Charles, I have no idea what any of that means. I'm going to assume it's English and leave it at that.

I use the LSD 6 myself.
//

Guess we'd better keep our hands and feet inside the blog while you're rolling, then.

how was the bike ride today?

I hope you think this work is fun?
This is such a great place, thanks for letting me play here!

Patriots about to wrap up a win over Miami ...

I didn't bother learning any php until php5 was out. I still prefer django and other python stuff, but at least it's usable now.

re: #6 _RememberTonyC

Patriots about to wrap up a win over Miami ...

The Bucs might win!!

re: #7 Conservative Moonbat

I didn't bother learning any php until php5 was out. I still prefer django and other python stuff, but at least it's usable now.

Dammit! Speak English! You're just babbling, man!

So I’m refactoring all our code that reads and parses JSON or XML to use the built-in (and much faster) PHP 5 functions instead of using outdated external classes and libraries written for PHP 4.

Translation for us Non-geeks: Christmas came early!

re: #8 Cannadian Club Akbar

The Bucs might win!!

over the packers ... nice

re: #3 The Sanity Inspector

Guess we'd better keep our hands and feet inside the blog while you're rolling, then.

Protect yourself at all times!

Hey look at this...there is now Tea Party Jewelry for sale Tea Party Emporium...I wonder if you have to pay sales tax when you buy?

I was just thinking:

Three trillion dollars divided by two thousand pages comes out to 1.5 billion dollars per page.

Each page is kind of like a 1.5 billion dollar bill.

re: #14 Dar ul Harbarian

I was just thinking:

Three trillion dollars divided by two thousand pages comes out to 1.5 billion dollars per page.

Each page is kind of like a 1.5 billion dollar bill.

i think the other day, Drudge said it was $2,200,000 per WORD

re: #14 Dar ul Harbarian

I was just thinking:

Three trillion dollars divided by two thousand pages comes out to 1.5 billion dollars per page.

Each page is kind of like a 1.5 billion dollar bill.

I wonder whose portrait is on that bill?

re: #13 Big Steve

Hey look at this...there is now Tea Party Jewelry for sale Tea Party Emporium...I wonder if you have to pay sales tax when you buy?

If they take money from Alouettes Zionist Mall there will be beatings!!
/

Alex Jones on replay - the conflicting early reports about the Ft. Hood shooting show a broader manipulation of the events than the single, lone-wolf scenario would suggest, although he's willing to admit that vaccinations and anti-malaria medicines, combined with psychiatric prescription drug abuse and the overall pattern of whackiness of psychiatrists, may also have been a factor.

re: #15 _RememberTonyC

i think the other day, Drudge said it was $2,200,000 per WORD

But what's the value of all the human lives it's going to save?

re: #16 Big Steve

I wonder whose portrait is on that bill?

It's a mirror.

Be careful going up against JSON.

re: #20 Guanxi88

It's a mirror.

Excellent!!!

re: #14 Dar ul Harbarian

I was just thinking:

Three trillion dollars divided by two thousand pages comes out to 1.5 billion dollars per page.

Each page is kind of like a 1.5 billion dollar bill.

re: #15 _RememberTonyC

i think the other day, Drudge said it was $2,200,000 per WORD

Nancy just looked so happy last night, I wonder if she rushed home and rocked Mr. Pelosi's world. (Ewww!)

re: #19 Conservative Moonbat

But what's the value of all the human lives it's going to save?

that depends on how many lives are saved ...

re: #18 Guanxi88

Alex Jones on replay - the conflicting early reports about the Ft. Hood shooting show a broader manipulation of the events than the single, lone-wolf scenario would suggest, although he's willing to admit that vaccinations and anti-malaria medicines, combined with psychiatric prescription drug abuse and the overall pattern of whackiness of psychiatrists, may also have been a factor.

Boy - he and Tom Cruise ought get together and have a sofa jumping competition.

re: #23 SteveC

Nancy just looked so happy last night, I wonder if she rushed home and rocked Mr. Pelosi's world. (Ewww!)

OMG ... take that back

re: #23 SteveC

Nancy just looked so happy last night, I wonder if she rushed home and rocked Mr. Pelosi's world. (Ewww!)

I just threw up a little bit in my mouth.

re: #16 Big Steve

I wonder whose portrait is on that bill?

I don't know whose picture is on it, but my skin will be the parchment it is printed on.

Alex Jones now points to early false reports that the shooter was dead, reports of multiple shooters, and suspects killed or in custody, to suggest that the possibility of a coordinated shooting, with Hasan as a patsy and/or participant in a broader plot cannot be ruled out. It's amazing - even the absence of evidence proves the conspiracy.

re: #28 Dar ul Harbarian

I don't know whose picture is on it, but my skin will be the parchment it is printed on.

you must be either really fat or really tall.

Wow, new features, great.

Any chance of an edit button on the comments?

Teh computer fu is weak in me.

re: #19 Conservative Moonbat

But what's the value of all the human lives it's going to save?

A lot of people will likely die standing in line for their free health care.

re: #30 Conservative Moonbat

you must be either really fat or really tall.

Why can't he be both?

re: #13 Big Steve

Hey look at this...there is now Tea Party Jewelry for sale Tea Party Emporium...I wonder if you have to pay sales tax when you buy?

Holy cows! Talk about your over-priced junk!

re: #17 Cannadian Club Akbar

If they take money from Alouettes Zionist Mall there will be beatings!!
/

The Zionist Mall is not affiliated with the "Tea Party Emporium" in anyway!

There is no tax on Zionist Mall products!

re: #26 _RememberTonyC

OMG ... take that back

re: #27 Cannadian Club Akbar

I just threw up a little bit in my mouth.

*Singing*
Mama's got a squeeze box
She wears on her chest
And when Daddy comes home
He never gets no rest

'Cause she's playing all night
And the music's all right
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at night

Well the kids don't eat
And the dog can't sleep
There's no escape from the music
In the whole damn street

re: #30 Conservative Moonbat

you must be either really fat or really tall.

They will just peel off fresh pieces every April 15 and wait for it to grow back

re: #36 Alouette

The Zionist Mall is not affiliated with the "Tea Party Emporium" in anyway!

There is no tax on Zionist Mall products!

I knew that. Just watching your back, sister!

re: #35 Guanxi88

Holy cows! Talk about your over-priced junk!

Frigging lapel pin small enough to sit on a dime, for $90.00! made from quartz and semi-precious stones? Please.

re: #15 _RememberTonyC

i think the other day, Drudge said it was $2,200,000 per WORD

which is a silly ratio. There is no increased understanding of the bill by dividing the number of words in it into the amount of money it represents.

To back up my position: add enough words to the bill so that the number comes down to $200 per word -- do you know anything more about the bill?

re: #40 Guanxi88

Frigging lapel pin small enough to sit on a dime, for $90.00! made from quartz and semi-precious stones? Please.

But obviously one is quite the rebel if they wear it
/

DIRTY JOKE WARNING
===

Nancy Pelosi was taking a tour of a D.C. hospital while working to reform healthcare in the U.S. As she is touring, a doctor is explaining all the different functions of the hospital to her.

Eventually, they pass an open room in the inpatient ward, where Nancy could clearly see a middle aged man masturbating with great enthusiasm. The doctor quickly instructed the floor nurse to close the door. It was too late, Pelosi had already seen.

She fiercely looked at the doctor and said, "What kind of hospital are you running here Doctor?"

The doctor calmly explained that the man had a very rare ailment, which required him to ejaculate three times daily, or his testicles would swell and he would die. Nancy accepted the doctor's explanation and they moved on.

A few minutes later, they came across another open room, yet this time they witnessed a nurse on her knees giving a different middle aged man oral sex. Pelosi was outraged and called for an immediate explanation.

"It's very simple Mrs. Pelosi", said the doctor. "This man suffers from the same ailment as the last man, however he has a much better health plan."

re: #41 keithgabryelski

which is a silly ratio. There is no increased understanding of the bill by dividing the number of words in it into the amount of money it represents.

To back up my position: add enough words to the bill so that the number comes down to $200 per word -- do you know anything more about the bill?

Just wait - I'm sure Federal Register will expand sufficiently to bring the cost down to something like a nickel a word before it's all said and done.

re: #40 Guanxi88

Frigging lapel pin small enough to sit on a dime, for $90.00! made from quartz and semi-precious stones? Please.

I'm selling shells from the Gulf of Mexico for only $10. Get 'em now!!!

re: #33 Dar ul Harbarian

A lot of people will likely die standing in line for their free health care.

there is no evidence of this. A larger change to the healthcare system: Medicare did not see these results over decades of its use.

re: #45 Cannadian Club Akbar

I'm selling shells from the Gulf of Mexico for only $10. Get 'em now!!!

Hold them to your ear, and you can hear the people roaring against death panels, obamunism, and anything else of which you disapprove.

re: #43 _RememberTonyC

"It's very simple Mrs. Pelosi", said the doctor. "This man suffers from the same ailment as the last man, however he has a much better health plan."

Sign me up.

re: #41 keithgabryelski

which is a silly ratio. There is no increased understanding of the bill by dividing the number of words in it into the amount of money it represents.

To back up my position: add enough words to the bill so that the number comes down to $200 per word -- do you know anything more about the bill?

I know ... but it was a fun little number to toss around

re: #47 Guanxi88

Hold them to your ear, and you can hear the people roaring against death panels, obamunism, and anything else of which you disapprove.

"I was at the beach, and found if you pick a woman up, and hold her next to your ear?... You can hear her scream."
-Ron White

The Bucs won!! We are 1-7. I smell Superbowl!!
//

re: #50 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

"I was at the beach, and found if you pick a woman up, and hold her next to your ear?... You can hear her scream."
-Ron White

Love that guy! I swear, i think he has taps on my in-laws' phones to mine them for material.

Having not seen 'Dirty Rotten Scoundrels' for some time, and having linked a scene on the previous thread, I noticed Youtube has the entire movie in 12 parts. I'm up to part 3 and thought I'd see if anyone else noticed the Lord of the Sith was a first a butler. Man- you have to work your way up to Emperor of the Galaxy I guess:

re: #51 Cannadian Club Akbar

The Bucs won!! We are 1-7. I smell Superbowl!!
//

what you're smelling might remind you of a bowl, but it ain't that super

congrats on the win!

*singing again*

I'm just a love machine
a huggin' kissin' fiend;
I'm just a love machine
and I won't work for nobody but you

re: #54 _RememberTonyC

what you're smelling might remind you of a bowl, but it ain't that super

congrats on the win!

Rookie QB-first start. This kid is 21, 6'6", 250 lb.

re: #44 Guanxi88

Just wait - I'm sure Federal Register will expand sufficiently to bring the cost down to something like a nickel a word before it's all said and done.

the point: is it a laudable goal to have a ratio of words to cost for bills -- does that help?

the answer is simply: no

Its only benefit is are fallacies: red herring and an appeal to ridicule

re: #31 Bagua

Wow, new features, great.

Any chance of an edit button on the comments?

Yes, perhaps a 15 minute window to edit your own comment.

Then perhaps Steve could take this one back, and post something that does not induce projectile vomit:

re: #23 SteveC

Nancy just looked so happy last night, I wonder if she rushed home and rocked Mr. Pelosi's world. (Ewww!)

re: #58 Racer X

See my #27.

re: #57 keithgabryelski

Its only benefit is are fallacies: red herring and an appeal to ridicule

Ridicule is an effective method of rhetorical argumentation, esepcially when dealing with something like this, where even the sponsors and authors have only a general idea of what the thing entails.

Red herring - maybe. It's a useful way of making the estimated costs of the thing somewhat imaginable. Trillions, like billions, are inconceivably large.

re: #57 keithgabryelski

I agree with #60, especially the 1st sentence
Ridicule is an effective method of rhetorical argumentation, esepcially when dealing with something like this,

I would edit it to read Ridicule is an effective method of rhetorical argumentation, esepcially when dealing with something RIDICULOUS!

I'm having trouble posting. Several times in the past few days when I click "post this comment" the status wheel just spins. I am unable to ding or post another comment. I then navigate away from LGF, then hit the back button. I can then post the comment and continue with no trouble (until next glitch).

Have I got germs?

re: #62 Racer X

I'm having trouble posting. Several times in the past few days when I click "post this comment" the status wheel just spins. I am unable to ding or post another comment. I then navigate away from LGF, then hit the back button. I can then post the comment and continue with no trouble (until next glitch).

Have I got germs?

word on the street says its COOTIES

re: #1 Guanxi88

!jer ner crom pron pah...

re: #60 Guanxi88

...esepcially when dealing with something like this, where even the sponsors and authors have only a general idea of what the thing entails.

I know that's a popular talking point but it's not true. They know what's in the bill, everyone does. It's been posted online for about a week.

re: #56 Cannadian Club Akbar

Rookie QB-first start. This kid is 21, 6'6", 250 lb.

good luck ... maybe he can get some experience and start fresh in 2010

re: #65 Killgore Trout

I know that's a popular talking point but it's not true. They know what's in the bill, everyone does. It's been posted online for about a week.

And they still voted FOR it?

re: #65 Killgore Trout

I know that's a popular talking point but it's not true. They know what's in the bill, everyone does. It's been posted online for about a week.

In a general way, yes. Same with asking a Lockheed engineer about the specifics of X, Y, or Z on a given fighter plane under certain conditions. Of course he doesn't know the specifics - the availability of the blueprints and specs have little relation to how the thing will actually perform in a given situation.

re: #58 Racer X

Yes, perhaps a 15 minute window to edit your own comment.

That's been contemplated here before and rejected because people then might use it to post some really nasty shit knowing that they can then delete it soon afterward. LGF is calmer these days and most of the more extreme lizards have moved on so it might not be such a problem now.

re: #65 Killgore Trout

I know that's a popular talking point but it's not true. They know what's in the bill, everyone does. It's been posted online for about a week.

ummm,, slow down there, Sparky

Wasn't there a video on here last week of John Conyers saying he doesn't read the bills, thats what his staff is for

re: #67 Racer X

Yes, that's why they wrote it.

re: #60 Guanxi88

re: #63 sattv4u2

re: #60 Guanxi88

The "rightist's have weighted in...!

re: #72 oldegeezr

re: #63 sattv4u2

re: #60 Guanxi88

The "rightist's have weighted in...!

You have a keen grasp of the obvious.

re: #72 oldegeezr

re: #63 sattv4u2

re: #60 Guanxi88

The "rightist's REALISTS have weighted in...!

ftfy, Champ

re: #70 sattv4u2

Wasn't there a video on here last week of John Conyers saying he doesn't read the bills, thats what his staff is for

Heh, that was probably an old video from Mikey Moore's Fahrenheit 911 talking about the Patriot Act.

I posted yesterday that they should have waited till Monday to pass healthcare so that they could have done it on the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall for a touch of some appropriate irony... And then a friend of mine reminds me that November 7th is the anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution.

Not as ironic, but still rather amusing. (Note: I am not calling Obama a Bolshevik, I just found it funny)

re: #72 oldegeezr

re: #63 sattv4u2

re: #60 Guanxi88

The "rightist's have weighted in...!

You REALLY believe that all 400+ Congressman reas the 1995 page bill WITH the 800+ pages of amendments attached to it before last night??

WE HAVE A LIVE ONE HERE FOLKS !!

BRB

re: #65 Killgore Trout

I know that's a popular talking point but it's not true. They know what's in the bill, everyone does. It's been posted online for about a week.

There was a lot of semantic contortionism that went into rationalizing that the bill had been available for even 72 hours - how doe that translate into a week?

re: #75 Killgore Trout

Heh, that was probably an old video from Mikey Moore's Fahrenheit 911 talking about the Patriot Act.

Does that make it a good or bad thing? I hate to think folk are voting in support of anything so massively large as to be beyond comprehension by a moderately educated and literate representative. Goes for all of it, and all of them.

re: #77 sattv4u2

You REALLY believe that all 400+ Congressman reas the 1995 page bill WITH the 800+ pages of amendments attached to it before last night??

WE HAVE A LIVE ONE HERE FOLKS !!

Cousin of mine estimated what it would have taken to print all those bills for the 435 congressmen+100 senators to read, came to a number around $100,000.

We're off to a good start already! ;)

(yes yes, they could have just read electronic copies...)

re: #60 Guanxi88

Ridicule is an effective method of rhetorical argumentation,

sometimes effective, but never honest. It is a fallacy.

esepcially when dealing with something like this, where even the sponsors and authors have only a general idea of what the thing entails.

This is another fallacy: that no one read the bill and thus do not understand it.

A lawmakers understanding need not be ever word and ever paragraph. A clear understanding of the bill is required but not every single word.
Clearly there have to be experts in sections of a bill this large to help guide it to something that is workable, but that need not be one person for the whole document and it need not be the same person that votes on the bill (as long as the person that votes on the bill has enough information to vote )

Red herring - maybe. It's a useful way of making the estimated costs of the thing somewhat imaginable. Trillions, like billions, are inconceivably large.

It serves no purpose other than to ridicule the legislation (with out reasonable facts) and to divert attention away from the actual issue (what should and should not be included in health care reform.

Therefore it has no beneficial purpose in the overall debate.

re: #81 Raryn

(yes yes, they could have just read electronic copies...)

Kindles for Kongress!

re: #77 sattv4u2

You REALLY believe that all 400+ Congressman reas the 1995 page bill WITH the 800+ pages of amendments attached to it before last night??

WE HAVE A LIVE ONE HERE FOLKS !!

were are screwed.

"..."
"You must ...first define their purpose..."

How large is the average Congressional staff? A bill that big, it would even be hard to assign everyone to summarize a section.

How many law makers that voted for this bill have even a minor in economics? Just asking.

I could try and read the Bill for a month and not have any concept of what it actually says...

re: #61 sattv4u2

I agree with #60, especially the 1st sentence
I would edit it to read Ridicule is an effective method of rhetorical argumentation, esepcially when dealing with something RIDICULOUS!

You should present some evidence that this bill is ridiculous.

I'm so old I can remember when every single congressman read the whole of the USA Patriot Act before they voted on it.

/Sarcolepsy

re: #81 Raryn

Cousin of mine estimated what it would have taken to print all those bills for the 435 congressmen+100 senators to read, came to a number around $100,000.

All that paper, Congress has to be in violation of some kind of environmental regulation. Arrest the whole lot of 'em!

re: #88 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I could try and read the Bill for a month and not have any concept of what it actually says...

It say's your taxes are going up & the quality of care is going down...

re: #82 keithgabryelski

It serves no purpose other than to ridicule the legislation (with out reasonable facts) and to divert attention away from the actual issue (what should and should not be included in health care reform.

Therefore it has no beneficial purpose in the overall debate.

In other words:
1) only dialectical argumentation is admissible in politics;
2) That a congressional representative needs to have a particular piece or section rendered for them in general terms does not equate to that person having a general knowledge of the bill, but we admit they lack a grasp of all the specifics;
3) And in any event, considerations of the projected cost of the thing are inadmissible, on grounds of (1), above, and because health care reform is important. This last bit is itself a fallacy, known as petitio principii.

re: #92 brookly red

It say's your taxes are going up & the quality of care is going down...

And if you don't conform you will be fined.

re: #94 Cannadian Club Akbar

And if you don't conform you will be fined.

again.

re: #82 keithgabryelski

It serves no purpose other than to ridicule the legislation (with out reasonable facts) and to divert attention away from the actual issue (what should and should not be included in health care reform.

Therefore it has no beneficial purpose in the overall debate.

Well, the issue people normally have is that even if a congressman agrees with the broad strokes in the bill, its entirely possible there could be one line (or paragraph...) that is rather objectionable.

God only know what different folks have managed to sneak in there. I'd say the protests are more about the necessity of the bill being 2000+ pages as opposed the necessity of the congressmen to read it. You can't convince me that the whole kit and caboodle is necessary.

Fundamental reform could probably be accomplished by one large bill to get it going and a series of smaller ones which could be voted on individually, but that's not how our system works.

re: #96 Raryn

Well, the issue people normally have is that even if a congressman agrees with the broad strokes in the bill, its entirely possible there could be one line (or paragraph...) that is rather objectionable.

God only know what different folks have managed to sneak in there. I'd say the protests are more about the necessity of the bill being 2000+ pages as opposed the necessity of the congressmen to read it. You can't convince me that the whole kit and caboodle is necessary.

Fundamental reform could probably be accomplished by one large bill to get it going and a series of smaller ones which could be voted on individually, but that's not how our system works.

Hard for either side to sneak in tid-bits for their pets patrons if the thing's not large enough.

re: #80 Guanxi88

Does that make it a good or bad thing?

It makes it a non-issue. You can selectively complain like Mikey Moore and the converted will agree with you or you can seek more valid criticism that reasonable people might consider.

BTW - it looks like the mandates for coverage requirements, the extensions to COBRA, and the pre-existing condition ban will take effect Jan 1, 2010 in the bill the House just passed.

The other provisions don't kick in until 2013.

So how will the cost of health insurance be reduced in the 2010, 2011 and 2012 years? Answer - the costs won't. Premiums will have to rise as the risks increase.

I honestly don't think the Dem reps in marginal districts understood that they will face constituents paying higher premiums with no relief for 2 more years when they voted last night.

(NAME DELETED is a 5 yr old boy, who is in his last stages of Neuroblastoma Cancer after a 2 1/2 yr battle. His family is celebrating Christmas early this year (November 13th and 14th). All he wants is Christmas cards.

I can't give out mailing addresses (of course) on LGF, but my nic is blue, if you want to do something really sweet for about a buck... send me an email, I'll send his address to you.

re: #88 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I could try and read the Bill for a month and not have any concept of what it actually says...

We live in a Republic - we have others do shit on our behalf.

Walter read most of this latest bill, and while he can be a cranky old coot, I trust his judgement. He said it was crap.

re: #89 keithgabryelski

You should present some evidence that this bill is ridiculous.

The size of it is absolutely ridiculous.

re: #97 Guanxi88

Hard for either side to sneak in tid-bits for their pets patrons if the thing's not large enough.

Which is one of the reasons that we need a presidential line-item veto. (even with a Democrat in the white house, as long as he isn't blatantly partisan with it)

And also the main reason why we'll never get one again. Passing an amendment for it is rather unlikely...

re: #93 Guanxi88

In other words:
1) only dialectical argumentation is admissible in politics;
2) That a congressional representative needs to have a particular piece or section rendered for them in general terms does not equate to that person having a general knowledge of the bill, but we admit they lack a grasp of all the specifics;
3) And in any event, considerations of the projected cost of the thing are inadmissible, on grounds of (1), above, and because health care reform is important. This last bit is itself a fallacy, known as petitio principii.

Don't get caught up in having someone define what is a valid argument. It's liking asking the enemy to decide what kind of weapon you should be using in battle.

If you have something to say, say it. This is a typical tactic designed to shut down speech.

re: #98 Killgore Trout

It makes it a non-issue. You can selectively complain like Mikey Moore and the converted will agree with you or you can seek more valid criticism that reasonable people might consider.

Howzabout we split the difference and discourage people drafting bills that require the political equivalent of a team of Jesuits to interpret and digest them for ease of understanding by the Solons in whose hands we have committed our fates?

re: #75 Killgore Trout

Heh, that was probably an old video from Mikey Moore's Fahrenheit 911 talking about the Patriot Act.

Could be. So you think Conyers has changed now and READS all the bills (like your #65 intimated?)

re: #89 keithgabryelski

You should present some evidence that this bill is ridiculous.

Self evident
Read the bill

I'll wait

re: #105 Guanxi88

Howzabout we split the difference and discourage people drafting bills that require the political equivalent of a team of Jesuits to interpret and digest them for ease of understanding by the Solons in whose hands we have committed our fates?

or we could just vote them out.

re: #69 Killgore Trout

That's been contemplated here before and rejected because people then might use it to post some really nasty shit knowing that they can then delete it soon afterward. LGF is calmer these days and most of the more extreme lizards have moved on so it might not be such a problem now.

Nah, it would still be a problem. The hypothetical course of events: Charles opens registration, banned lizard registers sock puppet, sock puppet posts insane racist idiocy in the dead of night, logs out and takes screen grab of own idiocy as evidence of LGF "jumping the shark," before deleting own comment. Comment editing is a recipe for stealth douchebaggery.

re: #103 Raryn

Which is one of the reasons that we need a presidential line-item veto. (even with a Democrat in the white house, as long as he isn't blatantly partisan with it)

And also the main reason why we'll never get one again. Passing an amendment for it is rather unlikely...

Actually, I wouldn't mind a blatantly partisan application of a line item veto. The opposite party would know their BS would be struck, so would have much less incentive to sneak it in and play nice with the president's partisans to let them sneak in their own BS.

re: #105 Guanxi88

Howzabout we split the difference and discourage people drafting bills that require the political equivalent of a team of Jesuits to interpret and digest them for ease of understanding by the Solons in whose hands we have committed our fates?

I both am offended and not offended by that remark.

/Jesuit Parsing Coach off

re: #108 brookly red

or we could just vote them out.

Voting them out would certainly discourage them

re: #93 Guanxi88

In other words:
1) only dialectical argumentation is admissible in politics;

No, just because someone is fallacious doesn't mean their position is incorrect. But honest argumentation is leading indicator that a position is worthy of consideration.

2) That a congressional representative needs to have a particular piece or section rendered for them in general terms does not equate to that person having a general knowledge of the bill, but we admit they lack a grasp of all the specifics;

I think we agree on this.

3) And in any event, considerations of the projected cost of the thing are inadmissible, on grounds of (1), above, and because health care reform is important. This last bit is itself a fallacy, known as petitio principii.

You suggest that dismissing the ratio of words to cost as silly is equivalent to ignoring the cost of this bill. That simply does not hold, especially since my position was to state the ratio (of words to cost) gave no beneficial information about the bill.

In fact, the ratio (of words to cost) does exactly the opposite: it obscures the cost of this bill (which is about 1 trillion of 10 years) by converting the numbers into an unrelated scale.

It's like asking how well your son did in track by asking how many bits per furlong he ran?

re: #96 Raryn

Well, the issue people normally have is that even if a congressman agrees with the broad strokes in the bill, its entirely possible there could be one line (or paragraph...) that is rather objectionable.

God only know what different folks have managed to sneak in there. I'd say the protests are more about the necessity of the bill being 2000+ pages as opposed the necessity of the congressmen to read it. You can't convince me that the whole kit and caboodle is necessary.

Fundamental reform could probably be accomplished by one large bill to get it going and a series of smaller ones which could be voted on individually, but that's not how our system works.

I still expect there to be a half dozen or so more bills over the next 30 years tuning the thing.

re: #112 Guanxi88

Voting them out would certainly discourage them

alas not quickly e-nuff...

re: #90 WindUpBird

I'm so old I can remember when every single congressman read the whole of the USA Patriot Act before they voted on it.

/Sarcolepsy

So NOT reading this one makes up for NOT readinmg that one!!

I see!!

(((headache time)))

re: #111 karmic_inquisitor

I both am offended and not offended by that remark.

/Jesuit Parsing Coach off

Look, if you want good, sound reasoning and interpretation, if you want subtle insight into implications and ramifications of a complex body of knowledge and law, and if you want them to work on Shabbat, you gotta get the Jesuits in.

re: #110 funky chicken

Actually, I wouldn't mind a blatantly partisan application of a line item veto. The opposite party would know their BS would be struck, so would have much less incentive to sneak it in and play nice with the president's partisans to let them sneak in their own BS.

I'd rather the pork from both sides of the aisle be cut.

re: #116 sattv4u2

The Republicans did it TOO!

re: #106 sattv4u2

Of course not but they know what's in the bill. These things are cobbled together from bits and peices of legislation that have been around for years. Each Congressman has their pet issues that they insist be included or excluded (as the case may be) and that's all they care about. Sometimes they insist that wording be changed before they'll let it out of committee etc. This is they way it has always been. Complaining about everyday events is pretty pointless.

re: #113 keithgabryelski

You suggest that dismissing the ratio of words to cost as silly is equivalent to ignoring the cost of this bill. That simply does not hold, especially since my position was to state the ratio (of words to cost) gave no beneficial information about the bill.

In fact, the ratio (of words to cost) does exactly the opposite: it obscures the cost of this bill (which is about 1 trillion of 10 years) by converting the numbers into an unrelated scale.

It's like asking how well your son did in track by asking how many bits per furlong he ran?

Just say what you want to say, let Keith deal with the answers.

This Swine Flu mania has gone too far.

re: #100 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

You still have my addy? Send it along

re: #109 goddamnedfrank

Agreed, it's probably not a good idea.

What's not to like...?
Medic Care for the last six years, since I'm seventy-one.
VA prescriptions for an $8 co-pay...
Since I’m a combat vet...

re: #120 Killgore Trout

Of course not but they know what's in the bill. These things are cobbled together from bits and peices of legislation that have been around for years. Each Congressman has their pet issues that they insist be included or excluded (as the case may be) and that's all they care about. Sometimes they insist that wording be changed before they'll let it out of committee etc. This is they way it has always been. Complaining about everyday events is pretty pointless.

Excellent observation.

And IMHO, this health care bill appears to be a liberal wet dream come true. It does nothing to address the core problem of why health care costs are rising astronomically.

re: #118 Raryn

I'd rather the pork from both sides of the aisle be cut.

My point was that even a partisan line item veto pen would result in less pork. Now, both parties scheme together to get maximum pork. If the folks not in the presiden't party weren't able to get their pork, they would be much, much more likely to raise a royal stink over the other guy's.

re: #114 Conservative Moonbat

I still expect there to be a half dozen or so more bills over the next 30 years tuning the thing.

Thats a given. But i'd rather there be one big bill now with the bare necessities, even if it requires a dozen or more bills over the next 5 years to fine tune it.

I mean, thats what we have professional politicians for right? Even if they do spend as much time on vacation as working.

re: #113 keithgabryelski

You suggest that dismissing the ratio of words to cost as silly is equivalent to ignoring the cost of this bill. That simply does not hold, especially since my position was to state the ratio (of words to cost) gave no beneficial information about the bill.

In fact, the ratio (of words to cost) does exactly the opposite: it obscures the cost of this bill (which is about 1 trillion of 10 years) by converting the numbers into an unrelated scale.

It's like asking how well your son did in track by asking how many bits per furlong he ran?

No, I just suggested that the ration of dollars (unfathomably large in number) to words (somewhat conceivable in number) is a neat way of driving home how very large a billion of anything is. We're not converting anything into anything, here, and of course it provides no new information to run it. It's not intended to do that - it's intended to underline how very large is the text of the bill, and how very substantial is its expense. Improving the ratio (lowering per-word cost) could only come by reducing expense overall - not gonna happen - or adding to the text, which would only exacerbate the objection to the size of the thing. It's slick and easy tool for conceptualizing and underlining two facts about the bill - it's not an analysis, nor is it meant to be one.

Bits per furlong is a nice one, though.

re: #100 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

(NAME DELETED is a 5 yr old boy, who is in his last stages of Neuroblastoma Cancer after a 2 1/2 yr battle. His family is celebrating Christmas early this year (November 13th and 14th). All he wants is Christmas cards.

I can't give out mailing addresses (of course) on LGF, but my nic is blue, if you want to do something really sweet for about a buck... send me an email, I'll send his address to you.

Too many times a request like this is an urban legend, but I googled the phrasing you used. (Figuring you cut and pasted rather than retyped). If you are speaking of a young man with the same name as the gentleman who gathered animals two by two, that one is legit.

re: #114 Conservative Moonbat

I still expect there to be a half dozen or so more bills over the next 30 years tuning the thing.

So we've got that to look forward to. great.

re: #120 Killgore Trout

Then don;t say "it';s a fallacy" when someone states they haven't read the bill

I haven't read every technical manual for every piece of equipment we have at work, but I mostly know what they do and how to use them

Problem is, I'm often surprised by something one of them does or doesn't do tjhat I thought it did

Apply that to what they "KNOW" is in the bill

SURPRISE SURPRISE SUPRISE !

re: #96 Raryn

Well, the issue people normally have is that even if a congressman agrees with the broad strokes in the bill, its entirely possible there could be one line (or paragraph...) that is rather objectionable.

We agree -- it is bad to have parts of the bill that are misunderstood that have real effect on society.

It doesn't hold a congressman will understand a bill any more if he has read every word.

It is does hold that a synopsis of the effective parts of a bill can better understood by lawmakers and challenged for truth by all parties to see if it effectively approximates a bills actual influence.

Fundamental reform could probably be accomplished by one large bill to get it going and a series of smaller ones which could be voted on individually, but that's not how our system works.

I agree.

this is the one large bill -- there should be a series of smaller bills to solve tort reform and other consideration for health care reform.

re: #127 funky chicken

My point was that even a partisan line item veto pen would result in less pork. Now, both parties scheme together to get maximum pork. If the folks not in the presiden't party weren't able to get their pork, they would be much, much more likely to raise a royal stink over the other guy's.

True.

A pity that Clinton's line item was unconstitutional (iirc, under the reasoning that it basically allowed to president to write legislation...)

Though I still say that a line item veto can hardly be less constitutional than executive orders

A constitutional ammendment was called for rather than this bill, considering the size and scope, imho.
But that gets in the way of the Chicago Way Power Play.

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

If you have something to say, say it. This is a typical tactic designed to shut down speech.

Walter brings up an excellent point, which he has brought up many times before:

There is no benefit to having an honest debate on subjects if you don't have an honest position.

And ... the ends justify the means.

re: #133 keithgabryelski

It doesn't hold a congressman will understand a bill any more if he has read every word.

It is does hold that a synopsis of the effective parts of a bill can better understood by lawmakers and challenged for truth by all parties to see if it effectively approximates a bills actual influence.

The problem, though is that the bill is a massively complicated thing, interacting in a massively complicated environment, with factors and co-factors that do not admit of easy prediction, detection, or quantification.

And if it should turn out to be a bust, and assuming it could be noticed in time, it is not likely to be corrected or reformed. Previous experience suggests that bad laws just get edited and tacked onto, not fixed.

re: #136 keithgabryelski

Walter brings up an excellent point, which he has brought up many times before:

There is no benefit to having an honest debate on subjects if you don't have an honest position.

And ... the ends justify the means.

Is there an honest position other than your own on this topic?

re: #102 funky chicken

The size of it is absolutely ridiculous.

What size would be appropriate?

re: #139 keithgabryelski

What size would be appropriate?

That's mere rhetoric, and serves no purpose other than to ridicule the objection in question.

re: #139 keithgabryelski

What size would be appropriate?

Less than a Trillion dollars.

re: #140 Guanxi88

That's mere rhetoric, and serves no purpose other than to ridicule the objection in question.

Sauce for the goose...

re: #139 keithgabryelski

What size would be appropriate?

less would be a good starting point!

re: #133 keithgabryelski

We agree -- it is bad to have parts of the bill that are misunderstood that have real effect on society.

It doesn't hold a congressman will understand a bill any more if he has read every word.

It is does hold that a synopsis of the effective parts of a bill can better understood by lawmakers and challenged for truth by all parties to see if it effectively approximates a bills actual influence.

I agree.

this is the one large bill -- there should be a series of smaller bills to solve tort reform and other consideration for health care reform.

The issue with that being: Who's writing the synopsis? I'm assuming every congressman has interns that could be given the task and the parties themselves have messages about the various bills coming out, but I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that there's plenty of random clauses that might be important but seem innocuous enough at first.

This specific comprehensive bill seems *too* comprehensive.

re: #132 sattv4u2

The bill was intentionally written to do what they want it too. Just like the Patriot act they know what they're voting for. I know there's a deep desire to paint this as some sort of bumbling atrocity but it's all pretty calculated.

re: #129 Guanxi88

No, I just suggested that the ration of dollars (unfathomably large in number) to words (somewhat conceivable in number) is a neat way of driving home how very large a billion of anything is. We're not converting anything into anything, here, and of course it provides no new information to run it. It's not intended to do that - it's intended to underline how very large is the text of the bill, and how very substantial is its expense.

one trillion dollars does a fine job of that.

$n per word does not -- it attempts to discount this bill with an arbitrary and unrelated ratio.

re: #146 keithgabryelski

one trillion dollars does a fine job of that.

$n per word does not -- it attempts to discount this bill with an arbitrary and unrelated ratio.

A trillion is an unfathomably large number, representing a staggeringly large number of billions, which are themselves made up of units (millions) that cannot be conceptualized in concrete terms.

re: #139 keithgabryelski

re: #143 sattv4u2

less would be a good starting point!

Let me exapnd with a specific

How bout starting out with how (some) of it will be funded
They state there Medi Care if awash in fraud and they can trim 500 BILLION from it

How bout they trim the 500 Billion, set it aside to SHOW us they can, THEN craft leg that uses that 500 billion

The problem that I have with this "fix" is that it isn't a "fix", it's a new

Our current health system NEEDS some fixes

When I get a flat tire and need an oil change, I don't buy a NEW car, I FIX the problems with the one I have

re: #139 keithgabryelski

What size would be appropriate?

about 100 pages would be more than sufficient, frankly

re: #140 Guanxi88

That's mere rhetoric, and serves no purpose other than to ridicule the objection in question.

Not at all:

The person said something was ridiculous because it was large.

That is a bare assertion.

I asked for some concept of what and what was not "a ridiculous size".

I did not ridicule anyone or any position, i merely asked for clarification.

re: #148 sattv4u2

re: #143 sattv4u2

When I get a flat tire and need an oil change, I don't buy a NEW car, I FIX the problems with the one I have

Or, you could do a bill like this one, and build your own car company from the ground up.

re: #137 Guanxi88

The Patriot act has been tweaked a couple times.

re: #145 Killgore Trout

The bill was intentionally written to do what they want it too. Just like the Patriot act they know what they're voting for. I know there's a deep desire to paint this as some sort of bumbling atrocity but it's all pretty calculated.

You stated up thread that each person had their own pet project that they crafted into the bill

THATS what they (individually) vote for as long as nothing is in the rest of the bill that states they have to kill puppies and kick kids

re: #145 Killgore Trout

The bill was intentionally written to do what they want it too. Just like the Patriot act they know what they're voting for. I know there's a deep desire to paint this as some sort of bumbling atrocity but it's all pretty calculated.

And remember that the thing has to go through Committee with the Senate. What you see is not necessarily what you will get.

re: #146 keithgabryelski

one trillion dollars does a fine job of that.

$n per word does not -- it attempts to discount this bill with an arbitrary and unrelated ratio.

Can you conceive of the sum of one trillion dollars? I mean, you and I know its equal to $1,000,000,000,000 but thats just a number. Its as real to me as a googol dollars. A million is a far more reasonable number, given that I can conceive of plenty of things that cost $1m. Saying an average of X million is appropriated by each word, or sentence, is a rather conceivable measurement. (Not one that means anything particularly significant, but its easy to understand)

re: #138 Guanxi88

Is there an honest position other than your own on this topic?

There are plenty -- but ridiculing this bill and attempting to divert attention from the discussion of its points is not one of them.

re: #154 austin_blue

And remember that the thing has to go through Committee with the Senate. What you see is not necessarily what you will get.

True that.

re: #138 Guanxi88

Is there an honest position other than your own on this topic?

And of course, Keith attempted to turn my position around by agreeing with me.

Fine, I will agree with him, start with an honest position, but say it who ever you want to, how ever you are most capable of stating your position, and don't play all these games of what is the "proper" way to frame a debate and not the "proper" way to present a position.

Just say it and throw it in the lap of the person who you are trying to make your point to. If you point is honest, all of his/her knight jumping and windy spinning will be able to cover up the simple facts.

Leave that sort of "debate" for all the big wigs in the halls of Cambridge. Being "proper" never won a war.

Bottom Line:

I no longer trust politicians to stumble around spending Trillions of OUR hard earned tax dollars.

Has no one learned from our recent near total financial collapse?

re: #69 Killgore Trout

That's been contemplated here before and rejected because people then might use it to post some really nasty shit knowing that they can then delete it soon afterward. LGF is calmer these days and most of the more extreme lizards have moved on so it might not be such a problem now.

I'm thinking more for stealth edits to avoid all the PIMF corrections. People abusing the feature should be spanked appropriately.

I hate looking at my own stupid typo mistakes.

Just a wish, it's already a fantastic forum as is.

re: #62 Racer X

I'm having trouble posting. Several times in the past few days when I click "post this comment" the status wheel just spins. I am unable to ding or post another comment. I then navigate away from LGF, then hit the back button. I can then post the comment and continue with no trouble (until next glitch).

Have I got germs?

Open your Taskmanager and see how your CPU and memory are doing. If they are maxed out that is your problem.

Also, look at how many programs you have running in the background but do not need, close down a few and that may fix things.

re: #159 Racer X

Bottom Line:

I no longer trust politicians to stumble around spending Trillions of OUR hard earned tax dollars.

Has no one learned from our recent near total financial collapse?

The Dems think that the lesson is that Capitalism is evil. That's an exaggeration, not not an absurd on. They don't like the concept of having to balance the books so they won't do it. We'll all end paying for that, of course.

re: #126 Racer X

Excellent observation.

And IMHO, this health care bill appears to be a liberal wet dream come true. It does nothing to address the core problem of why health care costs are rising astronomically.

Expectations drive costs.

People expect better and better medicine.

They expect new treatments. They expect to live longer than Mom and Dad / Grandma and Grandpa.

Those expectations were created by a system that concentrates vast sums of wealth in the hands of those who take risks to create those new therapies and to those who rapidly adapt to deliver those therapies. And all of it is labor intensive work performed by scarce labor resources who demand high compensation.

The bill does not address the rising expectations. It simply presupposes that insurance companies have hard wired the system to overheat and that a public insurer will put an end to their systemic theft.

The expectations will not go away. And when they are not delivered on, people will no longer be able to scapegoat the insurers - they can now call their Representative in Congress when they are denied a new, exotic, and expensive treatment. If enough people call (or if you are particularly deserving of media sympathy and park yourself at the Representatives office with a camera crew in tow) then the entitlement will be expanded, as was the case with the Prescription Drug benefit for seniors.

At some point the costs will have to actually be addressed. And given all of the things that the US Government is spending on, that may come sooner.

On another note - seems Obama has adopted Reagan's "spend them dead" strategy in transforming government. Reagan spent gobs of money on defense while cutting taxes leaving congress no money to spend. Perhaps that is what Obama wants to do, but the area that will get cut back will be defense on a fairly permanent basis.

re: #158 Walter L. Newton

And I am think faster than I am typing and not being real careful. But I think most got the gist of my comment.

I try to preview a little better.

re: #160 Bagua

I'm thinking more for stealth edits to avoid all the PIMF corrections. People abusing the feature should be spanked appropriately.

I hate looking at my own stupid typo mistakes.

Just a wish, it's already a fantastic forum as is.

I usually just let my typos stand and let people try and figure out what I mean

re: #137 Guanxi88

The problem, though is that the bill is a massively complicated thing, interacting in a massively complicated environment, with factors and co-factors that do not admit of easy prediction, detection, or quantification.

It is true that every law has side-effects and that some side-effects cause extreme problems.

This doesn't seem to be the case, given that this law only marginally changes our healthcare system and it doesn't change it anywhere close to what has been done in the past (Medicare).

And if it should turn out to be a bust, and assuming it could be noticed in time, it is not likely to be corrected or reformed. Previous experience suggests that bad laws just get edited and tacked onto, not fixed.

We agree -- bad laws live on forever because lawmakers make a name for themselves by increasing legislation not removing old laws from the books
(as well as the entitlement issues with laws on the books).

That sucks.

re: #159 Racer X

Bottom Line:

I no longer trust politicians to stumble around spending Trillions of OUR hard earned tax dollars.

Has no one learned from our recent near total financial collapse?

Problem is we have yet to earn them. Those are China's and Japan's and Saudi Arabia's dollars (i leave the "hard earned" part up to others to apply).

re: #148 sattv4u2

They state that Medi Care is awash in fraud and they can trim 500 BILLION from it

AND ,,, speaking of that, two points

If they "know" theres that much fraud in it why haven't they already taken steps to eliminate it
AND
If this bill does NOt pass does that mean they will NOT go after the fraud like they haven't up to now!?!?!

re: #159 Racer X

Bottom Line:

I no longer trust politicians to stumble around spending Trillions of OUR hard earned tax dollars.

Has no one learned from our recent near total financial collapse?

I have...always have

re: #168 sattv4u2

They state that Medi Care is awash in fraud and they can trim 500 BILLION from it

AND ,,, speaking of that, two points

If they "know" theres that much fraud in it why haven't they already taken steps to eliminate it
AND
If this bill does NOt pass does that mean they will NOT go after the fraud like they haven't up to now!?!?!

Why not just a bill just to slash that 500 Billion in fraud and waste?

re: #144 Raryn

The issue with that being: Who's writing the synopsis? I'm assuming every congressman has interns that could be given the task and the parties themselves have messages about the various bills coming out, but I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that there's plenty of random clauses that might be important but seem innocuous enough at first.

This specific comprehensive bill seems *too* comprehensive.

yes. it's the basic problem: when is a synopsis too short to give an accurate description of the build. And certainly you should surround yourself with trustworthy and smart people that can accurately negotiate the costs/benefits.

But, it doesn't hold that having to understand every word in a bill is a better way to understand it for lawmakers (that is, is it even possible to understand every word for the nearly 700 lawmakers responsible for voting on a bill)

re: #159 Racer X

Bottom Line:

I no longer trust politicians to stumble around spending Trillions of OUR hard earned tax dollars.

Has no one learned from our recent near total financial collapse?

When did we ever trust politicians to spend Trillions of dollars? We should be reducing fraud, waste, spending and governmental mismanagement. Not increasing the above with expanded government.

re: #170 Bagua

Why not just a bill just to slash that 500 Billion in fraud and waste?

Seems to me there are already bills against fruad... we could enforce them.

CNN Video:

On City Streets, Home-Grown Radical NYC Muslim Group Praises Fort Hood Shooter

re: #147 Guanxi88

A trillion is an unfathomably large number, representing a staggeringly large number of billions, which are themselves made up of units (millions) that cannot be conceptualized in concrete terms.

I agree. The best way I heard of describing "1 billion" was to say:

1 billion seconds is more than 32 years.

(actually it was more descriptive)

If you were able to spend one dollar every second, it would take you more than 32 years to spend one billion dollars.

re: #173 brookly red

Seems to me there are already bills against fruad... we could enforce them.

Yet the propaganda says we need this massive bill in order to reduce the fraud. That is a con job.

You may recall the Strategic Vision poll by a conservative group about students who could not name the first president. Nate Silver called it a fraud, and even offered big money if the pollster would share it's supporting data which they never did. Now Nate has results from another poll of Oklahoma students that seems more reasonable.

Nate.

re: #174 HelloDare

CNN Video:

On City Streets, Home-Grown Radical NYC Muslim Group Praises Fort Hood Shooter

Scum. The only bright spot in that report is that CNN labeled as 'hate', which it is. It would be better to call it 'disloyalty', but I'll take the moral sanity where I can find it (which is part of the reason I post here).

One figure that has gone under in all this arguing about "cost per page" or "cost per word" is 40+ million uninsured Americans, roughly the population of Spain or Poland. A shame and a scandal for a nation that many like to tout as "exceptional", and one that many more nonetheless hold up as a model for other nations to emulate.

re: #155 Raryn

Can you conceive of the sum of one trillion dollars? I mean, you and I know its equal to $1,000,000,000,000 but thats just a number. Its as real to me as a googol dollars. A million is a far more reasonable number, given that I can conceive of plenty of things that cost $1m. Saying an average of X million is appropriated by each word, or sentence, is a rather conceivable measurement. (Not one that means anything particularly significant, but its easy to understand)

i'm just saying the ratio of words to cost was not a reasonable way to understand the bill.

a ratio of # of people in the united states to cost is more reasonable.

re: #177 avanti

You may recall the Strategic Vision poll by a conservative group about students who could not name the first president. Nate Silver called it a fraud, and even offered big money if the pollster would share it's supporting data which they never did. Now Nate has results from another poll of Oklahoma students that seems more reasonable.

Nate.

Did Nate ever prove it was a fraud, or was that his opinion?

re: #176 Bagua

Yet the propaganda says we need this massive bill in order to reduce the fraud. That is a con job.

what are prisons for?

re: #174 HelloDare

CNN Video:

On City Streets, Home-Grown Radical NYC Muslim Group Praises Fort Hood Shooter

What a surprise! (I mean that CNN is covering it) what could they be trying to distract us from?

re: #149 funky chicken

about 100 pages would be more than sufficient, frankly

i think 8 words is enough

"remove the words 'over 65' from medicare legislation"

My point: reducing the number of words should not be your first consideration when evaluating how to cut up a bill before congress.

Charles = kid
PHP5 = candy store

(for my part, I've just upgraded the laptop to Windows 7. Guess I picked a bad day to quit drinking...)

re: #178 Dark_Falcon

Scum. The only bright spot in that report is that CNN labeled as 'hate', which it is. It would be better to call it 'disloyalty', but I'll take the moral sanity where I can find it (which is part of the reason I post here).

That's odd. Notice how there was no mention of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. /

re: #186 HelloDare

That's odd. Notice how there was no mention of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. /

they must be reading their own polls...

re: #179 ralphieboy

40+ million uninsured Americans

Break that down for us giving answers to each of the following
How many of those are illegal aliens?
How many of those are in the 20-35 year old bracket that opt NOT to buy into company sponsered plans so they have that extra cash at hand
How many of those are eligible for state and fed programs but haven't applied
How many of those are bewteen jobas and WILL have coverage again when re-hired

re: #183 brookly red

What a surprise! (I mean that CNN is covering it) what could they be trying to distract us from?

I'm not going to attribute ill motives to CNN on this one. This report is CNN doing its job. An organization like that is dangerous and the public should be made aware of it. Such an organization needs to be picketed, protested and ostracized. That's the American way to deal with terror-loving scum.

re: #188 sattv4u2

Keith Hennessey had some numbers on that:

How many uninsured people need additional help from taxpayers?

[Link: keithhennessey.com...]

re: #190 jaunte

Keith Hennessey had some numbers on that:

[Link: keithhennessey.com...]

Tanks!

re: #181 Walter L. Newton

Did Nate ever prove it was a fraud, or was that his opinion?

He offered them money to prove it was not, but they refused to release any info on how they conducted the survey. The pollster is also under investigation from a national polling association. Nate did a statistical analysis on the results that showed it was almost mathematically impossible to have the distribution of the results that the poll showed. All of that was on top of assuming that only 23 % of students knew the name of the first President and not one student passed the test.
I'm not a math wizard, but you can apparently chart any polls distribution and see anomalies that would not occur naturally,but often do when you make up the numbers.

re: #116 sattv4u2

So NOT reading this one makes up for NOT readinmg that one!!

I see!!

(((headache time)))

Two wrongs do not make a right.

What I am saying is this behavior by congressmen is as old as galaxies. It is not new, shocking, or surprising. It is not endemic to Democrats or Republicans. Stars will turn into red giants and collapse into black holes, incinerating countless worlds, humans will evolve into psychic winged nephilim, and congressmen will STILL be signing bills into law that they didn't read. :)

re: #189 Dark_Falcon

I'm not going to attribute ill motives to CNN on this one. This report is CNN doing its job. An organization like that is dangerous and the public should be made aware of it. Such an organization needs to be picketed, protested and ostracized. That's the American way to deal with terror-loving scum.

OK, you have a point, but I can't bring myself to trust CNN.

re: #192 avanti

He offered them money to prove it was not, but they refused to release any info on how they conducted the survey. The pollster is also under investigation from a national polling association. Nate did a statistical analysis on the results that showed it was almost mathematically impossible to have the distribution of the results that the poll showed. All of that was on top of assuming that only 23 % of students knew the name of the first President and not one student passed the test.
I'm not a math wizard, but you can apparently chart any polls distribution and see anomalies that would not occur naturally,but often do when you make up the numbers.

But Nate didn't prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt... right?

re: #188 sattv4u2

40+ million uninsured Americans

Break that down for us giving answers to each of the following
How many of those are illegal aliens?
How many of those are in the 20-35 year old bracket that opt NOT to buy into company sponsered plans so they have that extra cash at hand
How many of those are eligible for state and fed programs but haven't applied
How many of those are bewteen jobas and WILL have coverage again when re-hired

Here's one I can give you off the top of my head, but will provide a reference:

10.6 million uninsured children.

[Link: www.census.gov...]

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

re: #158 Walter L. Newton

And of course, Keith attempted to turn my position around by agreeing with me.

Let's get this straight: i don't agree with you. That was a sum up of your position to help everyone understand your desire to scrap simple matters of honesty and to subvert any real understanding of either sides position to fill your own, singular, position.

It's a simple matter of logic: present your position and defend it.
If you can't defend it, it doesn't mean your position is incorrect, you just may be a poor defender ... but it is a leading indicator that you have thought through your opinion and its consequences.

I'll keep with logic -- and point out when others are not, mostly to help myself understand others which will help me at the voting booth when I need to choose who best represents my values.

You, of course, are free to embrace dishonesty and champion the misunderstanding of logic, however far that gets you.

re: #196 ralphieboy

Here's one I can give you off the top of my head, but will provide a reference:

10.6 million uninsured children.

[Link: www.census.gov...]

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

unless of course those are the children of illegals... could affect the count just a tad.

re: #196 ralphieboy

Here's one I can give you off the top of my head, but will provide a reference:

10.6 million uninsured children.

[Link: www.census.gov...]

So a good portion of them could be illegal aliens

Also, how many of them qualify for state/ fed programs and parents haven't bothered to sign up
AND, how many are children of people who had insurance, got laid off and WILL have insuarnce again when rehired

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

re: #196 ralphieboy

Here's one I can give you off the top of my head, but will provide a reference:

10.6 million uninsured children.

[Link: www.census.gov...]

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

So a good portion of them could be illegal aliens

Also, how many of them qualify for state/ fed programs and parents haven't bothered to sign up
AND, how many are children of people who had insurance, got laid off and WILL have insuarnce again when rehired

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

PIMF

re: #194 brookly red

OK, you have a point, but I can't bring myself to trust CNN.

I don't trust them either. It's just that I make a point of not going after people when they are doing their job right. At work, customers sometimes go after employees who have done nothing wrong and have only given the customer the best possible service. I hate being on the receiving end of that treatment, and I go to some lenths to ensure I'm not meting it out to others.

re: #197 keithgabryelski

Oh get over yourself.

You took issue witjh someone ON A BLOG making a sarscastic of the hand comment

Like that NEVER happens!
We're all supposed to sit and write doctotorail thesis' on each post!

And lets not forget to NEVER be condescending! You, of course, are free to embrace dishonesty and champion the misunderstanding of logic, however far that gets you.

OOpppsss ,, where'd that come from!!

re: #195 Walter L. Newton

But Nate didn't prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt... right?

Read his previous article, and make up your own mind. Keep in mind the poll showed only 2% of high school students in in the S.V. polled got 6 out of 10 correct, while 68% of 5th graders passed a much harder test linked fro Nate. Look at the charts of distribution and see how you feel. Since the pollster won't share how they polled, it's impossible to prove fraud, but S.V. is being investigated.

re: #159 Racer X

Bottom Line:

I no longer trust politicians to stumble around spending Trillions of OUR hard earned tax dollars.

Has no one learned from our recent near total financial collapse?

The financial collapse was because of the ABSENCE of government. They could loan whatever they wanted, however they wanted, hooked investing into banking, mooshed it all together.

Or has Wall Street been socialized all this time, all these many years, and I never knew?

re: #179 ralphieboy

One figure that has gone under in all this arguing about "cost per page" or "cost per word" is 40+ million uninsured Americans, roughly the population of Spain or Poland. A shame and a scandal for a nation that many like to tout as "exceptional", and one that many more nonetheless hold up as a model for other nations to emulate.

Well back in 1948 only about 1 million Americans had group policy health insurance. The 1950 census had the population of the US at 150 Million. That is 149 million uninsured!

So I think you need to post your moral condemnation of all Americans who lived back then. You know - the greatest generation who won the war and all that.

They wear the moral stain of having failed to insure their fellow citizens. Should we spit on their graves?

re: #196 ralphieboy

Here's one I can give you off the top of my head, but will provide a reference:

10.6 million uninsured children.

[Link: www.census.gov...]

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

Are illegal aliens lesser people? You are making a moral argument. How moral is it to exclude them from our collective shame?

re: #200 sattv4u2

So a good portion of them could be illegal aliens

Also, how many of them qualify for state/ fed programs and parents haven't bothered to sign up
AND, how many are children of people who had insurance, got laid off and WILL have insuarnce again when rehired

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

PIMF

I think you are picking at nits here: it's still a f*ck of a lot more uninsured children than a country like America should have.

re: #195 Walter L. Newton

But Nate didn't prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt... right?

If you understand the (bio)statistical methodologies involved then it is accurate to say that he proved his cased beyond any reasonable doubt, the usual threshold for legal conviction. A "shadow of a doubt" is more of a matter of faith than practicality. Just because Nate didn't actually witness SV doctor the poll results, in the library with the candlestick, doesn't give any reason to believe that his analysis is erroneous.

re: #202 sattv4u2

Oh get over yourself.

You took issue witjh someone ON A BLOG making a sarscastic of the hand comment...

/wait, we aren't supposed to do that? uh oh.

re: #204 WindUpBird

The financial collapse was because of the ABSENCE of government. They could loan whatever they wanted, however they wanted, hooked investing into banking, mooshed it all together.

Or has Wall Street been socialized all this time, all these many years, and I never knew?

That is a completely false talking point, at best it is simplistic at worst it is dishonest.

re: #207 ralphieboy

I think you are picking at nits here: it's still a f*ck of a lot more uninsured children than a country like America should have.

s-chip?

re: #204 WindUpBird

The financial collapse was because of the ABSENCE of government. They could loan whatever they wanted, however they wanted, hooked investing into banking, mooshed it all together.

Or has Wall Street been socialized all this time, all these many years, and I never knew?

Ya may want to look into that a tad more

It's BECAUSE of gov';t telling lending institutions that they HAD to come up with a way to loan people money that the banks etc normally wouldn't loan to, those people defaulting leaving the bansk with worthless paper, forcing them to be taken over by (SURPRISE) the same gov;'t that told them what they had to do

re: #202 sattv4u2

And lets not forget to NEVER be condescending! You, of course, are free to embrace dishonesty and champion the misunderstanding of logic, however far that gets you.

OOpppsss ,, where'd that come from!!

honest argumentation does not always mean being polite (because politeness is a value judgement that is different for all observers).

Walter did ask for people to be dishonest (when it suits his or their collective needs) and he fundamentally misunderstands why people use these formalized mechanisms, which is to understand what parts of an argument are relevant and which are not.

There is no "thesis" here -- i simply pointed out something that has spread as a logical argument against healthcare legislation (cost/words in bill) is not very reasonable.

re: #196 ralphieboy

Here's one I can give you off the top of my head, but will provide a reference:

10.6 million uninsured children.

[Link: www.census.gov...]

Although do not know what percentage of these are illegal aliens, I do not think it a significant point in the overall discussion...

AND ,, don't think I let slip by the lefty talking point of "THink Of The Children!!"

re: #212 sattv4u2

Ya may want to look into that a tad more

It's BECAUSE of gov';t telling lending institutions that they HAD to come up with a way to loan people money that the banks etc normally wouldn't loan to, those people defaulting leaving the bansk with worthless paper, forcing them to be taken over by (SURPRISE) the same gov;'t that told them what they had to do

Oh now you have done it...

re: #206 karmic_inquisitor

Are illegal aliens lesser people? You are making a moral argument. How moral is it to exclude them from our collective shame?

"Lesser people"? They are criminals. It is perfectly moral to exclude them from our taxpayer supported programs, it is also perfectly moral to exclude them from the country as well.

re: #205 karmic_inquisitor

Well back in 1948 only about 1 million Americans had group policy health insurance. The 1950 census had the population of the US at 150 Million. That is 149 million uninsured!

So I think you need to post your moral condemnation of all Americans who lived back then. You know - the greatest generation who won the war and all that.

They wear the moral stain of having failed to insure their fellow citizens. Should we spit on their graves?

Please put away the rhetoric, I am not condemning America morally, I am saying we have a problem that needs to be adressed, even if it costs us nearly as much or even more as we have spent on bailing out banks, or as maintaining a military to secure access to foreign energy resources and ensuring safe water, air and food.

re: #213 keithgabryelski

honest argumentation does not always mean being polite (because politeness is a value judgement that is different for all observers).

Walter did ask for people to be dishonest (when it suits his or their collective needs) and he fundamentally misunderstands why people use these formalized mechanisms, which is to understand what parts of an argument are relevant and which are not.

There is no "thesis" here -- i simply pointed out something that has spread as a logical argument against healthcare legislation (cost/words in bill) is not very reasonable.

Can I be on your dodge ball team? You're good!

I wasn't talking about Walter, I was talking about YOU taking issue with a flip remark that the problem with the bill was that it was too long

Swingandamiss

No Balls, One Strike!

re: #215 brookly red

Oh now you have done it...

damn me!! (hangs head in shame)

re: #206 karmic_inquisitor

I do think the treatment of non-citizens is a legitimate issue. My mom just got back from the UK. On the first day of the trip her husband had kidney stones. They went to the hospital for treatment. No charge. Medication. No charge. She even offered to pay and they refused. She asked her friends who she was staying with if this is always the case. They said people come from all over the world, fly into Heathrow and go straight to the hospital for free healthcare. That's certainly something we don't want to duplicate here.

I don't mind coughing up some money to subsidize people who legitimately need help paying for their insurance. But blowing everything up will mean paying MUCH MORE because I cannot imagine the future under a govt med plan ONLY. So I will supplement my coverage with private insurance as long as I can afford to do it. And I'll be subsidizing that public plan too. It sucks to have to spend so much more on what I already am paying for. So I will take my revenge at the ballot box.

re: #217 ralphieboy

"I am not condemning America morally"
A shame and a scandal for a nation that many like to tout as "exceptional",

So you meant shame in the NON condemning manner!?!?!

re: #220 Killgore Trout

I do think the treatment of non-citizens is a legitimate issue. My mom just got back from the UK. On the first day of the trip her husband had kidney stones. They went to the hospital for treatment. No charge. Medication. No charge. She even offered to pay and they refused. She asked her friends who she was staying with if this is always the case. They said people come from all over the world, fly into Heathrow and go straight to the hospital for free healthcare. That's certainly something we don't want to duplicate here.

We are not only duplicating that here, we are doing it on a far more massive scale through the defrauding of our Hospital ER rooms.

re: #216 Bagua

"Lesser people"? They are criminals. It is perfectly moral to exclude them from our taxpayer supported programs, it is also perfectly moral to exclude them from the country as well.

gee next you will want to prosecute people for Medicaid fraud... oh wait, that's me. sorry.

re: #207 ralphieboy

It shows a failure of compassion at a basic level that there are children in this country who are not "covered" when it comes to being able to see a physician.

The higher economic and power strata of our country are, and have been, neglectful of the big picture here, and have run after their own gain beyond any reasonable point, leaving behind the obligations of helping others with the talents they have been given.

We would not even be having this health care debate had those with advantages been acting well.

re: #217 ralphieboy

re: #222 sattv4u2

"I am not condemning America morally"
A shame and a scandal for a nation that many like to tout as "exceptional",

So you meant shame in the NON condemning manner!?!?!

Not to mention scandal

re: #224 brookly red

gee next you will want to prosecute people for Medicaid fraud... oh wait, that's me. sorry.

Yes, what an nasty piece of work I am, no compassion for the criminals who are the elephant in the room on this issue.

re: #203 avanti

Read his previous article, and make up your own mind. Keep in mind the poll showed only 2% of high school students in in the S.V. polled got 6 out of 10 correct, while 68% of 5th graders passed a much harder test linked fro Nate. Look at the charts of distribution and see how you feel. Since the pollster won't share how they polled, it's impossible to prove fraud, but S.V. is being investigated.

I did, and he didn't prove anything beyond a doubt.

re: #218 sattv4u2

Can I be on your dodge ball team? You're good!

I wasn't talking about Walter, I was talking about YOU taking issue with a flip remark that the problem with the bill was that it was too long

Swingandamiss

No Balls, One Strike!

it's hard to understand that you were talking about Walter when you only quoted me.

re: #228 Walter L. Newton

I did, and he didn't prove anything beyond a doubt.

Yes he did. He proved he could get Avanti to buy it!

re: #217 ralphieboy

Please put away the rhetoric, I am not condemning America morally.

Bull shit you aren't.

Your words -

A shame and a scandal for a nation that many like to tout as "exceptional", and one that many more nonetheless hold up as a model for other nations to emulate.

That isn't moral condemnation? That isn't rhetoric?

Plus, I sourced my numbers - less than 1% of the population was covered with group policy insurance in 1948. Fact.

Also - while you are not be rhetorical, why don't you find an article of an indigent person being turned away for vital services at a American hospital in the last year. Please find it. Because not being insured does not equate to having no access to vital care. Hospitals and providers provide services to the indigent for free in the country and the system that is so morally bankrupt absorbs the cost.

re: #229 keithgabryelski

it's hard to understand that you were talking about Walter when you only quoted me.

What part of "I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT WALTER" (from #218) didn't you fathom?

Swingandamiss

No Balls,, TWO Strikes

re: #227 Bagua

Yes, what an nasty piece of work I am, no compassion for the criminals who are the elephant in the room on this issue.

/OMG, that could lead to elected representitives doing time for taking bribes... where will it end?

re: #203 avanti

Nate is pretty honest. His reputation for laying out the good and bad for Democrats and Republicans is solid. His analysis is usually spot on, if he says it's a fraud, it is.

re: #226 sattv4u2

re: #222 sattv4u2

Not to mention scandal

Put it away when it comes to comparing us to 1948 or even 1984. I want am not an American Exceptionalist, but i want to be a citizen of a nation that it able to proudly proclaim that it is a world leader in matters of democracy and economics.

Nearly all other industrialized democracies offer health care to a much broader range of their citizens than America does, which indicates that we are capable, just not willing.

And that is a shame. Especially for the children. Excuse my bleeding heart, I have a weakness for the as-yet unproductive members of society...

re: #100 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

(NAME DELETED is a 5 yr old boy, who is in his last stages of Neuroblastoma Cancer after a 2 1/2 yr battle. His family is celebrating Christmas early this year (November 13th and 14th). All he wants is Christmas cards.

I can't give out mailing addresses (of course) on LGF, but my nic is blue, if you want to do something really sweet for about a buck... send me an email, I'll send his address to you.

Note to Lizards: this one is confirmed as real by Snopes if you were wondering.

If you were wondering what Ayaan Hirsi Ali's been up to lately, she just had a tulip named after her:

[Link: www.floracultureinternational.com...]

re: #232 sattv4u2

What part of "I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT WALTER" (from #218) didn't you fathom?

Swingandamiss

No Balls,, TWO Strikes

Stop talking about me :)

IS it too late to point out that all of this isn't really insurance? It is better described as a pre-paid health plan.

Insurance is a bet against a future occurrence. Pre-paid health plans are paying now for future treatments.

re: #232 sattv4u2

What part of "I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT WALTER" (from #218) didn't you fathom?

Swingandamiss

No Balls,, TWO Strikes

i see, i did misread your last post.

my post of #213 stands -- you misread me.

which means you balked?

re: #235 ralphieboy

Put it away when it comes to comparing us to 1948 or even 1984. I want am not an American Exceptionalist, but i want to be a citizen of a nation that it able to proudly proclaim that it is a world leader in matters of democracy and economics.

Nearly all other industrialized democracies offer health care to a much broader range of their citizens than America does, which indicates that we are capable, just not willing.

And that is a shame. Especially for the children. Excuse my bleeding heart, I have a weakness for the as-yet unproductive members of society...

You get back to me with the numbers I asked for upothread
Once we find out what the REAL problem is, then we can craft a REAL solution.

re: #237 Charles

If you were wondering what Ayaan Hirsi Ali's been up to lately, she just had a tulip named after her:

[Link: www.floracultureinternational.com...]

Charles ... Would you address a Tammy Bruce question? She is the reason I first found out about LGF.

re: #237 Charles

Nice.

re: #239 Chip Designer

IS it too late to point out that all of this isn't really insurance? It is better described as a pre-paid health plan.

Insurance is a bet against a future occurrence. Pre-paid health plans are paying now for future treatments.

we get tax defered intrest?

re: #234 harry91

Nate is pretty honest. His reputation for laying out the good and bad for Democrats and Republicans is solid. His analysis is usually spot on, if he says it's a fraud, it is.

Well, no it's not, since he doesn't claim he has conclusive proof.

re: #220 Killgore Trout

I do think the treatment of non-citizens is a legitimate issue. My mom just got back from the UK. On the first day of the trip her husband had kidney stones. They went to the hospital for treatment. No charge. Medication. No charge. She even offered to pay and they refused. She asked her friends who she was staying with if this is always the case. They said people come from all over the world, fly into Heathrow and go straight to the hospital for free healthcare. That's certainly something we don't want to duplicate here.

The argument that Ralphie made was a moral one. An argument where we are compelled by shame to insure others.

Well if that is the basis of the argument then surely one is just as morally obligated to insure illegal aliens as they are citizens. that is one of many places that adopting the moral imperative of providing everyone insurance (not care - we do that now) take you.

That is the point that Ralphie needs to confront or Ralphie's moral standards are too fungible to be considered moral standards.

re: #240 keithgabryelski

i see, i did misread your last post.

my post of #213 stands -- you misread me.

which means you balked?

nope ,,, 213 talks about what Walter said. (haven't we been here before??)

Swingandamiss

No Balls, Three Strikes,, YER OUT!