Slaughter solution

Originally posted by whodey
Kinda hard to do when no one seems to want to talk about it. 😉

If that is true, how is it you claim to know so much about what it is and what it means? Remember, you don't have much of a reputation for posting info or analysis in good faith - and nor does utherpendragon - so we wait for something more than your default setting 'outrage' to manifest itself as evidence. If it is what you and utherpendragon claim, why isn't there a force 12 political hurricane blowing with apoplectic Republicans spinning, swooping, soaring?

Originally posted by Hugh Glass
Ah, that's why the Dr first diagnosed my MS, as a ulner nerve problem. Then it was a back problem, which moved to a neck problem. I told him, and my HR specialist at work it was MS, both just smiled and said no.
I had a friend with MS, he had it 35 years before he died...I had studied it quite frequently.
So, that was over the course of 5 years.
So if s back before they get wiped out, he was somewhat an elitist, cost him his whole dam regiment.

I'm not saying that the doctor (or senator) is always going to get it right. It's important to have a good doctor and its important to elect good sentors and representatives.

But ultimately, the doctor has to do what he or she believes is best, and stick with it. He can even change his mind if the facts warrant it. What he CAN'T do is worry about whether the patient might be angry because the doctor refused to prescribe something the patient saw in some infomercial for Magic Toxic Cleansing Powder or read some article about Perky's Purple Pills.

Even General Custer. Clearly, he made some really bad judgments, but he STILL had the responsibility to make judgments and stand by them. Should Custer have spent all his time worrying about his approval ratings? Should he have taken a poll of all his men before making any given decision? If you were commander in chief today, would you order your generals to behave in this fashion?

Originally posted by FMF
If that is true, how is it you claim to know so much about what it is and what it means? Remember, you don't have much of a reputation for posting info or analysis in good faith - and nor does utherpendragon - so we wait for something more than your default setting 'outrage' to manifest itself as evidence. If it is what you and utherpendragon claim, why isn't th ...[text shortened]... orce 12 political hurricane blowing with apoplectic Republicans spinning, swooping, soaring?

"why isn't there a force 12 political hurricane blowing with apoplectic Republicans spinning, swooping, soaring?-the troll

There is my dear! but,the liberal media is hush hush on it.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
I'm not saying that the doctor (or senator) is always going to get it right. It's important to have a good doctor and its important to elect good sentors and representatives.

But ultimately, the doctor has to do what he or she believes is best, and stick with it. He can even change his mind if the facts warrant it. What he CAN'T do is worry about wheth ...[text shortened]... you were commander in chief today, would you order your generals to behave in this fashion?

Your Custer illustration makes no sense. We are not even remotely talking about the military. Generals giving orders and soldiers doing as they are told.
Unless,thats how you view the way American citizens should behave w/their ELECTED officials?!
A great man once said," ...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Your Custer illustration makes no sense. We are not even remotely talking about the military. Generals giving orders and soldiers doing as they are told.
Unless,thats how you view the way American citizens should behave w/their ELECTED officials?!
A great man once said,[b]" ...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.[/b]

I was only using him as an example of an elitist. Custer had an agenda, that was going to put him in the political field... he had re-enforcements nearby, but not a scope of things around him, his own indian scouts told him to hold off. so he rushed in with his attack. In the name of glory for himself. I beleive our commanders, whether military, or political should carefully weight the outcome of everything placed before them.
G.W. Bush has taken critisism for the war in Iraq, some aspects deserve such critisisms. But One can't forget, he had many people behind him at the time, some who have since jumped ship, distancing themselves from the fray.
Does that sound familiar? We talk about Healthcare, and polling. Are we to believe that an issue split so evenly betwen the people of this great country does not require further facts? Do we know how it affects the lives of those who follow behnd us. The estmated costs have changed several times, there seems to be a distinct variance of opinions on many ideals set forth by this plan. As an example, how many people will it actually help in the first 4 years? Yet we start paying for it right away. How many of the estimated 30 million without healthcare, will it help by summer? By this time next year. Do you have that information?
If so, I'd be pleased to see it.
Your Government by the People and for the people is right on the money,, but do the people agree with this Bill? Polls suggest otherwise.

Originally posted by Hugh Glass
I was only using him as an example of an elitist. Custer had an agenda, that was going to put him in the political field... he had re-enforcements nearby, but not a scope of things around him, his own indian scouts told him to hold off. so he rushed in with his attack. In the name of glory for himself. I beleive our commanders, whether military, or politi ...[text shortened]... eople is right on the money,, but do the people agree with this Bill? Polls suggest otherwise.

Not your illustration. Melanerpes illustration was what I was referring too.😕

Originally posted by Melanerpes
I'm not saying that the doctor (or senator) is always going to get it right. It's important to have a good doctor and its important to elect good sentors and representatives.

But ultimately, the doctor has to do what he or she believes is best, and stick with it. He can even change his mind if the facts warrant it. What he CAN'T do is worry about wheth ...[text shortened]... you were commander in chief today, would you order your generals to behave in this fashion?

Custer had inspirations of going to the white house..he had several successes on the battle field, mostly against women and children. His scouts, who were indians told him of the danger. He chose to ignore. He had help nearby, but wanted this victory for himself. Thus putting his own glory ahead of the lives of his troops.
Do you follow a leader because you are afraid of repercutions, or do you follow a leader because you trust and beleive in him?
I know we owe our President support. But we also have the right to question.
Question how much this will cost us? How much debt will our children be saddled with? How many people will it help right now?, in 6 months? Most of it doesn't come into play for 4 years. What are we doing in the meantime? paying for it.
I am not without feelings for those without medical care. I am walking the line of losing what I have worked hard for, 38 years of hard work. My medical expenses passed the 15K mark on my tax return this year. I know how bad things are.
But if we jump, I want to have absolute faith that what we are doing, is the best thing, because to make a mistake, is to slow this process down.
Perhaps because I am so close to the edge of failure, my eyes see things differently. I do thank you for not resorting to name calling, and talking with words over my head, or condesending comments.
I appreciate that very much.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Not your illustration. Melanerpes illustration was what I was referring too.😕

Sorry, it's early morning for me. No man is wise at all hours?
I've got a bit of narcolepsy.
I also thank you for keeping responses civil, and not condesending.

Originally posted by FMF
If that is true, how is it you claim to know so much about what it is and what it means? Remember, you don't have much of a reputation for posting info or analysis in good faith - and nor does utherpendragon - so we wait for something more than your default setting 'outrage' to manifest itself as evidence. If it is what you and utherpendragon claim, why isn't th ...[text shortened]... orce 12 political hurricane blowing with apoplectic Republicans spinning, swooping, soaring?

This is what I was referring to. he throws out condesending words, at everyone who disagrees with his ideas.
I respect Whodeys words, I respect Utherpendragon, I also respect USAPT. I don't always agree with everyone.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Your Custer illustration makes no sense. We are not even remotely talking about the military. Generals giving orders and soldiers doing as they are told.
Unless,thats how you view the way American citizens should behave w/their ELECTED officials?!
A great man once said,[b]" ...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.[/b]

Suppose you yourself were an elected official - and you had spent many hours gathering information, and consulting with a wide variety of people from all sides of the issue, and after engaging in lengthy debate. And after all of that, you reached a conclusion on a particular bill that you believed would be the very best your constituents and-or America as a whole.

Would you be willing to vote for something else that you believed was NOT the best for your constituents just because someone took a poll and found a majority were now against it?

Originally posted by Melanerpes
Suppose you yourself were an elected official - and you had spent many hours gathering information, and consulting with a wide variety of people from all sides of the issue, and after engaging in lengthy debate. And after all of that, you reached a conclusion on a particular bill that you believed would be the very best your constituents and-or America as ...[text shortened]... for your constituents just because someone took a poll and found a majority were now against it?

Melanerpes,there has been a whole lot of polls on this. The American people are overwhelmingly against it. The elected officials are there to represent the people. To uphold and defend the Constitution not to "transcend" America.
And that includes Obama!

Originally posted by Hugh Glass
Custer had inspirations of going to the white house..he had several successes on the battle field, mostly against women and children. His scouts, who were indians told him of the danger. He chose to ignore. He had help nearby, but wanted this victory for himself. Thus putting his own glory ahead of the lives of his troops.
Do you follow a leader because ...[text shortened]... g, and talking with words over my head, or condesending comments.
I appreciate that very much.

yes - we do have a right to question the president and all of our elected officials. And those officials have a duty to listen to what the people are saying and address their concerns.

But those officials ALSO have a duty to do what THEY believe is the best thing, even if its unpopular. Just like General Custer had the duty to do what he believed was the best thing, even if it was unpopular.

Obviously, if an elected official deliberately goes against his own best judgment because he's seeking his own glory, that would be wrong. If this is what Custer was doing, then it was an abomination. Likewise, if a lawmaker passes a bill he considers to be harmful out of a desire for personal gain, that too is an abomination

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Melanerpes,there has been a whole lot of polls on this. The American people are overwhelmingly against it. The elected officials are there to represent the people. To uphold and defend the Constitution not to "transcend" America.
And that includes Obama!

So I guess the answer to my question is yes. You would be willing to throw out all your principles and judgment and just follow the whim of the polls?

As an example, I assume you would oppose a major tax increase on wealth that you believed would totally wreck the economy. As an elected official, would you go along with this just because "its what the majority wants"?

Originally posted by Melanerpes
So I guess the answer to my question is yes. You would be willing to throw out all your principles and judgment and just follow the whim of the polls?

As an example, I assume you would oppose a major tax increase on wealth that you believed would totally wreck the economy. As an elected official, would you go along with this just because "its what the majority wants"?

Unless I have misunderstood something here, and that is possible. The reason for the vote this week, is to get it done before the spring break, when our representatives will return to their states. The fear is, they will hear the people? Now, is that right? In our system, they are suppose to hear the people, or fear them when their jobs are again up for vote.
Do they listen to the people, or are they strong armed by the leadership?
Does this one bill define our President? I hope not.
With the polls showing such a close split, why not alow time for further debate?
As I said, most of this bill does nothing for four years anyway.

The Truth About the Health Care Bill - Michael Connelly, Ret. Constitutional Attorney
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.
However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.
The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, of all of your personal healthcare information in direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide...
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hates so much, out of the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though.
The 9th Amendment that provides: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;
The 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights... Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution." If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.
For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest they consult the source, the US Constitution, and Bill of Rights. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.
Michael Connelly