# A Measure Of Insanity



## Flanders (May 31, 2016)

*insanity* (_noun_)
plural *insanities*

* 1.* Persistent mental disorder or derangement.

*2. Law. a.* Unsoundness of mind sufficient in the judgment of a civil court to render a person unfit to maintain a contractual or other legal relationship or to warrant commitment to a mental health facility.* b.* In most criminal jurisdictions, a degree of mental malfunctioning sufficient to relieve the accused of legal responsibility for the act committed.

*3. a.* Extreme foolishness; folly.* b.* Something that is extremely foolish.​ 
*People are committed to insane asylums because they are more insane than everybody else. Obviously, a lot of people in Colorado belong in an insane asylum:* 

If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, the promoters of Amendment 69 — popularly known as ColoradoCare — are certainly crazy.​
May 31, 2016, 5:00 am
       Centennial state voters will soon decide whether to trade in Obamacare for single-payer.

Colorado, Single-Payer, and the Definition of Insanity | The American Spectator​


----------



## irosie91 (May 31, 2016)

Psychosis is ----marked by  "bizarre"  ideation.     which is, simply, belief in REALITIES---that are not real.      Recognized faith based  (religious) beliefs
are excluded from  "bizarre" but psychotic persons do not get their hallucinations
and delusions from "nowhere"-----they are often ROOTED in their religion


----------



## DGS49 (May 31, 2016)

No cogent person ever said that "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."  What has been said is that one indicator of insanity might be doing the same thing over and over again...

What PJO'Rourke actually did say was, "If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's 'free.'"

There is nothing inherently "wrong" with "single payer."  It works reasonably well in most western democracies where it has been implemented.  As with any other broad-based program to meet a global need (e.g., mass transit), it has some things it handles very well and some things it handles very badly.   Any legal subdivision moving from market-based provision of healthcare to single-payer will have glitches and growing pains, and it will have to be adjusted from time to time as more experience is gained.

But it is folly to suppose that you can superimpose a single-payer paradigm on a health care delivery system that has been created and thrived on the profit motive (ignoring for a moment the meaningless expressions "non-profit" and "not-for-profit").  It cannot work.  The profiteering that follows Government paying all the bills will be monstrous - look at Medicare.

Keep in mind that the other Western Democracies that have implemented single-payer have not had to deal with the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits the Federal Government from getting into the Healthcare business.  Also, those countries made the decision to go with socialized medicine quite a while ago, while their health-care delivery infrastructure was not anywhere near as developed as the US healthcare delivery infrastructure is now.

Consider: to  have a true single-payer system, the GOVERNMENT MUST EMPLOY ALL THE DOCTORS and other practitioners.  They must become "employees," and they inevitably will form unions who will limit hours, maximize benefits, and otherwise gum up the system.   Government must own and run the medical schools, hospitals, clinics, labs, rehab facilities, and assisted-care facilities.  And in order to do this, government must impose a substantial dedicated tax to pay for all of it, similar to the FICA and Medicare taxes that we  have now.

And everyone must be compelled to use the government's healthcare system, otherwise, the best doctors will simply opt-out, demanding higher fees from wealthy private clients, and everyone else will be left with bupkis.  This was the single issue that killed Hillary-Care in the early 90's.  Doctors were prohibited from operating outside the system.

A single state trying to go with single-payer is idiocy, on steroids.


----------



## irosie91 (May 31, 2016)

O'Rourke took the words right out of my fingertips------it was my original objection
to Obama care because I know what happens when people PREVIOUSLY on
MEDICAID-----get a job----with medical insurance-----and have to deal with -----
co-pays---etc      ----"I was better off on welfare"


----------



## Luddly Neddite (May 31, 2016)

The thread title ... and yet, people actually vote Republican. 

As for the true cost of "free" health care, we already pay much more than many realize. The difference between the US and other countries is that we don't get much for it. 






irosie91 said:


> O'Rourke took the words right out of my fingertips------it was my original objection
> to Obama care because I know what happens when people PREVIOUSLY on
> MEDICAID-----get a job----with medical insurance-----and have to deal with -----
> co-pays---etc      ----"I was better off on welfare"




"... better off on welfare"

In fact, that did not start with Obama or ObamaCare.


----------



## irosie91 (May 31, 2016)

Luddly Neddite said:


> The thread title ... and yet, people actually vote Republican.
> 
> As for the true cost of "free" health care, we already pay much more than many realize. The difference between the US and other countries is that we don't get much for it.
> 
> ...



so true----and-----you know very little about the quality of health care in OTHER 
COUNTRIES.    We get quite a bit


----------



## Flanders (May 31, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> psychotic persons do not get their hallucinations
> and delusions from "nowhere"-----they are often ROOTED in their religion


*To irosie91: Interesting take, but I hold a different view. Permit me to elaborate: 

That a half-black sewer rat, and a middle-class white feminazi, ended up with the same moral compass can only be explained by their innate attraction to slaughterhouses. Politics does not explain it. Political belief is nothing more than their method of getting to the slaughterhouse. Basically, decent people are decent because they are. Evil people are evil because they are. Both remain true to their personalities irrespective of external forces. 

Proof: A great many evil people can be found in every religion. Ditto every political belief.* 

Obama associates one of history’s bloodiest Communist butchers with Thomas Jefferson​
Obama’s Ho Chi Minh Trail
       By Daniel Greenfield
       May 31, 2016

Obama’s Ho Chi Minh Trail​
*What is it with the sewer rat and Hillary Clinton? Answer: They are determined to justify their own love of cruel butchers by tying them to Thomas Jefferson: *

In April 2009, Congressman Jeff Fortenberry dialogued with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on foreign policy At 4 minutes 25 seconds into this video, Hillary Clinton compares the eugenics advocate and racist Margaret Sanger to Thomas Jefferson. Clinton even seems to say that Sanger is superior to Jefferson.​
​
Hillary Clinton: I Admire Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger


----------



## irosie91 (May 31, 2016)

I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer---she was
a product of her hard childhood-----irish poor big family


----------



## Flanders (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer---she was
> a product of her hard childhood-----irish poor big family


*To irosie91: That is absurd. If you are correct every kid born poor is justified whenever they commit murder for any reason. I gather you would punish kids born with a silver spoon in their mouths. 

In any event, millions of disadvantaged children did not grow up and follow through on the brutality Margaret Anger set in motion: *

“The key to understanding the HIPAA and consent violations that we’ve referred to HHS is that there’s a business contract between StemExpress and the abortion clinics under which both sides make a profit from the baby body parts inside the young woman’s womb,” Ms. Blackburn said in the letter.

   “The contract changes the way both entities view the young woman: her baby is now a profit-center,” she said. “This betrayal of a young woman’s trust should disgust us all. It takes financial advantage, obtains consent through coercion, and deceives the woman, all in violation of federal privacy laws.”

House investigation: Planned Parenthood broke federal law in fetal body parts trafficking
       By Bradford Richardson - The Washington Times - Wednesday, June 1, 2016

House investigation: Planned Parenthood broke federal law in fetal body parts trafficking​


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

Flanders said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer---she was
> ...



oh----I see------no arguing with you-----I am anti abortion AND  pro-choice.     I have seen far more of REAL LIFE than have you.    My story-----My mom was---by age 32---the mother of five kids---the two youngest twins.    She is also afflicted with a "sickness"----which made her being a mother-----VERY DIFFICULT.     Age 35---when I was seven------she was PREGNANT AGAIN-------way back in the time when abortion was illegal------Her doctor went to work with the POWERS and got her a waiver-----the pregnancy was aborted ----her "tubes tied"  as she explained to my baby mind---along with --THEY KILLED THE BABY.    Thus I am anti abortion-------from an early age.    Fact is-----she probably SHOULD have been aborted of the first five------she was really incapable


----------



## Flanders (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> oh----I see------no arguing with you-----I am anti abortion AND pro-choice. I have seen far more of REAL LIFE than have you. My story-----My mom was---by age 32---the mother of five kids---the two youngest twins. She is also afflicted with a "sickness"----which made her being a mother-----VERY DIFFICULT. Age 35---when I was seven------she was PREGNANT AGAIN-------way back in the time when abortion was illegal------Her doctor went to work with the POWERS and got her a waiver-----the pregnancy was aborted ----her "tubes tied" as she explained to my baby mind---along with --THEY KILLED THE BABY. Thus I am anti abortion-------from an early age. Fact is-----she probably SHOULD have been aborted of the first five------she was really incapable


*To irosie91: Neither your personal reasons, nor all of the tragedies about back-ally abortions, justifies the slaughter of 55 MILLION babies in the womb in this country alone. The total number of individual horror stories is minute compared to number of murdered babies since Roe v. Wade: *


irosie91 said:


> I do not consider Margaret Sanger to be a racist murderer-


*To irosie91: Margaret Anger is the mother of slaughter as well as the patron saint of Kermit Gosnell and the others who did not get caught, as well the baby-body-parts industry. Other solutions to personal tragedies were, and are, available, but you and your kind cannot see past sanctioning GOVERNMENT murder.

Put aside every other reason for abortion and this reason remains immutable:

Never, never, never, under any circumstance give the government the authority to kill their own people.*


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

Flanders said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > oh----I see------no arguing with you-----I am anti abortion AND pro-choice. I have seen far more of REAL LIFE than have you. My story-----My mom was---by age 32---the mother of five kids---the two youngest twins. She is also afflicted with a "sickness"----which made her being a mother-----VERY DIFFICULT. Age 35---when I was seven------she was PREGNANT AGAIN-------way back in the time when abortion was illegal------Her doctor went to work with the POWERS and got her a waiver-----the pregnancy was aborted ----her "tubes tied" as she explained to my baby mind---along with --THEY KILLED THE BABY. Thus I am anti abortion-------from an early age. Fact is-----she probably SHOULD have been aborted of the first five------she was really incapable
> ...



I have never under-estimated the HORRORS of legal abortion------or the HORRORS of back alley abortions---or,  LIKE YOU,  attempted to
JUMP ON THE BANDWAGON of either POLAR   albeit, shallow    POV.       In today's world----OUR  government cannot FORCE 
abortion-------I am not actually sure that Margaret Sanger was on that  POLE either.   
I consider her motives pure ----her approach---very rash and ill-conceived     (ie--she did not know)


----------



## Flanders (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> I have never under-estimated the HORRORS of legal abortion------or the HORRORS of back alley abortions---


*To irosie91: That makes you the only person on the planet who claims to be anti-abortion at the same time you justify the slaughter. *


irosie91 said:


> or, LIKE YOU, attempted to
> JUMP ON THE BANDWAGON of either POLAR albeit, shallow POV.


*To irosie91: Pro life is not a bandwagon. Coming down on the side of life is never shallow. Both are legitimate opposition to a heinous practice.*


irosie91 said:


> In today's world----OUR government cannot FORCE
> abortion-------


*To irosie91: Not yet.

I will not cite Communist China, but I can say that sanctioning abortion is the first step toward population controls —— the end game for every 21st government, and certainly the United Nations.

Incidentally, the private sector money behind abortion is astronomical. Sad to say that every penny given to abortion “charities” is passed on to everyone else by the charitable tax deduction. In short: At least 50 percent of Americans who oppose abortion end up paying for them:* 

In 2004, after the death of his wife, Susan Thompson Buffett, the foundation he started to manage his charitable giving was renamed for her. Just how much of Buffett’s fortune has gone to promote these deadly endeavors? By examining the foundation’s tax returns, Mike Ciandella and Katie Yoder reported that, between 2001-2012, Buffett gave over $1.2 billion to abortion groups worldwide, which is enough money to abort a population the size of the city of Chicago.

   There is more: Before 2001, through the foundation, Buffett funneled at least $21 million more to these groups, which include Planned Parenthood, NARAL, the Population Council and the National Abortion Federation.
*
XXXXX*​
   To say that his personal life was unconventional is an understatement. Susan left him in 1977. They never divorced but remained close. His enormous love for her was apparent even though he and Susan’s friend, Astrid Menks, became a couple and married two years after her death.

*XXXXX*​
   Everyone assumed it was Susan who championed abortion and population control. Now we know that Mr. Buffet also supported the same dirty business, even giving to groups that have been accused of forced abortions and sterilizations in the Third World, such as EngenderHealth.

Warren Buffet: The abortion king
       Exclusive: Jane Chastain asks, 'Just how smart can the smartest man in the world really be?'
       Published: 05/14/2014 at 7:11 PM
       by Jane Chastain

Warren Buffet: The abortion king​
*Bill Gates is also big on abortions in addition to promoting vaccinations as a way to achieve population controls. He is not alone. The pseudoscience of eugenics has been around for more than a century. Many of the wealthiest Americans, including Teddy Roosevelt, were eugenicists before the beginning of the twentieth century. As near as I can tell, legal abortion as a means of population control sprang from eugenics. Twenty-first century eugenicists include:*

Software billionaire Bill Gates, who previously has advocated the reduction of the human population through the use of vaccines, and his wife Melinda marked the 100th year since the First International Eugenics Congress in London with a “family planning” summit with abortionists and the United Nations.

*XXXXX*​
     In addition to Gates, the meeting included some of the biggest names in the “billionaires club,” according to the London Times, including David Rockefeller, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey, Warren Buffett, George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.​
Bill Gates: World needs fewer people
Joins abortionists for 'family planning' conference on eugenics
Published: 08/19/2012 at 4:36 PM
by BOB UNRUH

Bill Gates: World needs fewer people​
*In case you did not know it the woman you and Hillary Clinton adore was a eugenicist:*

Sanger shaped the eugenics movement in America and beyond in the 1930s and 1940s. Her views and those of her peers in the movement contributed to compulsory sterilization laws in 30 U.S. states that resulted in more than 60,000 sterilizations of vulnerable people, including people she considered “feeble-minded,” “idiots” and “morons.”​
GROSSU: Margaret Sanger, racist eugenicist extraordinaire
       By Arina Grossu - - Monday, May 5, 2014

GROSSU: Margaret Sanger, racist eugenicist extraordinaire​
*Note that eugenicists simply want to kill to reduce the population. All of the political and legal reasons they cite is nothing more than widow dressing. You might also consider the number of human beings that will have to be killed in order to make population controls make a dent. My guesstimate is at least THREE BILLION for starters.* 


irosie91 said:


> I am not actually sure that Margaret Sanger was on that POLE either.
> I consider her motives pure ----her approach---very rash and ill-conceived (ie--she did not know)


*To irosie91: Now you went too far. Altruist motives is the one thing Margaret Anger is not guilty of.*


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

wrong-----I am anti abortion for routine use as simple contraception on ESTHETIC grounds.  
In fact----abortion is so used in RUSSIA----in just that manner.    Russian women report----stuff like-----"I had four abortions"   on medical history------an idea that I find repellent.   Of course,  I am anti FORCED abortion---or simply coerced.      HOWEVER I do know that there are many circumstances which justify  CHOICE ---as a matter of the welfare of the mother based on HER circumstances of life.


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> wrong-----I am anti abortion for routine use as simple contraception on ESTHETIC grounds.
> In fact----abortion is so used in RUSSIA----in just that manner.    Russian women report----stuff like-----"I had four abortions"   on medical history------an idea that I find repellent.   Of course,  I am anti FORCED abortion---or simply coerced.      HOWEVER I do know that there are many circumstances which justify  CHOICE ---as a matter of the welfare of the mother based on HER circumstances of life.



    PS----lots of my colleagues agree with me


----------



## Flanders (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> HOWEVER I do know that there are many circumstances which justify CHOICE


*To irosie91: The CHOICE argument has was exposed as a fraud years ago:*

But Kerry has gone what in better days would have been universally held to be one bridge too far. In a speech last year to the NARAL Pro-Choice America Dinner, he gave an intellectually suicidal summary of his views.

   He began by saying that "there is no overturning of Roe v. Wade." He went on: "There is no outlawing of a procedure necessary to save a woman's life or health." That statement of course begs the question on which the entire Congress and the state legislatures and the Supreme Court have been stalled for years, namely, Is the invocation of "health," if made by the woman alone, conclusive in authorizing abortion? If so, Roe v. Wade, which did not authorize willful third-trimester abortions, stands to be revised as the Roe-Wade-Kerry decision.

   Kerry continued: "There (shall be) no more cutbacks on population control efforts around the world."

   This endorses abortion Chinese-style. Too many people? Too few abortions.

   But the eye-popper was still to come: "We need to honestly and confidently and candidly take this issue out to the country and we need to speak up and be proud of what we stand for."

   But Kerry says he personally opposes abortion. Where is he exhibiting his pride in what he stands for? Whom has he counseled against abortion? A nun somewhere, out of earshot?

Crooked thought 
       William F. Buckley
       February 26, 2004

William F. Buckley - Crooked thought​


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

Wrong again----I specifically opposed---in my post----the CHINESE MODEL---forced abortion.      As to the "health"  issue-----that one is the STICKIEST of all.    Who gets to decide the "HEALTH"  issue?      My mom could have carried-----but her doctors testified that a sixth
child would destroy her  ----"mental"  health and they managed to win that one in the mid fifties.  
The model to legalize abortion if stated as-----
terminating a pregnancy likely to result in a  
"not well"  child-----or likely to damage the health of the mother   (that is the Israeli model) ----is----actually     CHOICE.    as in any woman who says>>>
" I will kill myself if I have to have another child"        That is the model I do support. 

EDUCATION in the pitfalls of abortion----both physical and emotional damage-----should be
supported.    Girls should never imagine that an abortion is simple contraception.   If you want to add the SPIRITUAL issues---fine with me


----------



## Arianrhod (Jun 2, 2016)

The possibility of making contraception available, affordable, and educable doesn't ever seem to enter these conversations...


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> The possibility of making contraception available, affordable, and educable doesn't ever seem to enter these conversations...



educable?


----------



## Arianrhod (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > The possibility of making contraception available, affordable, and educable doesn't ever seem to enter these conversations...
> ...



Is there a word you'd prefer for "Every child over the age of___should understand how pregnancy happens and how to prevent it when it's not wanted"?


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



yes------sane parents


----------



## Flanders (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> PS----lots of my colleagues agree with me


*To irosie91: How many disagree?*


irosie91 said:


> If you want to add the SPIRITUAL issues---fine with me


*To irosie91: Not killing children is a moral judgement:*

*  moral *(_adjective_)

   1. Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral quandary.

   2. Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior: a moral lesson.

   3. Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior; virtuous: a moral life.

   4. Arising from conscience or the sense of right and wrong: a moral obligation.

   5. Having psychological rather than physical or tangible effects: a moral victory; moral support.

   6.Based on strong likelihood or firm conviction, rather than on the actual evidence: a moral certainty.

*noun*

   1. The lesson or principle contained in or taught by a fable, a story, or an event.

   2. A concisely expressed precept or general truth; a maxim.

   3. morals. Rules or habits of conduct, especially of sexual conduct, with reference to standards of right and wrong: a person of loose morals; a decline in the public morals.

*XXXXX*​
* spiritual* (_adjective_)

   1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material. See synonyms at immaterial.

   2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.

   3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific.

   4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.

   5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural.

*noun*

   1. Music. a. A religious folk song of American Black origin. b. A work composed in imitation of such a song.

   2. Often spirituals . Religious, spiritual, or ecclesiastical matters.

   [Middle English, from Old French spirituel, from Latin spìrituâlis, of breathing, spiritual, from spìritus, breath. See spirit.]

*spiritually *(_adverb_)

*spiritualness* (_noun_)​ 
*Keep posting talking points with your personal life story and somebody who knows better might change their position.*


Arianrhod said:


> The possibility of making contraception available, affordable, and educable doesn't ever seem to enter these conversations...


*To Arianrhod: It most certainly does, although the pro-abortion crowd demand that tax dollars pay for every form of contraception in addition to abortions on demand:*


Flanders said:


> Incidentally, the private sector money behind abortion is astronomical. Sad to say that every penny given to abortion “charities” is passed on to everyone else by the charitable tax deduction. In short: At least 50 percent of Americans who oppose abortion end up paying for them:


*
*


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

answer to the FLANDERS question  ----one-----I ran into only one person who claimed to be an OB-GYN physician who stated   "abortion is simple contraception"     I do not believe that he was really a physician----it was a  NET  discussion


----------



## Flanders (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> answer to the FLANDERS question ----one-----I ran into only one person who claimed to be an OB-GYN physician who stated "abortion is simple contraception" I do not believe that he was really a physician----it was a NET discussion


*To irosie91: How in hell did he disagree with abortion? My question was:*


Flanders said:


> To irosie91: How many disagree?


----------



## Arianrhod (Jun 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



Fair enough.  But when the parents are Abstinence Only types like Rep. Bill Cassidy, who's going to step up for their children?


----------



## irosie91 (Jun 2, 2016)

Flanders said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > answer to the FLANDERS question ----one-----I ran into only one person who claimed to be an OB-GYN physician who stated "abortion is simple contraception" I do not believe that he was really a physician----it was a NET discussion
> ...



I commented on MY OWN POSITION on abortion which is that using abortion as if it is
a simple means of CONTRACEPTION -----is---
abhorrent.    The putative net OB-GYN disagreed with me and insisted----it is nothing
more than------an easy way to achieve contraception----fine and good.    Russians are
big on CASUAL USE abortion


----------



## Flanders (Jun 2, 2016)

Flanders said:


> To irosie91: How many disagree?





irosie91 said:


> I commented on MY OWN POSITION on abortion which is that using abortion as if it is
> a simple means of CONTRACEPTION -----is---
> abhorrent. The putative net OB-GYN disagreed with me and insisted----it is nothing
> more than------an easy way to achieve contraception----fine and good. Russians are
> big on CASUAL USE abortion


*To irosie91: Okay! If you say so.*


----------



## Flanders (Jun 10, 2016)

Flanders said:


> Never, never, never, under any circumstance give the government the authority to kill their own people.



*First it was Oregon:*

Nearly 1,000 people have killed themselves through the practice in Oregon since it became legal in the state in 1998.​
*Now it is California:*

Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat came around to the doctor’s side when he signed the End of Life Option Act into law in October, allowing physicians to prescribe lethal drugs to terminally ill, mentally-capable patients.​
First right-to-die clinic opens in California
       By Bradford Richardson
       Thursday, June 9, 2016

First right-to-die clinic opens in California​
*NOTE: Tax dollars funding Planned Parenthood’s infanticide followed Roe v. Wade.

Socialism’s Culture of Death works incrementally in all things. You can be certain that tax dollars will pay for suicide. Indeed, I am not sure that medical butchers are not already paid tax dollars to kill with kindness.

And you can take this one the bank. Planned Parenthood’s baby parts business will quickly be adopted by a new industry selling body parts harvested from suicides.  Legally, suicides can give permission which babies never do.*


----------



## anotherlife (Jun 10, 2016)

I think it was the Nazis that had this one right.  If you are a slowbie, then you can't contribute much so you will be hanged.  If you commit a failed suicide then you are too stupid to commit even a murder so you hang again.  Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 22, 2016)

DGS49 said:


> No cogent person ever said that "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."  What has been said is that one indicator of insanity might be doing the same thing over and over again...
> 
> What PJO'Rourke actually did say was, "If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's 'free.'"
> 
> ...



I thought this was a pretty good (fair and balanced) look.


----------



## Flanders (Sep 2, 2016)

Flanders said:


> Many of the wealthiest Americans, including Teddy Roosevelt, were eugenicists before the beginning of the twentieth century. As near as I can tell, legal abortion as a means of population control sprang from eugenics. Twenty-first century eugenicists include:


WASHINGTON – Many people know that the Nazis invoked science to try to justify their quest for a “Master Race.”​
But it might surprise most people to learn their evil application of eugenics, a supposed attempt to improve the human race, was modeled after a program in California greatly admired by Adolf Hitler.​ 
Eugenics making comeback as high-tech godsend
           Posted By Garth Kant On 09/01/2016 @ 9:00 pm

Eugenics making comeback as high-tech godsend​
*Nobody except me is calling Hillary Der gruppenführer. See this thread and you will see why she is a Nazi in every sense:*

Wisdom never interferes in Hillary Clinton’s brutal agenda. Margaret Sanger, one of the cruelest woman on record, is Hillary’s role model:​
Hillary’s Wealthiest Parasites


----------



## irosie91 (Sep 2, 2016)

your theory relating to Nazism is insane.   ------the concept of eugenics was not INVENTED in California-----nor was the
AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT.    In fact one can take EUGENICS as a program all the way back to Greece.    Abnormally formed newborns were regularly abandoned and left to die------for the good of the race.    Margaret Sanger was not cruel ---a bit weird--but not cruel


----------



## Flanders (Sep 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> one can take EUGENICS as a program all the way back to Greece. Abnormally formed newborns were regularly abandoned and left to die------for the good of the race.


*To irosie91: Not so. Murdering children is as old as the human race, but ancient Greeks knew nothing about DNA.*

*The word eugenics comes from Greek meaning well-born —— that had nothing to do with science. The pseudoscience of eugenics was created in modern times:* 

   In 1883, Sir Francis Galton, a respected British scholar and cousin of Charles Darwin, first used the term eugenics, meaning “well-born.” Galton believed that the human race could help direct its future by selectively breeding individuals who have “desired” traits. This idea was based on Galton’s study of upper class Britain.  Following these studies, Galton concluded that an elite position in society was due to a good genetic makeup.  While Galton’s plans to improve the human race through selective breeding never came to fruition in Britain, they eventually took sinister turns in other countries.

   The eugenics movement began in the U.S. in the late 19th century. However, unlike in Britain, eugenicists in the U.S. focused on efforts to stop the transmission of negative or “undesirable” traits from generation to generation. In response to these ideas, some US leaders, private citizens, and corporations started funding eugenical studies.  This lead to the 1911 establishment of The Eugenics Records Office (ERO) in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. The ERO spent time tracking family histories and concluded that people deemed to be unfit more often came from families that were poor, low in social standing, immigrant, and/or minority. Further, ERO researchers “demonstrated” that the undesirable traits in these families, such as pauperism, were due to genetics, and not lack of resources.

Introduction to Eugenics - Genetics Generation​


Flanders said:


> Wisdom never interferes in Hillary Clinton’s brutal agenda. Margaret Sanger, one of the cruelest woman on record, is Hillary’s role model:





irosie91 said:


> Margaret Sanger was not cruel


*To irosie91: Pooh-poohing cruelty to whitewash Hillary’s image is, itself, cruel.*


irosie91 said:


> ---a bit weird--but not cruel


*To irosie91: Eliminating the black race is a bit more than weird.*


----------



## irosie91 (Sep 2, 2016)

Flanders said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > one can take EUGENICS as a program all the way back to Greece. Abnormally formed newborns were regularly abandoned and left to die------for the good of the race.
> ...



sheeeesh     be not a cretin.      The greeks---especially the SPARTANS did what they did without  knowing about DNA .   In fact Margaret Sanger died before the WATSON CRICK
model of the chromosome was  "invented".     The reality of
INHERITED characteristics were ascertained in ancient times----it even appears in the bible.   People were BREEDING ANIMALS   long before    ADENOSINE AND GUANINE were
"invented".    As to abortions-----a very ancient practice.  
Eliminating the black race back then in her limited background referred to eliminating dense poverity and ignorance.    Abe Lincoln was not all that smart about that issue either


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Sep 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> Psychosis is ----marked by  "bizarre"  ideation.     which is, simply, belief in REALITIES---that are not real.      Recognized faith based  (religious) beliefs
> are excluded from  "bizarre" but psychotic persons do not get their hallucinations
> and delusions from "nowhere"-----they are often ROOTED in their religion



Can you provide some supporting documentation for your claim ?

I don't recall seeing that in the article.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Sep 2, 2016)

I think it is great that a STATE is attempting to work out it's health care issues.  

Better than doing it at a FEDERAL level.  

We can learn from what they do good and what they do bad.

If they do it at all (and I hope they do).

Vermont decided it could not afford it.  Colorado (fortunately) is not Vermont.


----------



## irosie91 (Sep 2, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Psychosis is ----marked by  "bizarre"  ideation.     which is, simply, belief in REALITIES---that are not real.      Recognized faith based  (religious) beliefs
> ...



read Kaplan's textbook of Psychiatry.    It comes in two giant
volumes-----a few thousand pages------somewhere in there


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Sep 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



In other words.....no.


----------



## irosie91 (Sep 2, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Sun Devil 92 said:
> ...



in other word   KAPLAN---Text book of Psychiatry----yes. 
For the record----I am an expert----my testimony regarding
this issue would be accepted in a court of law


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Sep 2, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



You can appreciate that such a claim over the internet is viewed with skepticism.

Why don't you summarize your argument....my guess is that you should be able to find a reference to it on the net.


----------



## irosie91 (Sep 2, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Sun Devil 92 said:
> ...



I am not going to search------I have examined ENOUGH patients who manifested delusions and hallucinations to 
KNOW what I am TALKING ABOUT.-----however if you have a specific question ----feel free.     I am not sure what you are calling "SUCH A CLAIM"  -----I simply and CORRECTLY stated
that hallucinations and delusions are not MANUFACTURED
extermal to the brain of the afflicted person-----they are manufactured in the patient's brain from EXISTING 
"material"-----same is true of dreams-------if you believe  "god"  does it-----or a 'jinn'  does it-----ok with me.   I do not argue with
delusions of FAITH.     For the sake of completeness---it is ILLUSIONS  that are a perceived but external phenomenon----take notes and expect  a POP QUIZ


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Sep 2, 2016)

Let's get back to Colorado.....

I think it is great they are trying to do something.   

Others have tried.  Hopefully, CO learns from their missteps.


----------



## Flanders (Mar 4, 2017)

*NARAL UPDATE*​
*Pro-Choice is No-Choice.*

NARAL Pro-Choice is sounding a similar note of bewilderment about the pro-choice movement’s path forward. The abortion group’s deputy policy director, Leslie McGorman, told Bloomberg News they will “pull out all of the stops” to stop Congress from defunding Planned Parenthood, but: “What tactic that requires remains to be seen.”​
Planned Parenthood Stunned As Reality Of Trump White House And GOP Congress Sets In
           Rachel Stoltzfoos
           Reporter
           2:32 PM 02/27/2017

Planned Parenthood Stunned As Reality Of Trump White House And GOP Congress Sets In​
*Kermit Gosnell, the baby-parts business, and Margaret Sanger’s boisterous hatred of black people leave the baby-killers with no option but to keep pushing the “pro-choice” sales campaign.* 

   But Kerry has gone what in better days would have been universally held to be one bridge too far. In a speech last year to the NARAL Pro-Choice America Dinner, he gave an intellectually suicidal summary of his views.

   He began by saying that "there is no overturning of Roe v. Wade." He went on: "There is no outlawing of a procedure necessary to save a woman's life or health." That statement of course begs the question on which the entire Congress and the state legislatures and the Supreme Court have been stalled for years, namely, Is the invocation of "health," if made by the woman alone, conclusive in authorizing abortion? If so, Roe v. Wade, which did not authorize willful third-trimester abortions, stands to be revised as the Roe-Wade-Kerry decision.

   Kerry continued: "There (shall be) no more cutbacks on population control efforts around the world."

   This endorses abortion Chinese-style. Too many people? Too few abortions.

   But the eye-popper was still to come: "We need to honestly and confidently and candidly take this issue out to the country and we need to speak up and be proud of what we stand for."

   But Kerry says he personally opposes abortion. Where is he exhibiting his pride in what he stands for? Whom has he counseled against abortion? A nun somewhere, out of earshot?​
Crooked thought 
           William F. Buckley
           February 26, 2004

William F. Buckley - Crooked thought​
*Killing infants, or population controls, matters not to the baby-butchers. They are proud of what they stand for, but not proud enough to admit the truth.*


----------

