On Mar 16, 5:20*pm, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 3/16/2011 11:25 AM, bud-- wrote:





The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 3/15/2011 12:42 PM, bud-- wrote:
Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
The Daring Dufas wrote:

Death Panels? I assume you're referring to that abomination of a
health
care bill? I haven't read the bill but if health care becomes rationed
which I believe it will if that nonsense is allowed to continue,
you can
be assured that some sort of bureaucratic group will start deciding
whether or not your life is worth spending money on to preserve it.
ALready is and always has been. Even MCare doesn't pay for everything.
Besides rationing is what economic systems do by definition.

The death panel stuff was way beyond that.

It was based on a provision for counseling where someone could discuss
with a doctor what the patient wanted for treatment - such as maintain
maximum care if brain dead. Some people seem to not want to be kept
alive if they are a vegetable. A "health directive" would make clear
what the patient wanted. Medical staff could make clear what kind of
choices might come up. The patient made the decisions.

There were no death panels.

Thanks to the idiocy of Palin and others, like tea-party robots at home
congressional meetings, the provision was removed. Much better that
vegetables be kept alive with machines.

I do believe there is something called "A Living Will" that would
convey the wish of a patient that no extraordinary measures be
used to keep them alive.

With minimal thinking ability you could figure out that what Palin (and
other idiots) called "death panels" was optional counseling by medical
staff to help people create their own "Living Will". The medical staff
would be *paid*. The decisions, if any, are made by the people. That is
all there was in the health proposal that Palin called "death panels".
It was a lie. It was spread by many of the right wing darlings. Many
(most?) gullible tea-party types believed it. Are you one of them?

With minimal reading comprehension you assume I'm a member of The Tea
Party. You obviously failed to grok everything I wrote especially since
I don't believe anything said by any politician particularly Democrat
politicians. BeeHO worshipers take anything said by their messiah as the
Gospel truth. Are you one of them?

Look it up at FactCheck. Or PolitiFact - it was the "lie of the year".

So now people can try to guess what might happen to them for what they
put in their Living Will. Guessing in medical areas is such a good idea..

My roommate's mom had A Living Will and his family had to fight the
medical staff who wished to ignore the DNR instructions.







It was my understanding that a Navy aircraft carrier task force was
sent
into the area when President Obama visited India. I understand there
were 34 ships involved.
Not unusual and it was a TF that was already on station in the area.
No big deal.

I agree it was routine.

But not for idiot Bachman. How many people believed her? She got her
cost information on the internet - it must have been right. Hard to
imagine what you would have to do to cost $100M per day.

Funny thing, I saw $200 million cost per day at one source. I suppose if
The Congressional Budget Office produced a number, you wouldn't believe
them either? There are so many hidden costs associated with protecting
our President, that I doubt anyone could produce an accurate accounting.

Read what Kurt wrote.

What number did the CBO produce - you conveniently don't say.

There goes your lack of reading comprehension again. Liberal Commiecrats
not only suffer from selective hearing but it's obvious your type is
also afflicted with selective reading. Go back and try to understand
what the word "if" means. I'm sure a third grader, even one from a
government school could explain to you what the word "if" means. Most of
the citizenry can't comprehend a million dollars much less one or two
hundred million so I can't really fault you for that.



You are gullible enough to believe anything idiots like Bachman say.

Hey - I'll sell you a deed to a famous historical bridge - cheap.
Absolutely legal.

You call me gullible when you have no reading comprehension and you
actually believe you could sell the deed to The Brooklyn Bridge? Geez!
What a moron you are, how do walk around without getting hurt by
tripping over or bumping into everything?

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Careful Duf. We sold you London Bridge. Could be that he's referring
to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Bridge