Less is more....

C

Canceled.LTroll.29

Banned
President Obama promises a national health-insurance plan overseen by federal bureaucrats, who will "reduce unnecessary spending", and help all Americans (except those evil rich folks) to "see the quality of their health care improve and their costs go down."

President Obamas' cream-of-the-crop bureaucrats will be more efficient and less prone to errors that their private-sector predecessors: "About 100,000
Americans die from medical errors in hospitals every year. Prescription drug errors alone cost the nation more than $100 billion every year".

Bureaucrats are famous for their meticulous attention to detail, which not only eliminates nasty mistakes, but results in huge savings for the taxpayer. Why, everyone knows that federal programs are damn near perfect and cost almost nothing! Entitlement fraud is nearly nonexistent! The government gets the best deals on everything, and does a superb job of managing our money through productivity, innovation, and a passion for quality.

How will the new bureaucrats of the National Health Service be able to duplicate the success of the top-notch people currently running Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the other entitlement programs bestowed upon a grateful electorate by past titans of the Jackass Party?

They're doing just swell, of course, and look set to serve as models for total government control of all aspects of life in America.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf

Today, healthcare, tomorrow the energy industry, transportation, housing, banking...the list of things the government can do better than those greedy capitalists is endless!
 
Last edited:
Imagine how much that $30 aspirin in the hospital is going to cost now. I will probably be more like $100.

If there is any question if Nationalized Healthcare will work efficiently in America (I will make no judgments on any other countries), just examine when the last time the government did anything efficiently or with the successful inclusion of cost effectiveness.

Name the program(s) where efficiency and cost effectiveness were the outcome, then name the programs where such is not the case.
 
Kathianne said:
Sort of like 'it's all about oil, Halliburton?' OR 'The basis of the war was WMD's and Bush lied?' I really doubt you're going to hear the end of any mantra.
Click to expand...

Well, there is a definite difference between statements that are essentially true, and indie's repeated exaggerations asserting that you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama 3 times.
 
Onceler said:
Well, there is a definite difference between statements that are essentially true, and indie's repeated exaggerations asserting that you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama 3 times.
Click to expand...

None of those statements are 'true.' In each case there may be a germ of truth, but the racist comment is certainly as justified as 'the left is unpatriotic.' the hyperbole sucks whomever it's aimed at.
 
Kathianne said:
None of those statements are 'true.' In each case there may be a germ of truth, but the racist comment is certainly as justified as 'the left is unpatriotic.' the hyperbole sucks whomever it's aimed at.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think the spriit of most of the things you listed is true.

- the war was sold on WMD's; people try to re-write history, but even Paul Wolfowicz admits to that. There would have been no war without the threat of WMD's.
- Bush lied outright on at least one occasion (about Curveball in his 2003 state of the union), and exaggerated & cherrypicked intel for a propoganda campaign, according to Scott McClellan, a recent Senate investigation & numerous other sources.
- we wouldn't be in Iraq if it wasn't for oil, period.
- there are definitely problems with the awarding of some no-bid contracts in Iraq, of which Haliburton was a notable recipient.

Much more truth behind those statements than in indie's "you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama 3 times"....
 
Onceler said:
I disagree. I think the spriit of most of the things you listed is true.

- the war was sold on WMD's; people try to re-write history, but even Paul Wolfowicz admits to that. There would have been no war without the threat of WMD's.
- Bush lied outright on at least one occasion (about Curveball in his 2003 state of the union), and exaggerated & cherrypicked intel for a propoganda campaign, according to Scott McClellan, a recent Senate investigation & numerous other sources.
- we wouldn't be in Iraq if it wasn't for oil, period.
- there are definitely problems with the awarding of some no-bid contracts in Iraq, of which Haliburton was a notable recipient.

Much more truth behind those statements than in indie's "you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama 3 times"....
Click to expand...

Well the 3 times is a bit over the top. As I said, if you don't buy Wolfie's first statements, why the second? Oh I understand, it's what you want to hear.

Ah well, I found the nonsense about Chimpy etc. stupid back when, I'll assume you'll get used to it after he wins. My guess it will come back, neither side has a grip on doing the right things.
 
"As I said, if you don't buy Wolfie's first statements, why the second? Oh I understand, it's what you want to hear. "

No; I buy it because it's consistent with statements from Scott Mclellan,Paul O'Neil, Richard Clarke and Colin Powell's former aide; I buy it because it's consistent with the Downing Street memo, and another British intel report stating that the admin was "fixing the intel around the policy." I buy it because of my own memory, which is verifiable by looking at news reports for the time period from late 2002-early 2003, where the emphasis on the vast majority of public statements from the admin - including Powell's speech to the UN and Bush's state of the union - was about WMD's, WMD's, WMD's. I buy it because of the recent Senate report illustrating the numerous examples of exaggerations & misleading statements from Bush and other members of the admin.

As I told Dixie on another thread, the list of people who have to be lying for Bush to be telling the truth keeps getting longer. Much longer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top