CXT, I regret that you do not understand the application of shared public funds to causes the culture deems worthy. In this case, our government, and our citizens, with good reason, have decided that having doctors turn the desperate away from hospitals or worse, punish patients by turning them in, is unacceptable. I also regret that you are unable to appreciate that your supposed analogy is so extreme in terms of cost and threat that it really does not inform the debate. Good luck catching up to nearly all doctors, ethicists, and US citizens on this, and thanks for making the world more interesting either in defending absurd positions for the sake of argument or in actually believing them.
Meanwhile, for the thinking America, the state has a right to deport illegals, and it is unethical to punish a patient for seeking care. End.
Obama
Moderator: Available
IJ
Last one first.
Let me ask you this----is a "doctor", hospitals etc in general required to report cases of suspected child abuse?
If so then they are, in effect, already acting as an arm of law enforcement..........you just want to decide what you consider a crime worth reporting might be
While I would not put those 2 on the same level.......pretending that the medical profession does not already act as an arm of law enforcement in many cases is a base canard.
Lets expand that a little more and use the same argument you use above---but lets switch the crime.
Say a man is badly hurt while comming a rape----is it "punishment" to use your term, for him to be reported and turned in by the doctors/hospital that treated him? Or should he be able to seek medical treatment for his injures without having to be worried about a report getting filed...a report that could get him "punished" later?????
Kinda plays hob with that whole "treatment without punishment" your pontifficating on above don't it.
And no that is not really a question.
I "understand" then just fine....well enough anyhow not to make your error of confusing your appeal to pity with a discussion of "public and private" funds....sure you say that now.....in a post-hoc fashion.
You and your supposed body of medical professionals have an odd way of expressing the "ethics"----tell me what did these experts in medical ethics tell the poor people in the regions that no longer have access to medical care period?
Part of the problem here is your refusal to "appreciate" that the "ethics" here are a bit more complex than your advancing.
For some reason AGAIN, you fail to grasp the essentially point here----just as its unethical to demand you pay for the medical bills of a person that is illegally occupying your home----its no more ethical to demand that all of us pay for the medical bills of a person illegally occupying your country.....its merely a question of scale.....not ethics.
Last one first.
Let me ask you this----is a "doctor", hospitals etc in general required to report cases of suspected child abuse?
If so then they are, in effect, already acting as an arm of law enforcement..........you just want to decide what you consider a crime worth reporting might be
While I would not put those 2 on the same level.......pretending that the medical profession does not already act as an arm of law enforcement in many cases is a base canard.
Lets expand that a little more and use the same argument you use above---but lets switch the crime.
Say a man is badly hurt while comming a rape----is it "punishment" to use your term, for him to be reported and turned in by the doctors/hospital that treated him? Or should he be able to seek medical treatment for his injures without having to be worried about a report getting filed...a report that could get him "punished" later?????
Kinda plays hob with that whole "treatment without punishment" your pontifficating on above don't it.
And no that is not really a question.
I "understand" then just fine....well enough anyhow not to make your error of confusing your appeal to pity with a discussion of "public and private" funds....sure you say that now.....in a post-hoc fashion.
You and your supposed body of medical professionals have an odd way of expressing the "ethics"----tell me what did these experts in medical ethics tell the poor people in the regions that no longer have access to medical care period?
Part of the problem here is your refusal to "appreciate" that the "ethics" here are a bit more complex than your advancing.
For some reason AGAIN, you fail to grasp the essentially point here----just as its unethical to demand you pay for the medical bills of a person that is illegally occupying your home----its no more ethical to demand that all of us pay for the medical bills of a person illegally occupying your country.....its merely a question of scale.....not ethics.
Forget #6, you are now serving nonsense.
HH
HH
Pernounciation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do04ZsC-cdw
Honestly, saying pakistan correctly is not elitist. It's saying the name correctly.
Im surprised conservatives got so pissed at how Obama said pakistan.
If he mispronounced it, okay, get mad.
But he said it more accuratly then anyone else ive seen, including democrats on a podium in america.
SO is that a bad thing?
Honestly, saying pakistan correctly is not elitist. It's saying the name correctly.
Im surprised conservatives got so pissed at how Obama said pakistan.
If he mispronounced it, okay, get mad.
But he said it more accuratly then anyone else ive seen, including democrats on a podium in america.
SO is that a bad thing?
I can't believe people actually take it seriously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGngj_35D_s
I mean what? Is this how dirty this campagn is getting?
I don't even like Obama(Im not joking)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGngj_35D_s
I mean what? Is this how dirty this campagn is getting?
I don't even like Obama(Im not joking)
AAA
And when Biden was running against Obama his calling him "articulate" was used against Biden as if he had slurred him.
McCain's pointing at Obama and saying "that one" has been roundly cast as a slur...some even have called him a "racist" for it.
So yes, that is exactly how petty and hysterical things have gotten on both sides of the isle.
I watched and otherwise intellegent and educated man seriously posit that using the terms "hocky mom" and "joe six pack" were offensive because they excluded blacks---as if black people don't play hocky or drink beer.
Then the same guy went on to explain that is they used the term "basketball" then it would include blacks------but of course someone else pointed out that such a reference could be seen as racist because it implies that "basketball" and "black" was somehow interchangeable---and thus offensive.
It getting so people can't even talk to each other any more.
And when Biden was running against Obama his calling him "articulate" was used against Biden as if he had slurred him.
McCain's pointing at Obama and saying "that one" has been roundly cast as a slur...some even have called him a "racist" for it.
So yes, that is exactly how petty and hysterical things have gotten on both sides of the isle.
I watched and otherwise intellegent and educated man seriously posit that using the terms "hocky mom" and "joe six pack" were offensive because they excluded blacks---as if black people don't play hocky or drink beer.
Then the same guy went on to explain that is they used the term "basketball" then it would include blacks------but of course someone else pointed out that such a reference could be seen as racist because it implies that "basketball" and "black" was somehow interchangeable---and thus offensive.
It getting so people can't even talk to each other any more.
Forget #6, you are now serving nonsense.
HH
HH
CXT: I continue, as ever, unclear as to whether this is a bad joke or you really don't get it. Anyway.
"Let me ask you this----is a "doctor", hospitals etc in general required to report cases of suspected child abuse? If so then they are, in effect, already acting as an arm of law enforcement..........you just want to decide what you consider a crime worth reporting might be."
You know, we already discussed this. It was made perfectly clear that there are certain situations--those involving the public health--that require us, legally and ethically, to report patient's medical diagnosis or activity to the authorities. These include violent crimes, child and elder abuse, and transmissible disease such as STDs and tuberculosis. Some of these issues were hammered out in legislative and court battles, such as with Tarasoff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarasoff_v ... California
There is no public health need for me to report that there is an illegal immigrant in the hospital (just as we do not report people with substance abuse problems, even though they represent a risk of DUI or violent crime; the risk is not immediate). I can already hear your argumentative reply gurgling up about how having even one illegal in the USA is going to doom our healthcare system and the rest of us will be denied medical care as a result. Well, that is not a position shared by the public at large, medical associations, ethicists, or any branch of government, and I know this because it is widely known that anyone who wants to find an illegal getting medical care can just wander into our hospital and look at them all. Of course, hospital administration has been dealing with undocumented patients for decades and came to the conclusion I'm presenting. In this regard, you are simply ignorant of the practice of the medical profession and the relevant laws. Your comments, snooty smiley faces aside, are about as helpful as me just suggesting to a nuclear physicist that we just run our reactors faster to obviate the need for foreign oil.
Before pounding out any unconsidered replies, please READ the Tarasoff material. Here is a major finding:
Holding: "When a therapist determines, or pursuant to the standards of his profession should determine, that his patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, he incurs an obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger. The discharge of this duty may require the therapist to take one or more of various steps. Thus, it may call for him to warn the intended victim, to notify the police, or to take whatever steps are reasonably necessary under the circumstances."
"Lets expand that a little more and use the same argument you use above---but lets switch the crime. Say a man is badly hurt while comming a rape ----is it "punishment" to use your term, for him to be reported and turned in by the doctors/hospital that treated him? Or should he be able to seek medical treatment for his injures without having to be worried about a report getting filed...a report that could get him "punished" later?????"
Yes, that would get the guy punished. And it represents an ethical conflict for the people involved. We are taught not to alter our care for the patient based on who they are or what they're done. Psychiatrists are taught that if they have to violate their confidentiality rules, they have to have a sufficient reason, they have to try to mitigate the harm, and they can also head such problems off by informing patients at the outset that their conversations are confidential EXCEPT when law says otherwise. The case of the rapist is an easy one. That guy is a public threat. Do you understand the ruling from the SCOTUS? "Serious danger of violence." As we know, having an illegal immigrant in the country does not pose a serious danger of violence to anyone.
"I "understand" then just fine....well enough anyhow not to make your error of confusing your appeal to pity with a discussion of "public and private" funds....sure you say that now.....in a post-hoc fashion."
Post hoc would mean I changed my story. Look it up. I have said form the outset that, consistent with applicable law, hospitals are required to provide care to anyone who seeks it regardless of ability to pay under EMTALA rules. That requires the expediture of public funds. Also, in a perfectly clear explanation, I detailed how it is the assumption of nearly all Americans that their government will see to common needs such as infrastructure, law enforcement, defense, and certain aspects of healthcare (as it requires by its own EMTALA rules), and it will employ public funds to do so. These Americans don't expect to repair entire bridges or launch entire wars on their private household's income. And you--you like having police you can call, right? Paid for by public monies; you would never expect to take on the salary of a LEO or buy their car by yourself. So let's drop this asinine line of reasoning that its hypocrisy to expect hospitals to obey the law but not expect to singlehandedly shoulder the healthcare of illegal immigrants.
"You and your supposed body of medical professionals have an odd way of expressing the "ethics"----tell me what did these experts in medical ethics tell the poor people in the regions that no longer have access to medical care period ?
Part of the problem here is your refusal to "appreciate" that the "ethics" here are a bit more complex than your advancing."
This is cute--you, not a medical professional, not read up on applicable law or ethics, and with no experience in the actual practice or finance of healthcare that I am aware of--lecturing all those who believe the national consensus of experts on this issue.
Pray tell, where do we have "regions that no longer have access to medical care period?" Hmmm? I'm so interested to learn where the burden of caring for illegals became so great that all of the doctors, nurses, clinics and hospitals just walked away, or turned into dust. A zip code would be great.
"Let me ask you this----is a "doctor", hospitals etc in general required to report cases of suspected child abuse? If so then they are, in effect, already acting as an arm of law enforcement..........you just want to decide what you consider a crime worth reporting might be."
You know, we already discussed this. It was made perfectly clear that there are certain situations--those involving the public health--that require us, legally and ethically, to report patient's medical diagnosis or activity to the authorities. These include violent crimes, child and elder abuse, and transmissible disease such as STDs and tuberculosis. Some of these issues were hammered out in legislative and court battles, such as with Tarasoff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarasoff_v ... California
There is no public health need for me to report that there is an illegal immigrant in the hospital (just as we do not report people with substance abuse problems, even though they represent a risk of DUI or violent crime; the risk is not immediate). I can already hear your argumentative reply gurgling up about how having even one illegal in the USA is going to doom our healthcare system and the rest of us will be denied medical care as a result. Well, that is not a position shared by the public at large, medical associations, ethicists, or any branch of government, and I know this because it is widely known that anyone who wants to find an illegal getting medical care can just wander into our hospital and look at them all. Of course, hospital administration has been dealing with undocumented patients for decades and came to the conclusion I'm presenting. In this regard, you are simply ignorant of the practice of the medical profession and the relevant laws. Your comments, snooty smiley faces aside, are about as helpful as me just suggesting to a nuclear physicist that we just run our reactors faster to obviate the need for foreign oil.
Before pounding out any unconsidered replies, please READ the Tarasoff material. Here is a major finding:
Holding: "When a therapist determines, or pursuant to the standards of his profession should determine, that his patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, he incurs an obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger. The discharge of this duty may require the therapist to take one or more of various steps. Thus, it may call for him to warn the intended victim, to notify the police, or to take whatever steps are reasonably necessary under the circumstances."
"Lets expand that a little more and use the same argument you use above---but lets switch the crime. Say a man is badly hurt while comming a rape ----is it "punishment" to use your term, for him to be reported and turned in by the doctors/hospital that treated him? Or should he be able to seek medical treatment for his injures without having to be worried about a report getting filed...a report that could get him "punished" later?????"
Yes, that would get the guy punished. And it represents an ethical conflict for the people involved. We are taught not to alter our care for the patient based on who they are or what they're done. Psychiatrists are taught that if they have to violate their confidentiality rules, they have to have a sufficient reason, they have to try to mitigate the harm, and they can also head such problems off by informing patients at the outset that their conversations are confidential EXCEPT when law says otherwise. The case of the rapist is an easy one. That guy is a public threat. Do you understand the ruling from the SCOTUS? "Serious danger of violence." As we know, having an illegal immigrant in the country does not pose a serious danger of violence to anyone.
"I "understand" then just fine....well enough anyhow not to make your error of confusing your appeal to pity with a discussion of "public and private" funds....sure you say that now.....in a post-hoc fashion."
Post hoc would mean I changed my story. Look it up. I have said form the outset that, consistent with applicable law, hospitals are required to provide care to anyone who seeks it regardless of ability to pay under EMTALA rules. That requires the expediture of public funds. Also, in a perfectly clear explanation, I detailed how it is the assumption of nearly all Americans that their government will see to common needs such as infrastructure, law enforcement, defense, and certain aspects of healthcare (as it requires by its own EMTALA rules), and it will employ public funds to do so. These Americans don't expect to repair entire bridges or launch entire wars on their private household's income. And you--you like having police you can call, right? Paid for by public monies; you would never expect to take on the salary of a LEO or buy their car by yourself. So let's drop this asinine line of reasoning that its hypocrisy to expect hospitals to obey the law but not expect to singlehandedly shoulder the healthcare of illegal immigrants.
"You and your supposed body of medical professionals have an odd way of expressing the "ethics"----tell me what did these experts in medical ethics tell the poor people in the regions that no longer have access to medical care period ?
Part of the problem here is your refusal to "appreciate" that the "ethics" here are a bit more complex than your advancing."
This is cute--you, not a medical professional, not read up on applicable law or ethics, and with no experience in the actual practice or finance of healthcare that I am aware of--lecturing all those who believe the national consensus of experts on this issue.
Pray tell, where do we have "regions that no longer have access to medical care period?" Hmmm? I'm so interested to learn where the burden of caring for illegals became so great that all of the doctors, nurses, clinics and hospitals just walked away, or turned into dust. A zip code would be great.
--Ian
To be honest it's not just that. It's the fact people still think a name and a 'blood line' make him a terrorist. The whole thing between the age of 1-6 was actually an interfaith public school, hell they had a prayer room for Christians.cxt wrote:AAA
And when Biden was running against Obama his calling him "articulate" was used against Biden as if he had slurred him.
McCain's pointing at Obama and saying "that one" has been roundly cast as a slur...some even have called him a "racist" for it.
So yes, that is exactly how petty and hysterical things have gotten on both sides of the isle.
I watched and otherwise intellegent and educated man seriously posit that using the terms "hocky mom" and "joe six pack" were offensive because they excluded blacks---as if black people don't play hocky or drink beer.
Then the same guy went on to explain that is they used the term "basketball" then it would include blacks------but of course someone else pointed out that such a reference could be seen as racist because it implies that "basketball" and "black" was somehow interchangeable---and thus offensive.
It getting so people can't even talk to each other any more.
On the other side of things, Palin should not be penalized for her use of slang. Why does it bother so many people?
Slang doesn't bother me; cursing isn't always a problem. Sometimes it's the best way to get across what you're saying. Sometimes, however, it's affected. I just don't buy the Senator Biden, regular guy schtick. I read soemwhere (can't find it now) that earlier, Palin didn't have that folksy accent. To some, it reminds them of the way Yalie George W suddenly became a country Texan. Oh really? You're a folksy native? If it's an act it's annoying, although I've not seen a pretransformation Palin clip, and beyond that, people do pick up accents if they live somewhere long enough.
I've got plenty of other reasons to dislike Palin
I've got plenty of other reasons to dislike Palin
--Ian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAUtZnwQUvI
more b.s.
Cenk goes a little rabid liberal here.
But he's right about the crowd.
and he's right that such statements like 'terrorist' and 'off with his head' is something that would never have been tolerated in 2000 or 2004
more b.s.
Cenk goes a little rabid liberal here.
But he's right about the crowd.
and he's right that such statements like 'terrorist' and 'off with his head' is something that would never have been tolerated in 2000 or 2004
AAA
It "bothers people" because in large part many people are idiots.
Also people are looking for reasons that have little to nothing to do with their actual politics to demonize people.
That is what people do.....they pick postions for all sorts of bogus reasons then try and rationalizine them in post-hoc fashion----we are less "rational" beings than we are "rationlizing" beings......hopefully we will eventually grow out of it....slowly to be sure...but we are growing--least I would like to think so.
And if anyone attempts to use that statement of an example of a cynical SOB like me being in any fashion "positive" I'll swear its my allergy meds talking.
It "bothers people" because in large part many people are idiots.
Also people are looking for reasons that have little to nothing to do with their actual politics to demonize people.
That is what people do.....they pick postions for all sorts of bogus reasons then try and rationalizine them in post-hoc fashion----we are less "rational" beings than we are "rationlizing" beings......hopefully we will eventually grow out of it....slowly to be sure...but we are growing--least I would like to think so.
And if anyone attempts to use that statement of an example of a cynical SOB like me being in any fashion "positive" I'll swear its my allergy meds talking.
Forget #6, you are now serving nonsense.
HH
HH
When I first started with Allstate I was on a phone team that received calls from sales agents. There was one female agent who had a strong southern-belle accent anytime I talked to her. One day during some down time the team was talking about accents and she was brought up, with all the guys on the team commenting on her strong accent. That came as news to the ladies on the team, who knew her but detected no such accent when talking to her. Our assumption then was that she used a fake accent only when talking to men in the company on the phone. She probably thought it would help her with her requests...and maybe it didIJ wrote: I read soemwhere (can't find it now) that earlier, Palin didn't have that folksy accent. To some, it reminds them of the way Yalie George W suddenly became a country Texan. Oh really? You're a folksy native? If it's an act it's annoying,
Glenn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WD3p_g2jXh8
Now im just laughing.
It's so over the top it's funny what people think.
Though why is being called a black man an insult? Why is it insulting if someone is muslim? People hurl these as insults?
Blacks are going to take over?
He hates white people?
Whats wrong with people?
despite the fact i may be defending the man, i don't exactly believe in his policies.
I don't like what im seeing though.
Now im just laughing.
It's so over the top it's funny what people think.
Though why is being called a black man an insult? Why is it insulting if someone is muslim? People hurl these as insults?
Blacks are going to take over?
He hates white people?
Whats wrong with people?
despite the fact i may be defending the man, i don't exactly believe in his policies.
I don't like what im seeing though.
