Pat Robertson: GOP base is too extreme

[open_sketchbook]

I doubt you could ever get universal healthcare in the United States. Too many people oppose it, and the people who oppose it are not merely against it but violently opposed, convinced as they are that it's a secret communist plot to destroy American values and whatever. If you got it past, they would forget about it almost immediately, but it's good odds that trying to straight-up implement real, universal healthcare in the current climate would probably get some democrats shot.

[TheHammer]

It has nothing to do with being "too dumb" you idiot. I said that it wouldn't be "a simple step" and wouldn't happen anytime soon.

Let me requote what you said :

LOL are you fucking serious? I wanted realistic solutions not pie in the sky not gonna happen anytime soon proposals that everyone knows will not work. Even if it were politically feasible, it is not by any stretch of anyones imagination a "simple step".

Emphasis mine, obviously.

I seems to remember, from what school told me (at least when I was paying intention) that words have meaning. In the bolded part, what I understand is that you are saying that a Universal, Single Payer system cannot work in America. To this perceived claim, I answer by declaring that by saying such a thing, you would imply that something preclude the US from doing something that is done in a good part of the rest of the world, or at least almost all of the developed world.
Then, you imply that a system aimed at helping people afford healthcare is politically infeasible in the US. This, in turn, imply that people would oppose such a thing.
THIS is what I call being "dumb".
But, eh ? Who know, I may care for the well-being of other human beings than just myself ?

If you read the context of the discussion you would have noted that the reason it wont work is because it is not politically feasible. It is not an Issue Obama could afford to waste time with at this point and the discussion was specific to things Obama could realistically get done. The giant fucking propoganda war we went through to simply get the modest Health Care Reform legislation through should let you know that much. The fact that we have many people in congress right now who ran on "repealing HCR" as one of their main issues should be another clue. But in you came with your idiotic and uninformed opinion and simplistic undeveloped suggestions none the less.

Wow its so fucking simple. Except you haven't crunched any numbers to see how you would pay for it. Haven't gauged the impact to the economy. No plan for implementation. You haven't gotten any healtchare providers on board. No system set up to prevent fraud. And numerous other key details that you haven't bothered to figure out.

You seem to be mistaken in thinking that I give a shit about the particular details of implementation of such a system in the US in the first place. Nope. It ain't the case.
I give you ideas, and you clean your shit yourself. I'm not here to do your job for you.

You don't care about the details yet you are convinced it would be "so simple" to do! Your ideas are the same idiotic variations one can find on all corners of the Internet. You added nothing to the conversation other than your own smug lols to yourself.

But, eh, today I feel generous, so here are some pointers :

- Reduces military spendings
- End tax-cuts for the Rich
- The Federal Healthcare Fund will be a Federal Agency : no need to put it under the control of some private firm.
- If private insurers aren't happy, too bad for them : I isn't them who make the law, and anyway they will still be able to do some business, and make profit from it.
- Fraud ? Well, we have a thing here, guess what it is ? It is a Healthcare ID Smart Card. With a shiny photography on top. It allow every "gear" of the Healthcare system you come into contact to have access to relevant informations, which are hosted on a central database put under scrutiny of Information Privacy Laws. It does not violate medical secret, as the only informations it carry are about reimbursement of medical acts and the like, not the detail of the medical acts performed.

More absolutely worthless drivel from you. Your 9 million foot overview of things that could be done is neither new nor insightful. The devil is in the details, which you hand wave away as unimportant. Its the details that make it neither simple nor something that could be implemented in the short term.

It's so fucking simple that from its POST WWII implementation it only took 50 years until they actually achieved "universal healthcare". SIMPLE! Can't everyone see how simple that is? We can just pull out our American Express card, and do this shit tomorrow!

Yes. Yes it took 50 years. But guess what ? We were from the first batch of countries to do this kind of thing. We had to discover how to do this as we advanced.
Now we know how to go about Universal Healthcare. And the UK, too. And Germany. And Canada. And... well, you understand were I'm going, I hope ?
We were from the first, and no one was here to help us, to guide us. Nowadays, you don't have such "excuse" anymore. There's plenty of examples you can inspire yourself from. Plenty of countries you can ask to help you create your own Universal Healthcare System.
You are not alone. Never forget this.

The United States is not France. We can not simply carbon copy the French system, translate it to English and say Voilà! Any system that we come up with is essentially going to be built from the ground up. The only elements of similarity being very basic concepts inherent to Universal Healthcare.

The only obstacle to the US having Universal Healthcare tomorrow is political ill-will. Which is what I was calling dumb and stupid.

Just shut the fuck up.

You can only hope.

If all you have to offer is the same tired bullshit as you have demonstrated in this thread, then We can ALL only hope.

Anyway, I see you are already pretty busy from your discussion with Bakustra, and I don't want to dogpile you - such things just ain't proper (plus, I don't want to have an angry germanoid spank me - yet). If you don't want to answer, no problem : I understand.

Don't worry about that. It really doesn't take much time to address your posts.

[TheHammer]

Dunno about tomorrow - but could be done in 6 months (if messily) and within 3 years (politely).

If you want a broken system it could be done in any protracted time frame. You would likely need 2-3 years lead time for development of software alone which will absolutely be neccessary to run a system like this. After that, I expect it would be a rather lengthy process of implementation as you roll people off their current healthcare plans on to the new system. And all of that is assuming you have the funds and political will to get the system in place to begin with, which as congress is currently made up, is impossible.

[Simon_Jester]

I will say that universal health care systems in other countries didn't materialize overnight- I'm not going to comment on what Hammer's saying overall, but it's not like Congress can pass a law one day on something complex like "replace the insurance industry" and have a functional bureaucracy to enforce it by the middle of next week.

When laws get put into action quickly, it's because there's already an organization in place to deal with them and handle the routine executive work. The Department of Homeland Security, for example, was created out of a host of existing government agencies that already knew how to do their jobs; only the superstructure on top of them all was put together from scratch (and you'll note it didn't do too well at first even so).

I doubt you could ever get universal healthcare in the United States. Too many people oppose it, and the people who oppose it are not merely against it but violently opposed, convinced as they are that it's a secret communist plot to destroy American values and whatever. If you got it past, they would forget about it almost immediately, but it's good odds that trying to straight-up implement real, universal healthcare in the current climate would probably get some democrats shot.

Do you know, we've actually seen surprisingly little direct violence from right wing-nuts in this country lately, considering the amount of rhetoric getting slung around. Maybe it's because most of the rhetoric is being aimed at demographics less predisposed to revolution- those with at least something to lose, those who are content with the status quo of the moment, and so on. The Tea Party is not, or has not evolved into, a revolutionary movement, not in the sense of actually wanting a revolution to occur.

I think you could get universal health care in the US; it's come too close to succeeding in the past for me to consider it impossible. But you'd need the right conditions on the ground, and the right leadership on top. Conditions weren't right ini 1994; leadership wasn't right in 2009-10.

[Rabid]

If you read the context of the discussion you would have noted that the reason it wont work is because it is not politically feasible. It is not an Issue Obama could afford to waste time with at this point and the discussion was specific to things Obama could realistically get done. The giant fucking propoganda war we went through to simply get the modest Health Care Reform legislation through should let you know that much. The fact that we have many people in congress right now who ran on "repealing HCR" as one of their main issues should be another clue. But in you came with your idiotic and uninformed opinion and simplistic undeveloped suggestions none the less.

Hmm. I see. You seem to think I was trying to say that it was possible to have Universal Healthcare in the US tomorrow just by snapping your fingers. No.
What I was trying to say is that it is possible to take the decision to implement Universal Healthcare tomorrow in the US, but that only political ill-will preclude your country from doing so.

Are you criticizing me for having an opinion similar to the one you just expressed ?

You don't care about the details yet you are convinced it would be "so simple" to do! Your ideas are the same idiotic variations one can find on all corners of the Internet. You added nothing to the conversation other than your own smug lols to yourself.

More absolutely worthless drivel from you. Your 9 million foot overview of things that could be done is neither new nor insightful. The devil is in the details, which you hand wave away as unimportant. Its the details that make it neither simple nor something that could be implemented in the short term.

The United States is not France. We can not simply carbon copy the French system, translate it to English and say Voilà! Any system that we come up with is essentially going to be built from the ground up. The only elements of similarity being very basic concepts inherent to Universal Healthcare.

Well, in this case, help me being constructive here : what would be the important details ? What would you propose ?

[TheHammer]

If you read the context of the discussion you would have noted that the reason it wont work is because it is not politically feasible. It is not an Issue Obama could afford to waste time with at this point and the discussion was specific to things Obama could realistically get done. The giant fucking propoganda war we went through to simply get the modest Health Care Reform legislation through should let you know that much. The fact that we have many people in congress right now who ran on "repealing HCR" as one of their main issues should be another clue. But in you came with your idiotic and uninformed opinion and simplistic undeveloped suggestions none the less.

Hmm. I see. You seem to think I was trying to say that it was possible to have Universal Healthcare in the US tomorrow just by snapping your fingers. No.
What I was trying to say is that it is possible to take the decision to implement Universal Healthcare tomorrow in the US, but that only political ill-will preclude your country from doing so.

Are you criticizing me for having an opinion similar to the one you just expressed ?

You made a shitty argument that amounted to hahaha dumb Americans why can't you do like the French? Thats why I criticized you.

You don't care about the details yet you are convinced it would be "so simple" to do! Your ideas are the same idiotic variations one can find on all corners of the Internet. You added nothing to the conversation other than your own smug lols to yourself.

More absolutely worthless drivel from you. Your 9 million foot overview of things that could be done is neither new nor insightful. The devil is in the details, which you hand wave away as unimportant. Its the details that make it neither simple nor something that could be implemented in the short term.

The United States is not France. We can not simply carbon copy the French system, translate it to English and say Voilà! Any system that we come up with is essentially going to be built from the ground up. The only elements of similarity being very basic concepts inherent to Universal Healthcare.

Well, in this case, help me being constructive here : what would be the important details ? What would you propose ?

I'm not proposing anything along these lines. It is not my contention that it is simple enough that I could even begin to put together a workable solution within the confines of this SDN posting.

[Rabid]

You made a shitty argument that amounted to hahaha dumb Americans why can't you do like the French? Thats why I criticized you.

It wasn't so much "Haha you dumbshit you don't like us" as much as "mang, your healthcare situation is so broken and dysfunctional that even badly copy-pasting an imperfect system that isn't adapted to your situation would seem like a real and tangible improvement over your current situation ; and the absurdity of it makes me bitterly laugh and mock those responsible for this situation".

I'm not proposing anything along these lines. It is not my contention that it is simple enough that I could even begin to put together a workable solution within the confines of this SDN posting.

In this case, why do you expect me to do it ?

[TheHammer]

You made a shitty argument that amounted to hahaha dumb Americans why can't you do like the French? Thats why I criticized you.

It wasn't so much "Haha you dumbshit you don't like us" as much as "mang, your healthcare situation is so broken and dysfunctional that even badly copy-pasting an imperfect system that isn't adapted to your situation would seem like a real and tangible improvement over your current situation ; and the absurdity of it makes me bitterly laugh and mock those responsible for this situation".

Again, you make an absurd over simplification of the situation.

I'm not proposing anything along these lines. It is not my contention that it is simple enough that I could even begin to put together a workable solution within the confines of this SDN posting.

In this case, why do you expect me to do it ?

Because you were the one coming in with unsolicited suggestions that amounted to "just implement Universal Healthcare! Its Easy!"

[TheHammer]

The British NHS went two years from legislation to implementation. Preliminary source here while I try to find the text of the 1946 act.

What point are you trying to make? That it should take two years from the time legislation is signed to the time it gets implemented? You will also note from the article you posted that there were numerous issues to work out in the NHS system and it was reformed since its original implementation.

They are sitting on these funds waiting for the "right time" to jump back into expansion. They've been building up cash with the idea in mind that they would "ride out" the recession. A limited time tax incentive encourages them to spend a little of that cash so that they get maximum value and are primed to take advantage when the economy pulls out of recession.

Your doom and gloom worries about this opening the door to the death of Medicare/Social security, worries I do not share, are entirely irrelevent to this discussion.

The economy won't pull out of the recession until demand increases, you idiot! Jesus fuck, if you're going to employ that much magical thinking, you probably should go all-out and ritualistically beg Mercury for assistance.

A smart business man has his company in position for when the recession ends. He does that by having the infrastructure and employees in place as the economy is ramping back up rather than scrambling to do so and losing all those dollars he could have been making by investing in his business when labor is cheap.

CHERRY PICKED QUOTES FROM http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/09/ ... -proposal/

You did of course also read all the other quotes on that page that essentially agreed with my point of view? Or does your natural dishonesty force you to pretend as if they weren't also there?

And that's the bottom line because Stone Cold Bakustra said so!

It would be great if Obama could come in like its the fucking WWE smack congress around and get them to pass anything he wants. Quite frankly, he doesn't have time to put it extreme positions to try and shift the Overton Window... Unless he loses the next election at which point he'll have plenty of time to be as extreme as possible.

Doesn't have time? What the fuck are you talking about? Did your mother drop you when you were a toddler? The point is that he doesn't lose anything from moving from the center-right to the center-left, and the fact that you think that's extreme shows there's no hope for you. You're simply terminally dumb.

He's trying to move it center left. Tax cuts for the middle class, tax increases for the Rich. Your "universal healthcare" proposal is far beyond that. Your "New Deal" proposal would also be far beyond that.

I'm well aware that you don't think they go far enough. I won't even argue that point. But that fact is you aren't getting anything stronger through this congress, so you dig in with the ground you did in fact gain, and save the rest of the fight for another day. It also remains to be seen what positive economic effects more regulation would have, since as history shows more regulation - whether it is needed or not - tends to have the opposit effect.

They would have the positive economic effects of preventing more disasters like this from happening, and of keeping people from starving to death and the economy from stalling as speculators drive up the prices of wheat and gasoline! Stop drinking the neoliberal Flavor-ade- it's poisoned.

Again you ignore the political reality that you aren't getting stronger regulations through this congress. As it stands its going to be a battle to keep the ones that made it through.

They support it, except when the various pundits decry it as socialized medicine with death panels. Whether it is better for them or not, just look at the backlash over HCR. As it stands, its going to be a battle to even keep any of the progress it made beyond this administration. It doesn't take a genius to know that as soon as you start talking single payer government controlled universal healthcare the same boogeymen will come out of the closet. Even if you had broad support, it is not a simple thing to set up. It would be a massive and time consuming undertaking.

No, they support it, they just don't support terms that have been propagandized thanks to the cowards of the Democratic party who won't bother to try and counter anything. The backlash against PPACA is largely due to the individual mandate, which I oppose as well, for quite understandable reasons. And you can actually fight for it instead of running whimpering away like the Democratic party has done for the last thirty years.

The support the concept, but they don't like anyone's ideas for implementation. And it doesn't fucking matter because no matter what the Democrats call it the rightwingers will still continue to use their same propogandized terms.

The point is that those are steps in the right direction. In politics its rare that you have truly revolutionary change, well without having an actual revolution. In lieu of that, what you have is an evolution where you move in a direction, and when you encounter resistance you try not to lose the ground you gained.

Hey, could you respond to what I said instead of farting buzzwords Rahm Emanuel crammed up your ass? Thanks.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Things wouldn't be worse. And they likely wouldn't get any better either. Too far of an extreme and you end up with both sides intently digging in on a tug of war that neither one is strong enough to win. So you end up going no where.

You don't know what the fucking Overton Window is, do you. But none of the positions I have advocated are really extreme, except that you've grown up with the window shifted so far to the right that you think that something as simple as "Massive speculation drives prices up, even on necessities" is revolutionary communism or something. Fuck you.

Yes I know what the Overton Window is. The positions you have advocated are extreme in light of the current political climate. Nice attempt to close with a strawman. I knew you'd get one or two out before this argument was concluded.

I've heard that argument made before, but quite frankly I don't buy it. Just because you start at the far left doesn't mean you will end up in the middle. Likewise because you start near the center doesn't mean you'll lose ground. Clinton was always very centrist and he got things done. And Obama has done a lot more than he's given credit for.

If OWS manages to maintain their momentum, then you might see them garnering support from Democrats and being the Counter-Tea Party. Unfortunately its going to take some convincing to show that they are serious, and are not in fact unemployed hippies who will go home once they run out of weed as they have been portrayed by much of the media.

I'm not talking about the far left. Clinton did more to hurt gay rights than W. ever did, he fucked the poor like crazy, and a large part of that was party unity combining with "centrism" causing him to implement Republican policies and his own party cheering that on. PS: Go right ahead and explain how you think negotiation works, though. I'm sure it will ultimately be as hilarious and annoying as everything else you've said.

You're also ignoring that I posted actual polls polling actual people about what they actually think about the actual OWS movement and their actual demands. I'm using the word "actual" a lot because you don't seem to understand it. Would I could impress the word in reverse upon your forehead so that every time you looked in a mirror it burned itself into your eyes.

I'm not ignoring anything. My point was that the OWS movement has yet to show they are in it for the long haul. If they are then more power to them. If they get bored and go home after a few months then they are no more of an impact than the "million man march" or any other fleeting movement.

[Rabid]

Again, you make an absurd over simplification of the situation.

"Again" ? Man, it's normal : I was restating with different words the basis of what I what trying to convey before. It's called "reformulation". Is that hard to understand ?

Because you were the one coming in with unsolicited suggestions that amounted to "just implement Universal Healthcare! Its Easy!"

Unsolicited : Do I need your permission to post now ?

"just implement Universal Healthcare! Its Easy!" : You misunderstand me. I never said that the implementation of Universal Healthcare in the US would be easy in itself. What I said was that the basic ideas of such implementation could be relatively easily found, as there was plenty of examples all over the world to take inspiration from ; asspulling some ideas myself on the move ; after what I gave for example the French system, an example between so many others.

[madd0ct0r]

universal healthcare is center left and accepted in most developed countries.

To be honest, no-one really understands why the Americans are so scared of it.

[TimothyC]

universal healthcare is center left and accepted in most developed countries.

To be honest, no-one really understands why the Americans are so scared of it.

Because for better and worse, Americans* are generally more weary of government powers than those people in other countries, and many do not like the idea of further government intervention in such a large part of the economy.

*Out of the population I interact with on a regular basis.

[General Mung Beans]

I doubt you could ever get universal healthcare in the United States. Too many people oppose it, and the people who oppose it are not merely against it but violently opposed, convinced as they are that it's a secret communist plot to destroy American values and whatever. If you got it past, they would forget about it almost immediately, but it's good odds that trying to straight-up implement real, universal healthcare in the current climate would probably get some democrats shot.

Doubt it. Despite panic from the left the Times Square bomber was not a Tea-Partier (and was an Islamist as it turned out) and Loughner was not ideologically motivated.

[K. A. Pital]

Because for better and worse, Americans* are generally more weary of government powers than those people in other countries, and many do not like the idea of further government intervention in such a large part of the economy.

*Out of the population I interact with on a regular basis.

Healthcare is not a critical part of the economy. It is a tertiary sector (services), the drug production is privatized anyway, and since the tertiary sector is completely dependent on the rest of the economy, if you create a universal healthcare system it doesn't mean shit for the rest of the economy. The dependence is one-sided here. But considering the state of American awareness and education, perhaps some other factors than "fewar of government!" are to blame. After all, Americans voted for the PATRIOT act which is far more scary than any "national healthcare project".