How Far Can The State Go?

[PoliticalChic]

your entire post is so much made up bullshit.

no government discussed in this thread is putting anyone to death - unless you count the death penalty, and then yes, our government does that.

your second paragraph just has absolutely no basis in reality at all.

i'm not sure what thread you were reading, but it wasn't this one.

"...no government discussed in this thread is putting anyone to death."

Perhaps....

...but, there is this:

a) "[Democrat] GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE'

DENVER, March 28— Elderly people who are terminally ill have a ''duty to die and get out of the way'' instead of trying to prolong their lives by artificial means, Gov. Richard D. Lamm of Colorado said Tuesday."
GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE' - NYTimes.com


b) Democrat Tom Daschle, original nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department, and says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them.
Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey - Bloomberg



c) A key administration figure committed to cost cutting is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere.
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/
Downgrading American Medical Care | The American Spectator



d) ...slipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age.” The CER would identify (this is language from the draft report on the legislation) medical "items, procedures, and interventions" that it deems insufficiently effective or excessively expensive. They "will no longer be prescribed" by federal health programs.” Are you thinking ‘seniors’? George F. Will - How the GOP Should Measure the Stimulus




The Democrat desire is evident.

wow. since your point (c) is known to be false i'm not going to bother with the rest.

also, gov. lamm's quote is from 30 years ago.

Nothing I ever post is false.

 

[Redfish]

Religion has always been the archenemy of Totalitarianism. The Totalitarians need the People to worship Government. Religion gets in the way of that. I think some prominent Communists had quite a bit to say on that subject.

ha ha ha ha ha ha. Religion was basis for totalitarianism for centuries.

in the case of islam you are correct, in the middle ages the priests were the most powerful people in the land--more powerful than the kings.

Christianity of today is about tolerance, acceptance, and freedom. No one is forced to be a Christian or believe in Christian teachings.

Our constitution provides for freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion. Our founding documents are full of references to the creator and a higher power---but there is not one mention of a specific religion.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Religion has always been the archenemy of Totalitarianism. The Totalitarians need the People to worship Government. Religion gets in the way of that. I think some prominent Communists had quite a bit to say on that subject.

ha ha ha ha ha ha. Religion was basis for totalitarianism for centuries.

in the case of islam you are correct, in the middle ages the priests were the most powerful people in the land--more powerful than the kings.

Prove it!

Christianity of today is about tolerance, acceptance, and freedom. No one is forced to be a Christian or believe in Christian teachings.

Hard to believe given that it is primarily Christians who are intolerant and unaccepting of gays and their freedom to marry the consenting adult of their choice.

Our constitution provides for freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion.

BZZZZT Wrong! There is no freedom OF religion WITHOUT freedom FROM religion.

Our founding documents are full of references to the creator and a higher power---but there is not one mention of a specific religion.

BZZZZT Wrong! There no reference to any "creator and a higher power" in the entire Constitution.

 

[Derideo_Te]

"...no government discussed in this thread is putting anyone to death."

Perhaps....

...but, there is this:

a) "[Democrat] GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE'

DENVER, March 28— Elderly people who are terminally ill have a ''duty to die and get out of the way'' instead of trying to prolong their lives by artificial means, Gov. Richard D. Lamm of Colorado said Tuesday."
GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE' - NYTimes.com


b) Democrat Tom Daschle, original nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department, and says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them.
Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey - Bloomberg



c) A key administration figure committed to cost cutting is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere.
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/
Downgrading American Medical Care | The American Spectator



d) ...slipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age.” The CER would identify (this is language from the draft report on the legislation) medical "items, procedures, and interventions" that it deems insufficiently effective or excessively expensive. They "will no longer be prescribed" by federal health programs.” Are you thinking ‘seniors’? George F. Will - How the GOP Should Measure the Stimulus




The Democrat desire is evident.

wow. since your point (c) is known to be false i'm not going to bother with the rest.

also, gov. lamm's quote is from 30 years ago.

Nothing I ever post is false.

Ironic!

 

[Redfish]

ha ha ha ha ha ha. Religion was basis for totalitarianism for centuries.

in the case of islam you are correct, in the middle ages the priests were the most powerful people in the land--more powerful than the kings.

Prove it! Hard to believe given that it is primarily Christians who are intolerant and unaccepting of gays and their freedom to marry the consenting adult of their choice.

Our constitution provides for freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion.

BZZZZT Wrong! There is no freedom OF religion WITHOUT freedom FROM religion.

Our founding documents are full of references to the creator and a higher power---but there is not one mention of a specific religion.

BZZZZT Wrong! There no reference to any "creator and a higher power" in the entire Constitution.

freedom of religion means freedom from a state mandated religion, I think we agree

"endowed by their creator" is the DOI not one of our founding documents?

 

[Synthaholic]

Admit it or not, the politically dominant philosophy, whether one calls it Democrat, Liberal, socialist, Marxist, it virulently opposed to religion, and, by extension, the morality thereof.



1. "Religious case at Supreme Court could affect Obamacare and much more
...At issue in Tuesday's oral argument before the court is a regulation under the Affordable Care Act that requires employers to provide workers a health plan that covers the full range of contraceptives, including morning-after pills and intrauterine devices, or IUDs."
Religious case at Supreme Court could affect Obamacare and much more - Los Angeles Times


But this is only the tip of the iceberg.




The American Left has always taken it's cues from the European Left.....
...and there, one can see both the how far the Left wishes to go against religious precepts, and, possibly.....

...an incipient push-back.



2. In 1984, Holland legalized euthanasia, the right of Dutch doctors to kill their elderly patients.
Would they do so based on their whim?

a. “The Dutch survey, reviewed in the Journal of Medical Ethics, looked at the figures for 1995 and found that as well as 3,600 authorized cases there were 900 others in which doctors had acted without explicit consent…. they thought they were acting in the patient's best interests.”
Involuntary Euthanasia is Out of Control in Holland


b. Euthanasia, as Dr. Peggy Norris observed with some asperity, "cannot be controlled." If this is so, just what is irrational about religious objections to social policies that when they reach the bottom of the slippery slope are bound to embody something Dutch, degraded, and disgusting?

"How many scientific atheists, I wonder, propose to spend their old age in Holland?"
David Berlinski



3. What makes men good? Certainly they are not good by nature. In fact, frequently, the contrary. Does science have an opinion?
"Perhaps," Atheist Richard Dawkins speculates, "I... am a Pollyanna to believe that people would remain good when unobserved and unpoliced by God."
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091226094728AAv8UVO





Perhaps there are some men who are simply good by their nature.....

4. "Some Dutch pharmacists refusing to supply euthanasia drugs

Although euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands, some Dutch pharmacists are refusing to supply the lethal drugs needed to carry it out. ....this does not necessarily happen because of religious objections to euthanasia. Some pharmacists do not know the doctors who approved the euthanasia; others do not agree with euthanasia for conditions like dementia or depression.

“A pharmacy is not a shop where deadly drugs are just handed over,” a spokesperson for the pharmacists’ association said."
BioEdge: Some Dutch pharmacists refusing to supply euthanasia drugs




Now, if the pharmacies of Holland were under the purview of the current United States President and his henchmen at the Department of Justice.....

...what, one wonders, would they be ordered to do?

"Admit it or not, the politically dominant philosophy, whether one calls it Democrat, Liberal, socialist, Marxist, it virulently opposed to religion, and, by extension, the morality thereof."?

1. Not all Democrats are Liberals.

a. If they were socialists they would be members of the Socialist Workers Party

b. if Communists, members of the Communist Party

c. if opposed to religion many would not be practicing Catholics or Jews or members of other organized religious sects.

2. As we know - at least I do - PC ought not speak to the issue of Morality, Immorality or Amorality; she does not comprehend the construct of each.

3. PC is, IMO, a bore, a passive aggressive, angry narcissist who holds any ideas which does not fit nicely into the box she carries labeled "my dogma" as the product of (pick the pejorative).

We have a winner!

 

[Derideo_Te]

in the case of islam you are correct, in the middle ages the priests were the most powerful people in the land--more powerful than the kings.

Prove it! Hard to believe given that it is primarily Christians who are intolerant and unaccepting of gays and their freedom to marry the consenting adult of their choice.BZZZZT Wrong! There is no freedom OF religion WITHOUT freedom FROM religion.

Our founding documents are full of references to the creator and a higher power---but there is not one mention of a specific religion.

BZZZZT Wrong! There no reference to any "creator and a higher power" in the entire Constitution.

freedom of religion means freedom from a state mandated religion, I think we agree

Freedom from religion means that a majority cannot impose their religious beliefs on a minority because the individual right to be free from religion is more important than the majority belief.

"endowed by their creator" is the DOI not one of our founding documents?

The DOI was not a founding document. The term founding derives from foundation and the Constitution is the document upon which this nation was founded. The DOI was the divorce subpoena that terminated the prior arrangement.

 

[Pogo]

Prove it! Hard to believe given that it is primarily Christians who are intolerant and unaccepting of gays and their freedom to marry the consenting adult of their choice.BZZZZT Wrong! There is no freedom OF religion WITHOUT freedom FROM religion.

BZZZZT Wrong! There no reference to any "creator and a higher power" in the entire Constitution.

freedom of religion means freedom from a state mandated religion, I think we agree

Freedom from religion means that a majority cannot impose their religious beliefs on a minority because the individual right to be free from religion is more important than the majority belief.

"endowed by their creator" is the DOI not one of our founding documents?

The DOI was not a founding document. The term founding derives from foundation and the Constitution is the document upon which this nation was founded. The DOI was the divorce subpoena that terminated the prior arrangement.

Quite true. But "endowed by their creator" isn't a religious invocation anyway. It's a flowery way to say "natural", as in "natural rights" or "natural born", i.e. a characteristic present by definition. "Creator" doesn't single out any particular religion.

 

[Londoner]

3. PC is, IMO, a bore, a passive aggressive, angry narcissist who holds any ideas which does not fit nicely into the box she carries labeled "my dogma" as the product of (pick the pejorative).

PC is a Republican apparatchik, a foot solider who spreads information created by other people. PC is not attempting to reveal all sides of a given debate; this thread is emphatically not an educational exercise; it is pure information control in the service of a political agenda. She doesn't show how the data was collected and interpreted in the Dutch case, nor does she make a connection between the Dutch case and Obama.

Can you imagine if PC all the sudden started reporting objectively on this stuff, rather than clogging the message board with rightwing propaganda? I can see it now. Tomorrow she will provide a detailed analysis of how much money the Health Care Industry has poured into Washington. She will demonstrate how Health Care was the first or second largest contributor to congressional elections, and that with this money they were given a virtual monopoly, such that consumers in say 95% of Iowa only had one health care option. This meant that BlueCross could raise rates & decrease services without being disciplined by competition, the effect of which was to shrink health care coverage (by making it unaffordable to average people) - the result being a cruel kind of euthanasia by default. And then she will move on to show which prominent Rightwing think tank created "Death Panels" (which, as it turns out, is not a death panel, but an optional counseling session about "end of life" treatment and the selection of medical advocates in the case of incapacitation). That is, she will give us a very detailed exposition on exactly where the "Death Panel" theory came from, and how the concept was not only created by AEI and used by Bob Dole to counter HillaryCare, but - PC will show us - how the rightwing propaganda machine began using the phrase "Death Panel" once Obama adopted this Republican idea, which has nothing to do with state mandated execution. I trust that PC will some day come here not to spread propaganda, but debate actual laws through a direct study of the language of those laws (not merely a cut-&-paste interpretation of those laws by special interests who have a horse in the race).

When did the Republican Party become Trotskyites? When did they start seeing language and information as tools to control the opinions of low information voters?

 

[PoliticalChic]

3. PC is, IMO, a bore, a passive aggressive, angry narcissist who holds any ideas which does not fit nicely into the box she carries labeled "my dogma" as the product of (pick the pejorative).

PC is a Republican apparatchik, a foot solider who spreads information created by other people. PC is not attempting to reveal all sides of a given debate; this thread is emphatically not an educational exercise; it is pure information control in the service of a political agenda. She doesn't show how the data was collected and interpreted in the Dutch case, nor does she make a connection between the Dutch case and Obama.

Can you imagine if PC all the sudden started reporting objectively on this stuff, rather than clogging the message board with rightwing propaganda? I can see it now. Tomorrow she will provide a detailed analysis of how much money the Health Care Industry has poured into Washington. She will demonstrate how Health Care was the first or second largest contributor to congressional elections, and that with this money they were given a virtual monopoly, such that consumers in say 95% of Iowa only had one health care option. This meant that BlueCross could raise rates & decrease services without being disciplined by competition, the effect of which was to shrink health care coverage (by making it unaffordable to average people) - the result being a cruel kind of euthanasia by default. And then she will move on to show which prominent Rightwing think tank created "Death Panels" (which, as it turns out, is not a death panel, but an optional counseling session about "end of life" treatment and the selection of medical advocates in the case of incapacitation). That is, she will give us a very detailed exposition on exactly where the "Death Panel" theory came from, and how the concept was not only created by AEI and used by Bob Dole to counter HillaryCare, but - PC will show us - how the rightwing propaganda machine began using the phrase "Death Panel" once Obama adopted this Republican idea, which has nothing to do with state mandated execution. I trust that PC will some day come here not to spread propaganda, but debate actual laws through a direct study of the language of those laws (not merely a cut-&-paste interpretation of those laws by special interests who have a horse in the race).

"And then she will move on to show which prominent Rightwing think tank created "Death Panels" (which, as it turns out, wasn't anything like a death panel, but an optional counseling session about "end of life"......




Now, under the out of use document called the Constitution, the Congress wrote the laws, and the executive branch enforced same....

....but under Obama, he changes laws at will.....ObamaCare, case in point.....some 38 changes by Obama.


So....these may or may not be currently in the 38.1 version, but.....

...just to prove what a dunce you are.....


Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC Bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get

Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your benefits for you. You have no choice!

Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected.

PG 430 Lines 11-15 The government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.

PG 624 "Quality" measures shall be designed to assess outcomes and functional status of patients.

PG 624 "Quality" measures shall be designed to profile you including race, age, gender, place of residence, etc.

Pg 632 Lines 14-25 The Government may implement any "Quality measure" of health care services as they see fit.

PG 633 14-25/ 634 1-9 The Secretary may issue non-endorsed "Quality Measures" for Physician Services and Dialysis Services.





Now to prove that you are a liar, too, this, by Obama adviser Rattner:

"1. "Beyond Obamacare...WE need death panels.



2. ...unless we start allocating health care resources more prudently — rationing, by its proper name — the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget.

3. ...in the pantheon of toxic issues — the famous “third rails” of American politics — none stands taller than overtly acknowledging that elderly Americans are not entitled to every conceivable medical procedure or pharmaceutical."

4. Take Britain, which provides universal coverage with spending at proportionately almost half of American levels. Its National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence uses a complex quality-adjusted life year system to put an explicit value (up to about $48,000 per year) on a treatment’s ability to extend life."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/op...care.html?_r=0

 

[boedicca]

How far will The State go? This far if we let it: manadatory implants so that we are under surveillance...constantly.

Chances are you’re carrying a couple of RFID microchips now. And if you are, they’re sending out a 15-digit number that identifies you. That number can be picked up by what’s called an ISO compliant scanner. And they’re everywhere, too.

…

It’s not possible to interact with society in a meaningful way by not having a mobile phone. I think human implants are likely to go along a very similar route. It would be such a disadvantage to not have the implant that it essentially becomes not optional....

The Mark: Scientist Claims Human Microchip Implants Will Become "Not Optional"

 

[KNB]

It’s not possible to interact with society in a meaningful way by not having a mobile phone. I think human implants are likely to go along a very similar route. It would be such a disadvantage to not have the implant that it essentially becomes not optional....[/i]
The Mark: Scientist Claims Human Microchip Implants Will Become "Not Optional"

If that's true then why is everyone worried about some cows in the Nevada desert.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"...no government discussed in this thread is putting anyone to death."

Perhaps....

...but, there is this:

a) "[Democrat] GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE'

DENVER, March 28— Elderly people who are terminally ill have a ''duty to die and get out of the way'' instead of trying to prolong their lives by artificial means, Gov. Richard D. Lamm of Colorado said Tuesday."
GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE' - NYTimes.com


b) Democrat Tom Daschle, original nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department, and says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them.
Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey - Bloomberg



c) A key administration figure committed to cost cutting is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere.
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/
Downgrading American Medical Care | The American Spectator



d) ...slipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age.” The CER would identify (this is language from the draft report on the legislation) medical "items, procedures, and interventions" that it deems insufficiently effective or excessively expensive. They "will no longer be prescribed" by federal health programs.” Are you thinking ‘seniors’? George F. Will - How the GOP Should Measure the Stimulus




The Democrat desire is evident.

wow. since your point (c) is known to be false i'm not going to bother with the rest.

also, gov. lamm's quote is from 30 years ago.

Nothing I ever post is false.

You just did.

Much of your material is misanalysed and misinterpreted.

Reactionary freaks like you do not understand the consequences of Hitler had won: a fascist Britain and France, and eventually an authoritarian America in self protection. Plus all the evil that goes with a racial ideology of German fascism.

 

[Synthaholic]

How far will The State go? This far if we let it: manadatory implants so that we are under surveillance...constantly.http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-ne...ip-implants-will-become-not-optional_04242014

What about mandatory implants for the Itty Bitty Titty Club?

 

[ogibillm]

"...no government discussed in this thread is putting anyone to death."

Perhaps....

...but, there is this:

a) "[Democrat] GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE'

DENVER, March 28— Elderly people who are terminally ill have a ''duty to die and get out of the way'' instead of trying to prolong their lives by artificial means, Gov. Richard D. Lamm of Colorado said Tuesday."
GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE' - NYTimes.com


b) Democrat Tom Daschle, original nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department, and says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them.
Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey - Bloomberg



c) A key administration figure committed to cost cutting is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere.
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/
Downgrading American Medical Care | The American Spectator



d) ...slipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age.” The CER would identify (this is language from the draft report on the legislation) medical "items, procedures, and interventions" that it deems insufficiently effective or excessively expensive. They "will no longer be prescribed" by federal health programs.” Are you thinking ‘seniors’? George F. Will - How the GOP Should Measure the Stimulus




The Democrat desire is evident.

wow. since your point (c) is known to be false i'm not going to bother with the rest.

also, gov. lamm's quote is from 30 years ago.

Nothing I ever post is false.

well that's fine for you to believe, but it's clear that the piece quoted is on the over-utilization of medical care and is discussed as a way to avoid rationing.

social justice never enters into the discussion at all.

At least 7 factors drive overuse, 4 related to physicians and 3 related to patients. First, there is the matter of physician culture. Medical school education and postgraduate training emphasize thoroughness. When evaluating a patient, students, interns, and residents are trained to identify and praised for and graded on enumerating all possible diagnoses and tests that would confirm or exclude them. The thought is that the more thorough the evaluation, the more intelligent the student or house officer. Trainees who ignore the improbable "zebra" diagnoses are not deemed insightful. In medical training, meticulousness, not effectiveness, is rewarded.

This mentality carries over into practice. Peer recognition goes to the most thorough and aggressive physicians. The prudent physician is not deemed particularly competent, but rather inadequate. This culture is further reinforced by a unique understanding of professional obligations, specifically, the Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others.

 

[ogibillm]

How far will The State go? This far if we let it: manadatory implants so that we are under surveillance...constantly.

Chances are you’re carrying a couple of RFID microchips now. And if you are, they’re sending out a 15-digit number that identifies you. That number can be picked up by what’s called an ISO compliant scanner. And they’re everywhere, too.

…

It’s not possible to interact with society in a meaningful way by not having a mobile phone. I think human implants are likely to go along a very similar route. It would be such a disadvantage to not have the implant that it essentially becomes not optional....

The Mark: Scientist Claims Human Microchip Implants Will Become "Not Optional"

you're arguing against consumer choice?

 

[PoliticalChic]

wow. since your point (c) is known to be false i'm not going to bother with the rest.

also, gov. lamm's quote is from 30 years ago.

Nothing I ever post is false.

You just did.

Much of your material is misanalysed and misinterpreted.

Reactionary freaks like you do not understand the consequences of Hitler had won: a fascist Britain and France, and eventually an authoritarian America in self protection. Plus all the evil that goes with a racial ideology of German fascism.

Where are your examples?
Oh....there are none.

You used to me merely a moron.

Now you're a liar, too.

 

[PoliticalChic]

wow. since your point (c) is known to be false i'm not going to bother with the rest.

also, gov. lamm's quote is from 30 years ago.

Nothing I ever post is false.

well that's fine for you to believe, but it's clear that the piece quoted is on the over-utilization of medical care and is discussed as a way to avoid rationing.

social justice never enters into the discussion at all.

At least 7 factors drive overuse, 4 related to physicians and 3 related to patients. First, there is the matter of physician culture. Medical school education and postgraduate training emphasize thoroughness. When evaluating a patient, students, interns, and residents are trained to identify and praised for and graded on enumerating all possible diagnoses and tests that would confirm or exclude them. The thought is that the more thorough the evaluation, the more intelligent the student or house officer. Trainees who ignore the improbable "zebra" diagnoses are not deemed insightful. In medical training, meticulousness, not effectiveness, is rewarded.

This mentality carries over into practice. Peer recognition goes to the most thorough and aggressive physicians. The prudent physician is not deemed particularly competent, but rather inadequate. This culture is further reinforced by a unique understanding of professional obligations, specifically, the Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others.

With very little effort you have become our main source of greenhouse gases.

you windbag....you're the explanation of why the Hindenburg ended up the way it did.

 

[Pogo]

Nothing I ever post is false.

You just did.

Much of your material is misanalysed and misinterpreted.

Reactionary freaks like you do not understand the consequences of Hitler had won: a fascist Britain and France, and eventually an authoritarian America in self protection. Plus all the evil that goes with a racial ideology of German fascism.

Where are your examples?
Oh....there are none.

You used to me merely a moron.

Now you're a liar, too.

Uh -- where are yours?

Many use the emergency room as their primary physician......you dope.

Like .... who?

Link?

Back into the gutter you lying scum.

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC is a far right opus dei type of pro-fascist who believed that Hitler winning WWII would have better than the West. I am glad she blogs, for it allows us to identify the enemies of America.