I think what Fartus Ignitus did by posting below was show the imaturity of
most far leftist. Why does this deserve it's own thread? Because the other
one is laced with lies and liberal ploys.
What the Democrats did was employ a child to say that the healthcare system
Republicans responded by saying that the boy was being exploited. So, Fartus
calls that an attack on a 12 year old and 2 year old. This is kind of like
liberals saying that Rush Limbaugh called soldiers phoney, when in fact, he
only called Jesse McBeth and those like him phoney.
"The critics accused Graeme's father, Halsey, a self-employed woodworker, of
choosing not to provide insurance for his family of six, even though he
owned his own business. They pointed out that Graeme attends an expensive
private school. And they asserted that the family's home had undergone
extensive remodeling, and that its market value could exceed $400,000. "
Ahem, and this is exactly the Republicans claim. If you can afford health
insurance but chose not to provide it then you do not need socialized
medicine. Yet Democrats attempt to call Republicans "haters of the poor" and
Typical Liberal Politics!
What this comes down is that Democrats are trying to push socialized
medicine more and more, to even those who do not require it and then
accusing Republicans of being rich fat cats when they suggest that it is not
needed for a family who sends their kids to an expensive private school and
own a home worth 400,000 dollars. The lowest of the lows.
Not to the fullest extent Joe. It is relatively minor compared to most
countries and that is for good reason. It is to keep society from becoming
dependent on government.
I have no problem with some social healthcare services but it should only be
used in dire circumstances.
What is happening in our country right now is a movement of people who don't
want to be responsible for their own health cost, and instead would rather
spend that money on gadgets.
I am not saying healthcare is cheap. Obviously it is not. However, that can
be fixed in other ways.
I cannot read your mind and I don't play your mind games.
It does not matter if you have a good example of it or not. I have about 20
bad examples of socialized healthcare that I have witnessed first hand in
the medical field.
One last clue, Natalie:
If this doesn't help, check wikipedia for articles about socialized
Once again, this is a "structure" which everyone agrees is necessary, and
other than the occasional screwup, works quite well. Its customers generally
like the way it works.
Joe's guessing games are what pseudointellectuals do. They give you a trivia
question that they believe is profound. When you answer, they keep saying
"nope, not yet." But rest assured, he is going to give you a magnificent
answer that will blow your mind.
Here you go, Natalie. I assume you agree with this definition of socialized
Main Entry: socialized medicine
: medical and hospital services for the members of a class or population
administered by an organized group (as a state agency) and paid for from
funds obtained usually by assessments, philanthropy, or taxation
If you agree with that, you'll also agree that this is socialized medicine:
I don't agree that socialized medicine means a plan must be available to
everyone. I like the definition above, since it includes the word "class",
defined as "a group, set, or kind sharing common attributes." For the VA,
the class with common attributes is veterans, 7.9 million of them as of
fiscal year 06:
I suppose you could say that BECAUSE it only serves a class, it is a private
health plan, but that wouldn't hold water. It's paid for by our tax dollars,
so it's not private.
If you want to stick with your definition, then you've completely trashed
the numbskulls (dbu, Sot, etc.) who think the various national health care
plans are examples of socialized medicine. They're not, since none of them
would be equally available to everyone if they ever made it into law. Based
on this, the numbskulls can now stop parroting Hush Bimbo, who ordered them
to say "socialized medicine".
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.