About Todd Akin

[Don]

If he is engaging in whoredom, then adulterer, fornicator, whoremonger—take your pick. But is rapist an accurate term?

By the laws of the land, yes, it's quite accurate.

 

[Crabtownboy]

:BangHead: Whoa, whoa, whoa....back up the truck Chuck (forgive me for derailing this thread for one itty bitty moment all)

Republicans do NOT want to cut Medicare and Social Security. OBAMA, on the other hand, wants to euthenize sick and elderly through his Obamacare....that seems FAR worse to me. (BTW, what did retired folks do before FDR???)

I now return you to your regularly scheduled debate.

Those are not the only social programs the government operates. There are many others and Republicans want to reduce funding or defund many programs. I am only using OldR's logic. As he supports candidates who want to reduce funding then, again by his logic, he supports hunger, starvation of the elderly, malnutrition of children and by defend Akin he is defending rape. Again, I am only using his logic.

Fully one-fourth of the House GOP spending cuts come from programs directly benefiting the poor, such as Medicaid, food stamps, the Social Services Block Grant, and a child tax credit claimed by working immigrants. Federal workers would have to contribute an additional 5 percent of their salaries toward their pensions, while people whose incomes rise after receiving coverage subsidies under the new health care law would lose some or all of their benefits.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57429110/republican-plan-boosts-pentagon-cuts-social-programs/

At the same time the GOP wants to restore funding to the Department of Defense. So, using OldR's logic, he supports killing people, but not helping those in need.

 

[OldRegular]

Those are not the only social programs the government operates. There are many others and Republicans want to reduce funding or defund many programs. I am only using OldR's logic. As he supports candidates who want to reduce funding then, again by his logic, he supports hunger, starvation of the elderly, malnutrition of children and by defend Akin he is defending rape. Again, I am only using his logic.

3. And then there is the 15 member death panel. These folks are going to pick up where the seven black robed servants of Satan left off in 1973. Obama, the leftist democrat elites, sadly supported by Crabtownboy, are just going to let all the old folks on Medicare die. Perhaps they will provide a DVD with soft music and sheep jumping over a fence like the movie "Soylent Green" as they perish, but that is all!

At the same time the GOP wants to restore funding to the Department of Defense. So, using OldR's logic, he supports killing people, but not helping those in need.

If my memory is correct it is Obama who insists on pulling the trigger on all the drone kills. Innocent people, men, women and children are murdered by this homicidal person. He even claims he killed Osama. I believe the pressure is getting to him! After all the most he ever did was ????????:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[Crabtownboy]

3. And then there is the 15 member death panel. These folks are going to pick up where the seven black robed servants of Satan left off in 1973. Obama, the leftist democrat elites, sadly supported by Crabtownboy, are just going to let all the old folks on Medicare die. Perhaps they will provide a DVD with soft music and sheep jumping over a fence like the movie "Soylent Green" as they perish, but that is all!

The current death panels are paid by insurance companies whose goal is to make profits not save lives. But that isn't the topic. The current topic is your supporting candidates who want to cut programs that will result in people suffering. Thus by your logic, you want people to suffer.

If my memory is correct it is Obama who insists on pulling the trigger on all the drone kills. Innocent people, men, women and children are murdered by this homicidal person. He even claims he killed Osama. I believe the pressure is getting to him! After all the most he ever did was ????????:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Nice try at changing the subject, but it won't work.

We are talking about funding. You want to cut funds that help people while increasing funds that kill people.

 

[OldRegular]

3. And then there is the 15 member death panel. These folks are going to pick up where the seven black robed servants of Satan left off in 1973. Obama, the leftist democrat elites, sadly supported by Crabtownboy, are just going to let all the old folks on Medicare die. Perhaps they will provide a DVD with soft music and sheep jumping over a fence like the movie "Soylent Green" as they perish, but that is all!

The current death panels are paid by insurance companies whose goal is to make profits not save lives. But that isn't the topic. The current topic is your supporting candidates who want to cut programs that will result in people suffering. Thus by your logic, you want people to suffer.

Obama's death panel is about saving money by allowing old people to die. There is no appeal; they deny, we die!

Even assuming that the insurance companies do deny coverage there are the courts CTB!

If my memory is correct it is Obama who insists on pulling the trigger on all the drone kills. Innocent people, men, women and children are murdered by this homicidal person. He even claims he killed Osama. I believe the pressure is getting to him! After all the most he ever did was ????????:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Nice try at changing the subject, but it won't work.

We are talking about funding. You want to cut funds that help people while increasing funds that kill people.

CTB you keep talking about the wicked Republicans. I am just showing that compared to democrats we are amateurs. And as to who are the racists I came across some information for another thread that you promoters of the slaughter of the unborn are likely aware:

Abortion and Women of Color: The Bigger Picture
By Susan A. Cohen

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/11/3/gpr110302.html

This much is true: In the United States, the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women. Antiabortion activists, including some African-American pastors, have been waging a campaign around this fact, falsely asserting that the disparity is the result of aggressive marketing by abortion providers to minority communities.

So who are the true racists in the country? The abortion crowd, primarily democrats!

 

[Crabtownboy]

CTB you keep talking about the wicked Republicans. I am just showing that compared to democrats we are amateurs. And as to who are the racists I came across some information for another thread that you promoters of the slaughter of the unborn are likely aware:

No, I am trying to show that your illogical logic is ridiculous when you claim that by my choosing Obama as a candidate over Romney that I support abortion. You seem unable to see that a person may reject part of what a candidate stands for while still determining that that candidate is more attractive than his opposing candidate. I have yet in my life time seen a candidate that I totally agree with.

Again, it is the lack of discernment in your position that I am pointing out.

 

[OldRegular]

No, I am trying to show that your illogical logic is ridiculous when you claim that by my choosing Obama as a candidate over Romney that I support abortion.

Admit it CTB you are a diehard democrat, the party of death in this country. fifty million babies butchered in the woman's womb and all your party can do is scream "CHOICE"! They are an abomination. Supporting the party of death is an abomination!

Again, it is the lack of discernment in your position that I am pointing out.

I am able to distinguish between the party that advocates the continued slaughter of the unborn children and the party that has at least stopped the practice of pulling a baby feet first from the womb, punching a hole in its neck, and suctioning out its brain. This is a practice your dear leader advocates as did Billy boy Clinton, former misogynist in chief.

 

[preachinjesus]

There are no death panels. We've been through this time and time again. It is a falsehood to say there are going to be death panels.

 

[OldRegular]

There are no death panels. We've been through this time and time again. It is a falsehood to say there are going to be death panels.

You were wrong then and are wrong now. There is a 15 member board that will determine what medical care is appropriate and what is not. They hold life and death in their hands.

Read it and weep:

Independent Payment Advisory Board IPAB (IPAB)

Established in Affordable Care Act (ACA, P.L. 111-148 and P.L. 111-152), the IPAB—a 15 member independent panel, to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate— is charged with enforcing a limit on Medicare spending growth. IPAB members are expected to be nationally recognized experts in health finance, payment, economics, actuarial science, or health facility and health plan management. The board will have broad authority to craft and execute new Medicare policies (including changes to provider reimbursement) with limited Congressional input. In general, unless Congress acts to block the proposals within a brief and limited time period and identify similar savings elsewhere, CMS will implement the policy recommendations. The first IPAB proposal must be submitted to Congress and the president beginning in 2014. The IPAB is expected to save $15.5 billion over 10 years. Additional information on this provision has not yet been published.



In opposition to the IPAB, Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) July 27 introduced the “Health Care Bureaucrats Elimination Act” (S. 3653), which would repeal the IPAB. In a joint statement, Senator Cornyn said the IPAB would “put power in the hands of politically-appointed Washington bureaucrats.” Senator Roberts added the IPAB will lead to rationing and that access to quality care will be “threatened by the decisions made behind closed doors by an unelected board and unaccountable government officials.” Similar legislation, the “Medicare Decisions Accountability Act of 2010” (H.R. 4985), was introduced March 25 in the House by Representative David Roe (R-Texas). As of August 30, S. 3653 had 11 co-sponsors and H.R. 4985 had 54 co-sponsors.

https://www.aamc.org/advocacy/medicare/153896/independent_payment_advisory_board_ipab.html

 

[preachinjesus]

"The health-care law, by the way, explicitly says that the recommendations cannot lead to rationing of health care (see page 428 of the law). Of course, "rationing" is in the eye of beholder. (One common complaint is that rationing is not defined.) The law also limits recommendations that would change benefits, modify eligibility or increase Medicare beneficiary cost-sharing, such as deductibles, coinsurance and co-payments."
Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2018578563_deathpanels02.html

You can read more about this in actual bill in sections 3403 and 10320. I'll provide a few excerpts from the actual bill which you can download here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf

Sect 3403 and 10320 work out that the IPAB is subject to review by the House and Senate.

Also notice that the claim of this board operating in secret (both assumed by and made by many) is erroneous: (Section 10320.b.2)
‘‘(2) COORDINATION.—In making recommendations under paragraph (1), the Board shall coordinate such recommendations with recommendations contained in proposals and
advisory reports produced by the Board under subsection (c).
‘‘(3) AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC.—The Board shall make recommendations submitted to Congress and the President under this subsection available to the public.’’.

As the IPAB will exist, remember this is not in effect until 2013/4, to control Medicare costs not by denying claims but by confronting the pharmaceuticals and medical industry which drives costs way up. The CBO scored the board as being able to save up to $30 billion dollars in savings. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1104427

Listen, we've had this conversation. I've read the ACA and can cite (and have) where your points are wrong. I don't particularly care to mull this over since we've both settled into our positions and won't be moving soon.

 

[Matt Black]

By the laws of the land, yes, it's quite accurate.

And it is pedophilia. I'm interested as to whether Aaron thinks that a 12 year old girl victim of pedophilia is a 'whore'.

 

[Aaron]

By the laws of the land, yes, it's quite accurate.

So, though you've asserted that the situation in question is righteously judged as whoredom, you're also asserting one of the guilty parties is a victim and not to be punished.

 

[Aaron]

And it is pedophilia. I'm interested as to whether Aaron thinks that a 12 year old girl victim of pedophilia is a 'whore'.

Being only one of two people to achieve the dubious honor of my ignore list, you have the privilege of being the only vassal to have done so. :wavey:

 

[Crabtownboy]

You were wrong then and are wrong now. There is a 15 member board that will determine what medical care is appropriate and what is not. They hold life and death in their hands.

Each insurance company has a "death panel" and their primary job is to help the company make a profit, not help you. Insurance companies do not have your best interest at heart. Profit is their driving motive, not saving people.


On your comment about my being a die hard Democrat. It isn't true. I select the person I think is the best candidate and vote for that person regardless of party affiliation. I voted for Marjorie Holt every time she ran for the House of Representatives.

I was a registered Republican for many years, but switched as in my state the primary is usually the real election. Sadly the Republican party has moved in it philosophy and many are now pernicious greedy folk who do not have the best interest of the average American at heart. Romney has bought into this and I cannot vote for him as I think he will destroy the middle class and the poor. He will do nothing about abortion as for the most part his hands are tied by the SC decision.

I am not a one issue voter and believe it is not wise to be a one issue voter.

Using you logic again you are a die hard Republican in favor of staving old people, the malnurishment of children, denying health care to many. Not a pretty picture.

 

[Matt Black]

Being only one of two people to achieve the dubious honor of my ignore list, you have the privilege of being the only vassal to have done so. :wavey:

Vassal? No idea what you mean by that but your craven dodging of The question demonstrates the utter moral bankruptcy of your disgusting position

 

[OldRegular]

You can read more about this in actual bill in sections 3403 and 10320. I'll provide a few excerpts from the actual bill which you can download here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf

SEC. 3403. INDEPENDENT MEDICARE ADVISORY BOARD.

(a) BOARD.—

(1) INGENERAL.—Title XVIII of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.), as amended by section 3022, is
amended by adding at the end the following new section:​

‘‘INDEPENDENTMEDICAREADVISORYBOARD ​

‘‘SEC. 1899A. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established an
independent board to be known as the ‘Independent Medicare
Advisory Board’.

‘‘(b) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this section to, in accordance
with the following provisions of this section, reduce the per capita
rate of growth in Medicare spending—

‘‘(1) by requiring the Chief Actuary of the Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services to determine in each year to
which this section applies (in this section referred to as ‘a
determination year’) the projected per capita growth rate under
Medicare for the second year following the determination year
(in this section referred to as ‘an implementation year’);
‘‘(2) if the projection for the implementation year exceeds
the target growth rate for that year, by requiring the Board
to develop and submit during the first year following the deter-
mination year (in this section referred to as ‘a proposal year’)
a proposal containing recommendations to reduce the Medicare
per capita growth rate to the extent required by this section;
and
‘‘(3) by requiring the Secretary to implement such proposals
unless Congress enacts legislation pursuant to this section.
‘‘(c) BOARDPROPOSALS.—

‘‘(1) DEVELOPMENT.—
‘‘(A) INGENERAL.—The Board shall develop detailed
and specific proposals related to the Medicare program
in accordance with the succeeding provisions of this section.
‘‘(B) ADVISORY REPORTS.—Beginning January 15, 2014,
the Board may develop and submit to Congress advisory
reports on matters related to the Medicare program, regard-
less of whether or not the Board submitted a proposal
for such year. Such a report may, for years prior to 2020,
include recommendations regarding improvements to pay-
ment systems for providers of services and suppliers who
are not otherwise subject to the scope of the Board’s rec-
ommendations in a proposal under this section. Any
advisory report submitted under this subparagraph shall
not be subject to the rules for congressional consideration
under subsection (d).​

Now for years the liberal leftists have told us that a reduction in the rate of growth is A CUT. So we must take this leftist democrat bill at their word and say that the purpose of the board is TO CUT Medicare. Now how is this Board going to cit Medicare? Well "PJ" wants to tell us and since reading the above nonsensical semantics is tiresome he can speak:

As the IPAB will exist, remember this is not in effect until 2013/4, to control Medicare costs not by denying claims but by confronting the pharmaceuticals and medical industry which drives costs way up.

No rationing! No rationing you say.

:laugh::laugh:NO just cutting the pay of those who provide the medical care. How can anyone call that rationing. Just because you don't pay your doctor doesn't mean he will not heal your hurts!:laugh::laugh:

Now "PJ" tells us he has read the 2500 pages of Obamacare. He is to be commended. Senator Baucus of Montana, whose committee supposedly crafted the bill, was asked if he had read the bill. His response was words to the effect: "It is written in Statutory Language, I haven't read it!"

Now those of you who read the few paragraphs I presented above can understand that it is unintelligible to the rational mind. Therefore, the Federal bureaucracy can do as they choose. Just think of 2500 pages of that gibberish! It is hell on earth! If rationing is what Federal bureaucrats want then rationing it will be.

Addendum

I suspect the reason the name Death Panel get the tail of a lot of folks in a knot is that it was first used on the national scene by Governor Sarah Palin. They simply don't understand women who are Conservative in political philosophy!

 

[Don]

So, though you've asserted that the situation in question is righteously judged as whoredom, you're also asserting one of the guilty parties is a victim and not to be punished.

By the laws of the land, absolutely correct. Are you intimating you wish to see both the young girl who wantonly threw herself into the situation AND the man both receive some form of punishment? Or neither? Or is there some other alternative?

 

[OldRegular]

Each insurance company has a "death panel" and their primary job is to help the company make a profit, not help you. Insurance companies do not have your best interest at heart. Profit is their driving motive, not saving people.

You are correct. Each insurance company is in business to make money. If they don't make money they are no longer providing insurance. That being true they must satisfy the majority of their policy holders or they go broke. Of course being a leftist this is beyond your comprehension.

On your comment about my being a die hard Democrat. It isn't true.

You would be hard pressed to convince anyone on this forum of that!

Sadly the Republican party has moved in it philosophy and many are now pernicious greedy folk who do not have the best interest of the average American at heart.

Actually that is false and you know it CTB. Conservatives give much more to charity than leftists. Just compare the giving of Biden and Obama to that of Romney.

Romney has bought into this and I cannot vote for him as I think he will destroy the middle class and the poor.

CTB be rational. That is a totally asinine statement. If the middle class is destroyed who is going to buy stuff all the rich people sell to make them rich.

He will do nothing about abortion as for the most part his hands are tied by the SC decision.

The Republicans stopped Partial Birth Abortion. The Republicans ensured medical care is given to aborted babies born alive over the three fold objections of Barak Hussein Obama.

I am not a one issue voter and believe it is not wise to be a one issue voter.

You simply vote the leftist ticket!

Using you logic again you are a die hard Republican in favor of staving old people, the malnurishment of children, denying health care to many. Not a pretty picture.
[/FONT][/SIZE]

:laugh::laugh:You are correct CTB. I watch many old people and young children die of starvation each day while I enjoy corn bread and pinto beans flavored with fat back! Gooood!:laugh::laugh:

You need to study history and see what the leftist mind set has done in the last 100 years. The following is one example:
**************************************************************

The butchers who ran the Soviet Union killed between 25 million [The Black Book of Communism] and 60 million [Rudolph J. Rummel] innocent humans - men, women and little children.

The monster Stalin may be the greatest mass killer of all time.

http://markhumphrys.com/soviet.html
**************************************************************
I can provide more if you like. You will say this is extreme and it is but it is the inevitable result of Marxist ideology as it is manifested in reality.

 

[Aaron]

By the laws of the land, absolutely correct.

Your qualifier seems an admission that rationally, it could not be called rape.

Are you intimating you wish to see both the young girl who wantonly threw herself into the situation AND the man both receive some form of punishment?

My point is rape, something violent and traumatic. One has to shut down rational thought to truly consider the hypothetical case we've been discussion either violent or traumatic for either party.

 

[preachinjesus]

Now for years the liberal leftists have told us that a reduction in the rate of growth is A CUT. So we must take this leftist democrat bill at their word and say that the purpose of the board is TO CUT Medicare. Now how is this Board going to cit Medicare? Well "PJ" wants to tell us and since reading the above nonsensical semantics is tiresome he can speak

Now those of you who read the few paragraphs I presented above can understand that it is unintelligible to the rational mind. Therefore, the Federal bureaucracy can do as they choose. Just think of 2500 pages of that gibberish! It is hell on earth! If rationing is what Federal bureaucrats want then rationing it will be.

So instead if answering direct questions you choose to mock me and the bill which explains the positions and reality of the IPAB which you decry as a "death panel."

Come on man, it's legislative language. There is a precision necessary for proper implementation. If you don't have the personal bandwidth to understand or contemplate what reality is then you'd best reassess your ability to decry a law you apparently don't understand.

Your entire presentation in this thread has been nothing but nonsensical rambling and red herring accusations. I'm distressed you think this is actual engagement.