person has evidence, quotes and all that to back up their argument the other simply says, “he did it”, who the hell you think is going to win? you see how that applies here or shall i spell it out so you can misinterpret it again?
You know, I can scroll up and see what I wrote — I don’t need you to blockquote the whole thing for my convenience.
Oh, please, explain again to me how you randomly calling me a racist means that I introduced race into the conversation. Brilliant stuff.
yarg, i didn’t randomly call you racist, you brought it up in your post, after which i pointed out that it was bringing race into it which devolved into racism as the discussion went on.
i do the quotes because i’m still not convinced you actually read the posts you respond to
So you’re saying you *did* randomly call me a racist? I’m glad we’re in agreement, then.
Dhoti is a racist.
In Nepal the word Dhoti is often used as an ethnic slur against the Madhesi community of Nepal and Indians by the majority population of Nepal. This may be because of the popularity of dhotis in the terai region and the bordering Indian states.
Um, wow. Clearly, when it comes to random, unfounded accusations, wallfly is merely the student, but charro is the master.
Meh.
I’d say it’s founded enough, but I wouldn’t assume it’s true.
I mean, yes, it may seem absurd for us to assume you know that “Dhoti” is an ethnic slur, (I wasn’t aware until just now) but I’m also not sure where you live, or have traveled. Although, it does sound pretty far-out. Charro did make a reasonable assumption that you were racist when your name matched up with a racist slur, but not necessarily a right one. For example, if I was named (insert racially divisive insult here), you’d assume I was a racist when you found out what that meant, but I could just have thought of a word that I thought sounded fine and used it as a name, because I wasn’t informed in terms of the culture that considers the word an insult.
unfounded: not based on fact or solid evidence; groundless.
So yeah, unless charro has something — anything — to suggest I’m using the term as a Nepalese slur (what’s the rate of Internet access in Nepal, anyway?), it’s unfounded.
True, but if I named myself “N*****”- hopefully you can guess which racial slur I don’t want to display, wouldn’t you assume I was racist, even if it turned out I lived in Nepal and had no idea what it meant to Americans? Anyway, the point is, if you hear someone name themselves a word that discriminates against a group of people, you’re going to assume they’re talking about that group of people (when they use the name, I mean.) It’s a knee jerk reaction, but you can’t exactly blame her for it.
LOL, well, if I ever get to Nepal and hear the n-word getting thrown around, I’ll be sure to tell you what they think it means.
Personally, I’d laugh my ass off at that one.
So, did you know your name was a Nepalese slur before tonight? I didn’t, for one.
Nope, not a clue.
But I do know that “charro” is Puerto Rican slang for “lame”, so there’s that.
That’s me, charro the lame master. Me, FTW!
haha! charro’s lame! charro’s lame! Actually, it’s not that funny.
Both of my parents had DNR’s in place. In my father’s case it worked as planned. It sort of did with my mother, but it took me three phone calls and 24 hours before they took her off life support (this was the down side of living in Australia when my mom passed away.) This despite the fact that she had a DNR on file with the hospital she went to.
Jeebus leaping frogs. Yeah, our (USA’s) current health care system is oh so freaking ‘wonderful’. Grrr.
They did the same thing with my grandmother who had a DNR on her living will. The problem is, these doctors don’t want to get sued by the living children of the person they allowed to die. Even with a DNR, they will still take life-saving measures to make sure that no one gets mad later. Its’ lose-lose.
Good on you for taking the time to read the bill — but you missed my point. I’m not suggesting that, as written, the bill mandates end-of-life health care rationing, but rather that, bureaucratic and cost pressures being what they are, end-of-life care will not be a priority in the worst-case public option.
I would say that it already isn’t a priority, or it would not have taken so long to get hospice care in this country…barely.
No, not really. It took so long to get hospice care because we as a society used to shunt off teh death and teh crazeh to hidey holes where we didn’t have to look at them.
Remember, VG, if I can’t see you you can’t see me… and I can’t catch anything!!!
*sends electronic cooties*
So what you’re saying is that on paper, the health care bill doesn’t play out like what you’re suggesting, but you’re predicting that in practice it will all go to hell in a handbasket?
Considering that the Prez has compared the new health care bill to the POST OFFICE, I’d say yeah, if we put this into practice and let the government run it, hell in a handbasket will be preferable.
-
Note to David Axelrod: Keep Prez on TOTUS.
Nice try at backpedaling, but that’s not what you said. You said, and I quote, “provisions to encourage people to limit their consumption during the most expensive periods of their lives, thereby saving a cash-strapped government a significant amount of money.”
There are no such provisions. By suggesting that they exist when they do NOT, and by stating that they are cost-cutting strategies, you ARE in fact implying that the bill will involve “end-of-life health care rationing.”
And frankly, even if you were merely concerned that end of life care “will not be a priority” — as others have mentioned, the REASON that this is up for discussion now is that end of life care is not a priority in the CURRENT climate. People are unfamiliar with the concept, so they feel threatened by the fact that the suggested changes include it, which is why we’re talking about it.
If immunization were not a current standard, and the health care bill included a passage on immunization/vaccination, you can bet your last dollar people would be screaming themselves blue in the faces about that. The reason people feel threatened by the concept is that it’s unfamiliar and seems “new,” because our CURRENT system does not consider it a priority – which is why they don’t pay for it, which is why the bill singles it out for reimbursement.
So stop trying to be disingenuous, stop trying to side-step and re-interpret your original statement, and most of all, stop fear-mongering. Go read the bill yourself.
If you still oppose it, great, but do so on grounds that actually exist, NOT on the false and dishonest basis that there are “provisions to encourage people to limit their consumption … thereby saving … a significant amount of money.”
eeee, you’re obviously itching to get into a fight over this — no doubt you think I’m one of those close-minded types you try to “debunk” or whatever — but in this case your eagerness is getting in your way.
I’m more than happy to discuss with you what I *actually* said, but if you’re so angry you have to twist my words, then sorry, I’m not interested.
but think of all the soylent green we could have
Paws, what is a “read”?
Dis some new culler? Is it like me favorite book, Cat in the Hat?
Screw read.
KILL MY GRANDMOTHER?! I’M DEFENDING MY FAMILY! DON’T SAY THAT’S NOT WHAT’s GOING TO HAPPEN!
Because when you haven’t read the bill and won’t listen to the opinions of those who have…
You know you’re an idiot.
what i’m curious to see is the actual number of people who have read the bill (the whoppin 1200 pages that it is) versus those who’ve read the paragraph or two quoted out of context on fox news.
i mean seriously, outside work i hardly got time to finish a novel of 400 pages, let alone a legal document 1,200 pages long. serusly.
I haven’t read the *entire* health care bill, but I have read several sections of it – always in context, always from the source. Something that reads one way when you read a paragraph or line by itself can be revealed to have a completely different meaning when you go back a few pages and read it in context.
Another thing that’s getting taken out of context is the section about “monthly payments to community based organizations.” The emails going around almost invariably say something like, “This means that this bill is going to send money every month to groups like ACORN!!!” when if they’d take a moment and read a few paragraphs before and after, they’d find that “community based organizations” refers to adult day care facilities, assisted living facilities, etc. – health and life care organizations that facilitate their consumers’ taking an active role in their community instead of being locked up in a hospital bed somewhere.
The language of the bill is not even all that difficult to understand, especially if you are familiar with the terminology – and I’ve worked in the medical support field for 20 years, so I am. A person with an 8th grade education, who WANTED to understand, could tackle a section at a time and spend no more than a few minutes on each section, and walk away understanding probably 90% or more of the bill. But no, it’s so much more fun for people to jump to conclusions and spread false rumors and outright lies!
thank you eeee
I like having eeee around. eeee is now our ace in the hole on the health care debate.
eeee is my heeeero.
LOL Thanks, y’all, but don’t encourage me – I’m long-winded enough without getting positive reinforcement for it! *grin*
I am intermittently active on a forum devoted to debunking urban legends, myths, and other types of tale-telling; quite a few of the provisions of the proposed health-care bill came under fire, with people taking one or two words or lines and putting the worst possible spin on them*. I had a slow week at work that week, so I was able to really dig into the bill and figure out what was being said, and what wasn’t.
Of course, the people who’ve decided it’s evil and wicked aren’t going to be swayed in their opinion; they just accuse me of being a government shill or incapable of independent thought – because taking an email’s or a radio jock’s word for things is so much more representative of “independent thought” than reading the damn thing oneself! *eyeroll*
*One of my favorites was a line that said that the government will be able to directly access your bank account for “election funds transfers.” When I looked into this, it was a section saying that there had to be an option for people to pay their premiums and other medical expenses via electronic funds transfer – NOT “election funds” transfer! In other words, the bill is just requiring that a 21st century option be available to those who wish to use it and that participants have up-to-date technology, but the spinners managed – intentionally or otherwise – to make it sound like Obama’s going to seize everyone’s bank account to pay for his next campaign.
As a friend of mine said, “Oh! How precious! They’re just trying SO hard!”
What do you mean I need a tetanus shot?! I SIGNED A DNR FOR FU(K’S SAKE!
I’m thinking successful troll is poorly named!
Failure Troll just failed.
The Platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) is a semi-aquatic mammal endemic to eastern Australia, including Tasmania. Together with the four species of echidna, it is one of the five extant species of monotremes, the only mammals that lay eggs instead of giving birth to live young. It is the sole living representative of its family (Ornithorhynchidae) and genus (Ornithorhynchus), though a number of related species have been found in the fossil record.
Yep; Successful Troll is ironically named, and has invoked the Ordinal Post rule as well!
I was just wondering, though, if there is any way to invoke the Ordinal Post Rule without using the “F” word. I like reading these random factoids about nothing in particular, but don’t want to be seen as an imbecile. Some of them are not on subjects that interest me, but I find it kind of like opening a fortune cookie. You never know when you will find an interesting message.
You’ve just got to hope for a troll.
Otherwise, people would invoke it all day long and the pages would multiply like never before.
But the point was that I don’t want to act like a moron. I believe the only numbers I would be comfortable “Shouting Out” would be twenty seven and forty two. Possibly sixty nine, as well, which is the result of adding them together, but not as likely. I only giggle at twenty seven because it reminds me of Weird Al Yankovic, and I use forty two as the answer to the ultimate question of Life, the Universe, and Everything. I’m not going to degrade myself to randomly shout out a number for no good reason. This is why I was wondering if there was an alternative method. Conversely, if someone was to post a random fact for no good reason, would the Inverse Ordinal Post Rule take effect, causing one of you to shout out a number?
No, but that’s a damned good idea.
That might be something I’m willing to try… I’m sure I can find some interesting Random Facts to post for no reason.
I like how you think–AND your kitty picture, too!
That’s me! Meowth – #52 on your Pokédex.
There’s a double entendre in there, at least if you’re female!
I just got my kids Pokemon FireRed (it was on clearance at my store for 3 bucks). I may end up regretting that…
Where?
It was on clearance at Sears. You’re not very likely to find it there now. I think they were probably returned to the vendor.
Part of the fun of the random facts is that you never know when they are going to happen.
Grandma on meds: Would you like a scone dearie?
Grandma off meds: AAAALLLLLAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!
This picture reminds me I better call my mom on here birthday tomorrow. There might be consequences if I don’t.
That woman is a WHORE! Look! She has her ENTIRE FACE uncovered! And in public! And probably without a man accompanying her!
We must do what our religion of peace demands… Somebody get me a dull machete so we may behead the whore.
okey dokey
*hands him a dull machete*
now.. who wants to make a bet how close he gets to the bazooka wielding granny?
I’ve got 50 here that says he doesn’t get within 10 yards.
i’ll see your 50, i say he get at least within 5 yards. i mean, she is old, she might have palsy or something or could sneeze at the last minute and blow up a truck instead. speaking of which…
*sets up a web cam to watch, gets in car, drives 50 miles away to watch on a laptop*
I’ll take that bet. It’s a bazooka, not a sniper rifle. Aim isn’t really all that important.
we are betting in otter teeth right?
Hell yeah. I need something I can trade for buffalo jerky.
groovy, i got a bag full of ‘em right here, i think two or three might even have fillings. extra worth there, i tell ya. and no, that’s not a human tooth, who’ve you been talking to? it was the canadian again wasn’t it? don’t you believe him! he’s just trying to get in on my illeg-er..i mean fully legal and sanctioned trade business…
Okay, I’m pretty sure otters don’t get gold fillings. WTF?
it’s better if you don’t know, plausible deniability and such.
That bazooka is an RPG-7.
She might be a high ranking individual with ‘special privileges’ or just so she can be recognized.
BTW, it’s an RPG.
RPG? Like Final Fantasy?
Rocket-Propelled Grenade.
role playing grenadiers!
Really Poor Grammar.
Rando Packs Guns
Rando Porks Grannies?
Ew.
Random Penis Ghost?
They don’t have ghosts!!! What’s wrong with you??!!/!!??!
I know. I was messing with him. I’ve played Half-Life 2 enough to know what RPGs are, and that they’re for n00bs!!!!
HOLY SHIITE!!!
HOLY CRAP! It’s my ex-wife and she got my previous lawn in the divorce..
And the rocket launcher. Man, she must’ve had a great lawyer.
I’ll say.. greedy b!tch!!!
RPG
Oh like I’m a fvcking weapons expert. I considered the possibility that it was an RPG, but wasn’t sure. The fact that I even thought of it means I’ve played too many first person shooter games.
Just for future reference, an RPG fires a self propelled, explosive round that generally is loaded with shrapnel. A rocket launcher fires…well it fires rockets. You can tell the difference because an RPG carries the projectile on the front. (It’s the cone looking thing.)
well also, the rpg’s only round is not just a cone shapped.. There is also a dome shapped round, and other shapped rounds for different jobs.
A rival mosque must be letting out about now… Happy Ramadan!
Holy crap, this man is stealing a quote used in the same pictures to make a comment that appears to be original and funny but isn’t!
“If you think I’m puttin’ on that veil again, you got another think comin’! I’m sicka squintin’ through a gazillion layers of gauze and fallin’ over stuff!”
She tried hard to get the weeds out of her garden the conventional way, but now Granma decided to try something else…
reminds me on some old people i know xD
I got cramps again darn cramps. Watch out now I tell ya I don’t want to hear it. Darn cramps.