AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

I defend the torture--but not the killing, maiming, crippling, or injuring--of prisoners who murder civilians, advocate the murder of civilians, or tolerate the murder of civilians.

I defend the killing of civilians, who facilitate or do not try to prevent those persons in their midst deliberately murdering civilians.

I defend warrantless wire tapping for the purpose of detecting and preventing the deliberate murder of civilians, but not for the purpose of collecting evidence for trial.

Speaking of non sequiturs, here's another gleaning from my e-mail today. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything we've been discussing here unless perhaps if we go back to a racial profiling theme, but:

What to do on a plane if the passenger next to you is irritating:
1- Remove your lap top from its bag
2- Open it lay it very gently on the drop down tray.
3. Slowly and carefully, turn it on.
4- Ensure the passenger next to you is watching
5- Connect with the internet.
6- Close your eyes for a brief moment, open them again, turn your gaze upwards to the skies as if in prayer. Moving your lips a bit will provide
a nice effect.
7- Take a deep breath and open this site
http://www.myit-media.de/the_end.html
8.-Enjoy the reaction.

(The sad thing is that only those who have been living in caves the last few years won't get this.)

(The sad thing is that only those who have been living in caves the last few years won't get this.)

I defend the torture--but not the killing, maiming, crippling, or injuring--of prisoners who murder civilians, advocate the murder of civilians, or tolerate the murder of civilians.

I defend the killing of civilians, who facilitate or do not try to prevent those persons in their midst deliberately murdering civilians.

I defend warrantless wire tapping for the purpose of detecting and preventing the deliberate murder of civilians, but not for the purpose of collecting evidence for trial.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
Documented civilian deaths from violence
93,042 " 101,539
...
Weekly graph Monthly table

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Jan 3 568 1035 1430 2806 743 276
Feb 2 604 1201 1449 2536 1011 343
Mar 3976 957 786 1789 2614 1540 416
Apr 3437 1256 1025 1590 2436 1261 484
May 545 619 1226 2103 2769 760 332
Jun 593 833 1215 2426 2108 670 488
Jul 650 762 1444 3159 2568 584 135
Aug 790 823 2165 2743 2333 592
Sep 553 943 1330 2408 1224 535
Oct 493 947 1201 2924 1186 528
Nov 478 1533 1208 2981 1053 473
Dec 529 906 996 2674 905 522
12,049 10,751 14,832 27,676 24,538 9,219 2,474

It is not true that: "under our official policies: many people were tortured to death; warrantless wiretapping was used to gather evidence for trials; thousands and thousands of civilians, of all ideologies and stripes, have been killed by US forces in the last 6 years?"

okie, You really mean it's a function between the patient and his doctor? You really mean that? This might be the very first time you have something close to being right.

All three of the things I said I would defend [torture, killing civilians, warrantless surveillance] are not UnAmerican and they are defensible. Their defense is their effectiveness in significantly limiting total civilian casualties.

ican711nm wrote:

All three of the things I said I would defend [torture, killing civilians, warrantless surveillance] are not UnAmerican and they are defensible. Their defense is their effectiveness in significantly limiting total civilian casualties.

I defend taxes (including the taxation of ican's income) to provide a minimum level of support to needy families with children and basic healthcare to all American citizens because of the effectiveness of taxation in significantly limiting human suffering.

I defend warrantless wire tapping for the purpose of detecting and preventing the deliberate murder of civilians, but not for the purpose of collecting evidence for trial.

cicerone imposter wrote:

okie, You really mean it's a function between the patient and his doctor? You really mean that? This might be the very first time you have something close to being right.

Sure it is a function of patient and doctor. But it won't be with Obamacare, with increasingly bureaucrat telling the doctor what to do if the government runs it. They are talking about these fancy studies or computer analysis that will tell them if and when tests are warranted, etc. This is one of the ways they give for how they will save all those billions. What a joke. And remember, Obama has sworn, has pledged not to sign any bill that would raise the deficit by a single dime. Is that not a very bizarre thing to say in light of what the analysis has been showing? It is not only bizarre but its in total denial of reality. We all know he will sign it without regard to adding billions, perhaps trillions to the debt, if he feels like it, regardless of the estimates.

Debra Law wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

All three of the things I said I would defend [torture, killing civilians, warrantless surveillance] are not UnAmerican and they are defensible. Their defense is their effectiveness in significantly limiting total civilian casualties.

I defend taxes (including the taxation of ican's income) to provide a minimum level of support to needy families with children and basic healthcare to all American citizens because of the effectiveness of taxation in significantly limiting human suffering.

I am suffering, so I am in favor of taxing all attornies, as studies show they are elite and have tons of money, and give it to me to relieve my suffering. I have personally been bilked by attornies descending like vultures on bankruptcy cases, companies that went bankrupt that owed me and other people alot of money. I am definitely in favor of taxing attornies at a much higher rate, especially the ambulance chasers like John Edwards that makes malpractice insurance go sky high. After all, the doctors have to charge alot of money just to pay for their insurance premiums, which can amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, many times more than most of us even make at all. But don't expect this reform any time soon, as the Congress are largely a bunch of attornies, and the legal lobby pretty much has the democrats in their pocket.

ican711nm wrote:

I defend warrantless wire tapping for the purpose of detecting and preventing the deliberate murder of civilians, but not for the purpose of collecting evidence for trial.

Doesn't the fourth amendment require the government to obtain a warrant if it wants to wiretap someone's phone? Aren't you, in fact, arguing that the government should violate the constitution when you say you favor warrantless wiretaps? And isn't advocating a breach of the constitution tantamount to treason? So that makes you a traitor, right ican?

Today, Zimbabwe is governed by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's administration, with President Robert Mugabe as Head of State. Mugabe has been in power since the country's long war for independence. His rule has been characterized by economic mismanagement, hyperinflation, and widespread reports of human rights abuses. [3] The collapse of the nation's economy and widespread poverty and unemployment has increased support for Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and his opposition party, Movement for Democratic Change, which in late 2008 agreed to share power with Mugabe. The literacy rate of Zimbabwe (89.4%) is the highest of Africa.[4]

I am saying that we have already HAD most of that discussion here as well as elsewhere. Try to keep up okay?

Quote:

His campaign rhetoric re health care did not threaten private insurance or private plans in the way the plan Congress came up with did.

So now congress has to adhere to Obama's campaign promises? You've been a little too long under the unitary executive.

You're the one who said he stuck to his game plan in his speech. The only game plan in town that I know of was in those bills Congress has been kicking around and that have generated so much negative publicity. So which is it? Are you sticking with your asserting that Obama has been consistent and hasn't changed his plan? Or was he offering something different in that speech Wednesday night?

Quote:

Quote:

His most recent speech provided no specifics and was pretty ambiguous in all the areas of greatest concern to those who are concerned.

It was infinitely more specific than the snippet you posted from 2003 as his 'original plan'.

That snippet referred to a single-payer system only. Do you suggest he was probably lying when he suggested that his goal was a single-payer system but we couldn't get there right away?

Rebut any point I made if you can.

I can't imagine what is in the water that makes some consider using a person's own words as a 'smear' or somehow inappropriate to use.

Unless they say what they want him to have said of course. Obama spent 40+ minutes giving a speech that was all over the place. Now we either go with his 'all over the place' or write our own scenario. You said his plan was consistent with what has been proposed. So let's go with that and stick to 1) what he said Wednesday night plus 2) what he has said in the past plus 3) how he has actually governed thus far.

I think all are pertinent to consider. Don't you?

For instance, he knows that the Republicans have pushed tort reform as a critical issue in healthcare reform and have been rebuffed in every effort. And he can read the polls. So Wednesday night he says:

Quote:

Now, I don’t believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I’ve talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So " so " so I’m proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these ideas. I think it’s a good idea, and I’m directing my secretary of health and human services to move forward on this initiative today.

Wow. Such strength of conviction. Such forceful taking the bull by the horns. Such commitment to accomplish a goal. Such unambigruousness. Not.

Kathleen Sebelius, his Secretary of Health and Human Services, before she was governor of Kansas, was Executive Director and then head lobbyist for the Kanas Trial Lawyers Association, a group who lobbied vigorously against any form of tort reform..

Just how tough do you think somebody like her will be in reining in trial lawyers in the interest of tort reform?

I defend the torture... of prisoners who ... advocate the murder of civilians, or tolerate the murder of civilians.

I defend the killing of civilians,

I can't imagine what is in the water that makes some consider using a person's own words as a 'smear' or somehow inappropriate to use.

Okie, the bill won't add to the deficit, because we will be raising taxes to pay for it. Not hard to figure out.

Your insurance company already does exactly what you claim the government is 'going' to do - tell your doctor what they can and cannot do to treat you, at least, if they expect to get paid. Never a complaint out of you about that, tho.
Cycloptichorn

Wishful thinking, not based upon reality. And when was the last time any bureaucracy or program came in under estimates? And you can't easily raise tax rates in a recession, even Obama has admitted that.