Leonebluen

 

I do not misrepresent anything; I comment on what I gathered from it. Please, having to explain this type of simple logic to one person is bad enough, I do not have it in me to explain these common sense things to someone else.

So, from an article that says that the ACA is going to reverse the negative trend next year, you gathered that things are going to get worse. If that's not misrepresentation, what do you want to call it? Illiteracy?

 

This goes to you not understanding what you are talking about or having a full grasp of the issue. I explained this before but I will explain again so that you know what would happen in a real universal healthcare system. When people believe that going to the doctor is free and no cost to them, they will go for every little thing no matter how irrelevant it is. I saw it in the military hospital when I was in the military. The place would be packed full of people with colds and the like when they would not normally go. The system gets over-stressed and over loaded.

Funny that you think your observations in the military are legitimate, but my observations from actually working in a hospital aren't. Newsflash, the system can handle those patients quite easily, because they don't require substantive attention from doctors. Nurses do 90% of the work for those people. They also reduce stress overall because people with serious illnesses get diagnosed early. Believe it or not, people end up healthier if they actually, you know, go to the doctor. Think of it like the dentist, people are better off getting checked out once or twice a year than finding out they need all their teeth replaced after ten years.

Per usual all you say is that I don't understand the system, but you give tenuous chains of "logic" to support your position despite being obviously unqualified to comment on the system yourself.

 

I back up my claims with sources. When I have an opinion based on experience and common sense, I tend to say that it is my opinion.

You have given no sources for any of the following claims: 1. Obama is intentionally delaying the law until after the 2014 elections, 2. The purpose of the bill is to put the private sector out of business. 3. The purpose of the law is to make people dependent on the government.

Additionally, I'd like to reference you back to the fact that when you actually do link articles you misrepresent them (ex: back on the first page), a point you've yet to address.

PS - Going back to your first post, people visiting the doctors more often is often a good thing because it facilitates early detection of the really costly problems.

 

You can assume that if you want and you would be assuming wrong. I am just not accepting your premise. As a matter of fact, your attempt to defend a fellow liberal by going into such a great detail on the different levels and extremes of liberalism has me quite amused. There is a right and a wrong in most things and especially in politics. As for the rest of your personal insults in that first paragraph, I've seen them all here from the other leftists who resort to those things when the conversation goes beyond their little ideological safety bubble.

You say I'm wrong, yet you give no reason why. I have clearly outlined why you obviously and blatantly misinterpreted Priscilla, and you have no proof otherwise. There are obviously different levels to everything in politics; just like the tea party is a more conservative part of the republican party. It is not party specific, it's just a fact of politics. Your unwillingness to recognize and understand that is... amusing, although I suspect you're really just pretending that there is no such distinction because you know you misrepresented Priscilla.

 

You should do yourself a huge favor; pay attention to what is going on every day on a daily/hourly basis. Drudgereport.com aggregates tons of news from all over the place. You'd be surprised what you will learn by leaving that little liberal "news" bubble that you have isolated yourself in. You are missing out on what is really going on in the world, particularly with Obamacare.

Again, ZD, you completely ignore my point. You talk about how people need to "pay more attention" and "escape the leftist propaganda bubble," but you've demonstrated that you're completely incapable of reading and understanding the news from a balanced perspective. You fundamentally misrepresented the article you linked on the first page because you wanted it to say something bad about Obamacare, even though it totally didn't. It's a two-way street here ZD. Before you talk about people escaping their biased bubbles, you need to recognize that you're firmly within a conservative bubble yourself (The Drudge Report, for example, is a known conservative circle-jerk, to use your own language). PS - You have no idea what I read, and in fact I do read from both sides, admittedly because I have to, for my work for my university.

 

Love the straw-man argument. I know so-and-so and they do this or that so that validates my otherwise invalid argument.

Funny, that's not at all what a straw-man argument is. The straw-man fallacy is when you misrepresent an opponents position and then refute the misrepresentation without ever actually addressing their actual original position. Maybe you should google some of this jargon before you start throwing it out in an argument.

 

You are so caught up in your ideological bubble and defense of a failure of a liberal law that you do not realize how badly you just stepped in it. "It's not even fully implemented yet," and what is the reason for that? Obama apparently doesn't want people to see how bad it really is cost wise that he is unlawfully just delayed parts of it until after the 2014 midterm. He also has granted tens of thousands of waivers so the reality of what this law is going to do isn't noticed until after the 2014 mid terms. I already know my costs have gone up more than 25% in 2 years all the while the level of coverage continues to decline each year. The purpose of Obamacare is to drive the private sector insurance business out of business and make people increasingly so more dependent on the government. It's happening now and if you could see past your liberal bias, you would see it too.

You make a lot of really big claims here. Please, give some links that prove Obama is intentionally delaying the program until after the 2014 elections? Or is that all just your own conjecture?

The purpose of Obamacare was to reduce health care costs, because the U.S. had a terrible system which cost a fortune and gave mediocre care. Whether or not it will be effective is yet to be seen (PS - You keep saying I'm defending the law, no, I'm not, I'm pointing out that you're overzealous when you have no idea what's going to happen). I myself admitted that it's impossible to tell what's going to happen in the long-run quite yet.

 

Now I do not expect you to believe this. I really do not care if you do to be honest. But I am going to bookmark this discussion for a year or so from now when everything I've said comes to pass and I can remind you. Make sure you stick around until then.

I've looked through the forums, ZD. Very few of your predictions seem to come true, but you always manage to complain about whatever happens instead anyways.

You claim I'm such a biased leftist, but all I've ever done on these forums is point out that you rely on hyperbole and sensationalism. You think I'm so far left only because you're so impossibly far right, that everyone seems leftist by comparison.

It's funny because ZD always whines about personal attacks, unsubstantiated claims, and avoiding the topic at hand, yet here he demonstrates all three tactics like a real master. Accept the fact that you blatantly misinterpreted priscilla. Accept the fact that you blatantly misinterpreted the article you linked on page one. Then move on.

Sigh, you don't understand relativity. The fact that no conservative would support the ACA just means that universal health care is not a conservative idea. It does not mean that the ACA is a liberal form of universal health care. There can be, and in fact there are, different forms of universal health care, and those forms are all more or less conservative/liberal than one another. You have to remember there's always two spectrum to consider, liberalism relative to the status quo, and liberalism relative to all possible outcomes. Obviously the bill is not conservative on the former, but Priscilla was obviously referencing the latter.
Now, I know this might not fit very well into your black-white, us-vs-them perception of politics, but if you abandon your simplistic dichotomies and apply some critical thinking for just a moment here, you might come to understand relativity. You don't have to, though. After all, I'm quite enjoying you demonstrate why you're useless in political conversations; you're so busy looking for ammunition that you forget about facts and balanced conversation.

And perhaps that's the conclusion you've drawn from a few articles you've skimmed, but it's already been shown you have questionable political literacy at best. You never did respond to my earlier post, though, so I'll refresh your memory. The articles you linked here, they don't say what you think they say. You think you're up to speed, but skimming articles, as I said, does not make you a political messiah. It makes YOU the hack, ZD.

Moreover, every single person in my immediate family has worked or does work in health care, including myself, and we'd all disagree with you, as would numerous studies on the ACA, though I'm sure you'd dismiss them as leftist propaganda. Fact is, it's not even fully implemented yet, so you're getting a little overzealous here. Cam down. You already lost two elections over this issue, and, no, most of Europe isn't socialist. Your rhetoric is outdated.

 

Once again it's great to see how everyone thinking that Obamacare is god awful and that the US has one of the best health care systems in the world don't include any sources or citations. I find all the conservative toe dragging to Obamacare very interesting because the law itself is actually very conservative. It's a compromise Obama made because there was no way in hell that he was going to pass a Universal Health System. Also for anyone who likes crying that this law is unconstitutional the supreme court deemed it constitutional. Of course according to ZD they're all hacks, but it's ok let's just let him continue to spew rage in his own bubble. Listen, no one is trying to argue that Obamacare/Affordable Health Care Act is amazing, the problem is that there seems to be only one solution presented. Get rid of it. That's not a solution, and the time to discuss this is in the past. My only hope is the lunatic Tea Party doesn't end up making us also default on our debt as well as already having the gov' shut down. I know it's hard for some of you to believe, but just because you don't like a law doesn't mean you get to whine and moan and stomp your heels. Case in point, I detest the 2nd Amendment, and wish that it was removed so that gun ownership would then be seen as a privilege and not a right. However I know it's in the constitution and I'm absolutely ok with having sensible gun control reform instead.

P.S. Preacher where did you find information ranking our healthcare system as the best? A quick google search will find you plenty of articles ranking it pretty low.

P.P.S. Here are some sources 1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/most-efficient-healthcare_n_3825477.html (Bloomberg study ranking the efficiency of countries healthcare systems) 2. http://www.businessinsider.com/best-healthcare-systems-in-the-world-2012-6# (According to the World Health Organization) We're 37th. Unfortunately I couldn't find a more recent study than 2000 so it's a little dated. Also want to mention that the only thing I saw that the only time I saw United States has the best healthcare system... it was for drugs (http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/the_us_has_the_best_health_care_system_in_the_world_-_for_drug_companies).

 

 

It's this kind of comment that leads me to believe that we as a society is doomed. You literally have no idea what being Conservative is if you think Obamacare is a conservative bill. It has to be the most absurd thing I've read in this forum in a good while.

 

It's this kind of comment that leads me to believe that ZD shouldn't be talking about politics. Honestly, it's quite obvious that Priscilla meant it's conservative relative to other possible forms of universal health care. You neither read other peoples' comments nor the articles you think validate your claims; you seem to skim them at best, yet you come on here and insult others and act like you're a political messiah bearing God given truth.

If you want people to take you seriously, perhaps you should work on understanding what you're reading before you forecast the end the world.

As far as costs and whatnot go, it's far too early to tell if Obamacare will be effective or not. It hasn't even been fully implemented, so I hardly think your naysaying is conclusive. People's cost changes seem largely dependent on circumstance (gender included, unfortunately).

Boiler, my point was that Medicaid is an example of how centralized negotiation forces competition and gets consumers wayyyy better prices. Obviously it isn't a perfect fit in the current system, because the current system isn't centered around competition. It's centered around unreasonably high costs every step of the way. In other countries, where you see centralized negotiation in most/all sectors, you see the market readjusts for it; that hasn't happened here because Medicaid affects a smaller segment of the market.

Part of the reason the system is so expensive currently is the lack of centralized negotiation. That's the biggest reason why U.S. health care costs are so out of line with the rest of the world. Medicaid, for example, demonstrates that centralized negotiation can drastically lower health care costs without ruining the market. Supply and demand doesn't work too well with health care, since often times it's pay this price or die.

The US has spent the most money in the world on health care, and it has gotten mediocre results. The best health care system in the world is socialized, and it costs far less than ours. This is also true of countless other universal health care systems.

Link a few articles all you want, the empirical evidence doesn't lie.

PS - Do you even read your own articles? The USA Today article you referenced primarily blames sequestration and medicare for job cuts. It even says that Tennessee's refusal of federal funding for the ACA is to blame for a third of Vanderbilt's job cuts. Then it say that next year, when the ACA is in full effect, hospitals will need to ADD staff because of it.

Oh, didn't even notice that. Yes, yes he could, but he'd need a perfect sweep with me losing all my games. I find this unlikely at best

Live sounds like fun! Maybe even blitz. I'd be good with blitz.

After my victory on time tonight, I officially win.

I'd say 4 points for fireworks makes more sense. Mollies are obviously superior, so if you make them the same point cost you'll just render fireworks irrelevant.

That's assuming you want to change them, of course. I think you're all approaching the issue wrong if you're just considering whether or not fireworks are super strong. Obviously, they are; however, I'd say the server is fairly well balanced between the infected and survivor TEAMS, which is really all that matters. You gimp the survivors #2 buyable, and suddenly the infected could have a very large advantage.

Anyone need a QB or TE with RBs or WRs to spare? Since Roddy White & Montee Ball aren't up to par yet, I'm looking to pick up some more options.

The fact that there is so much information about our naval locations available on the internet just adds to my belief that this administration is the most reckless and incompetent in our history.

Oh please, you probably say something similar about every Democratic U.S. president.

Notice that the Russians' naval locations are also available on the same site. Why? Because they put them there too? Doubtful. More likely it's becase in the digital era that information is just easy to attain, and it's inconsequential whether that information is available there or not. First of all, even if it's not on the internet, it's probably pretty easy for any potential enemy to attain. Secondly, what potential enemies are going to strike us first anyways?

What's your MC name Cake?

You are not Biggs. -_-

 

dont worry san, cat is just a bully. you can be who you want!

Except Biggs.

He's right. Only I can be Biggs.

Other problem is that you have to not talk at all other than when using your voice commands, because you can't just turn on and off the software to recognize your voice like you would Ventrillo or Teamspeak. Software like Dragon is "Always on" once it's activated.

Not really such a problem. Just turn "buy molly" into "computer buy molly" or "command buy molly" and it'd never be something he'd say otherwise.

That sounds awesome! I'd love to try it.

That map is a bit troubling tho....now our battleship locations are located on a map for all to see... doesn't seem very smart, but I guess that shouldn't surprise me at this point.

Meh, in the informational age I feel as though that intel is probably pretty easy to get anyways.

ZD.... did you miss my last post?

 

Wait Let me get this right. For months there have been numerous people in here insulting me and trolling me and when I complain about it, I get the "it's the cellar, blah blah blah." Now all of a sudden there are some rules and apparently only apply to me all the while you get Chan, Shaftiel, and everyone else poopting all over me? How typical.

Dude, he said it applied to everyone. You're just the one who broke it immediately after he posted it. Stop acting like such a victim.

Check this out. Interactive Google map of the area.

 

https://mapsengine.g...I4.kwd5NMDbqwEc

That's pretty awesome, how'd you come across that?

No, ZD, I'm not going to address what you said and here is why.

1) While you constantly rant about leftists and how we believe nothing but propaganda, you have these unchangeable perceptions about leftists and what each of us must believe.

a) For example, you spent the entire first page of this thread rambling about how it's hypocritical to attack Bush while defending Obama, while no one was defending Obama. I said you made a bad comparison, and yet you somehow read that as "ermahgerd this guy wants Obama to invade Syria." Newsflash, I said at least twice that it's unacceptable when the US meddles in issues where we don't belong, such, as, Syria.

Despite this, you managed to initiate a two page flame war because you're indignant that we're not MORE upset about Syria, even though nothing has really happened yet. NO, this isn't the same as Iraq, because we, have, not, invaded them. So, NO, we're not going to be as upset about Syria as we are Iraq, YET.

2) You make obscure and absurd comments, then backtrack and clarify in a shallow attempt to place blame on others. For example, "If you still do not understand why we went into Iraq, then you will never understand or you refuse to understand. But hey, it's okay for Obama to do the same thing in Syria, Libya." Then, when I ask how they're equitable, I somehow became the idiot for "missing" your sarcasm, even though nothing you said denoted sarcasm.

3) Here's my favorite bit about you - you constantly whine that people only assert their opinions as fact. However, if you look through your posts, you'll see quite a LOT of supposed "facts" that are nothing more than your opinion. This is just a discussion forum, yet you act like a pedantic elitist to anyone and everyone who disagrees with you, despite your infallible hypocrisy. Time and time again, you pull the same maneuvers. 1) Claim any info the opposition uses is just propaganda or government lies, 2) Whine about how the opposition passes off opinion as fact. 3) Pass your own opinion off as fact, and therefore claim you're the "winner" of the argument. 4) Whine that the opposition is personally attacking you and ignoring the issues. 5) Personally attack the opposition and ignore the issues. PS - Nice job ignoring the quotes Priscilla found, they did make you sound kinda crazy.

So, no, ZD, I am not going to engage you anymore. Not because I am incapable, and not because I think you're right. I am not going to waste my time arguing with you because you are just looking for an argument, assuming things about others, and assuming your opinion as fact and others' as illegitimate. Most importantly, though, I recognize that arguing with someone so partisan is utterly ineffectual because you don't differentiate between fact and fiction, you differentiate between what you say and what other people say. You have no interest in anything but shaming others and shaming Obama, and you only come on the forums to escalate otherwise mild conversations. No one benefits from your additions to the forums, aside from your own ego, so I won't encourage you any further. You're going to believe what you want to believe, so I'd rather talk with more respectful individuals who recognize that it's not just what you say that matters, but how you say it, because every, single, one of your posts reeks of insult.

Well guys, ZD insists he's not trolling, so, he must in fact be illiterate. Question answered, problem solved, case closed.

AHhh, I'll be in class tomorrow during draft anyways. Mehhhh.

After reading ZDs last post, I'm going to assume the he's either A) Illiterate or B ) not actually reading what I have to say on the matter.

I've been in this section of the forums twice, and I can already tell feeding that troll is a waste of time.