Why does the left hate St Jude?

[there4eyeM]

Interesting to see who the last posters are, sometimes.

 

[Tresha91203]

Ivanka auctioned off a coffee with her for 70k, which went to St Jude. Living in Memphis, Sgt Ju de e is a great charity. Kids get treatment, parents never pay a dime.
But the left has to put politics above everything and bitches about it. If it was Michelle Obama or one of their kids, they wouldn't care a bit.

Fucking disgusting people who do not like charities and place politics over everything.

Trump Family Tried To Auction Coffee With Ivanka, Raising Ethical Concerns

Michelle didn't do something likethis, that's the point.

Paying for access is what you guys accused the Clintons of doing, and here you are doing it.

I thought they were paying St. Jude. It is a charity auction. Ivanka doesn't get the money. She doesn't get paid.

 

[westwall]

Ivanka auctioned off a coffee with her for 70k, which went to St Jude. Living in Memphis, Sgt Ju de e is a great charity. Kids get treatment, parents never pay a dime.
But the left has to put politics above everything and bitches about it. If it was Michelle Obama or one of their kids, they wouldn't care a bit.

Fucking disgusting people who do not like charities and place politics over everything.



Trump Family Tried To Auction Coffee With Ivanka, Raising Ethical Concerns

Christian organization that runs on charity and not off the government teat is why.

Yep. We've been a supporter of St. Judes for decades.

 

[sakinago]

There's a difference between a civil war, and then the arming AND setting up a no fly zone for one side that quite frankly really wasn't much better than the side in power. Then the original power was knocked out, and a power vacuum formed, surprise surprise.

So your argument is, it's ok for Obama to do what bush did, because he did so through proxys?

I'm not saying it was okay. In fact, I think it was actually bad policy.

but here's the thing.

1) Obama didn't lie about what we were doing or why we were doing it.
2) Obama got international support for the action from the UN, the Arab League and NATO, while Bush ignored all attempts to resolve the matter diplomatically.
3) Obama helped people get rid of a dictator they didnt' want. No one in Iraq really wanted to get rid of Saddam except for the Kurds. If they did, then we could have armed Proxies. But that was our policy from 1991 to 2002, and it didn't work.

Khadafy was gone in a few months after the fighting started.

Look we probably have similar views on what should be done concerning foreign policy. I just think you buy into narratives that are more convenient for your side at the time. I'm guilty of the same but I try my best to remain consistent with my values. So...

1. It didn't seem convenient to you that as soon as Gaddafi tried to take their oil out of the US dollar and instead trade it as their dinar, that's when the US and France decided to get involved? I mean there's been civil unrest in that country since Gaddafi has been in power...but it just so happens that at the time...thats the country they took drastic intervention to ensure Gaddafi was out of power. Despite not doing it anywhere else during the time of the "Arab spring". Yea I'd say the reasons we went into lybia were lies.

2. Not much to say other than I don't believe that a group of unelected foreign diplomats should be able to overrule our constitutional republic...who happens to give a ton of tax payer dollars to them. Our elected officials were put there to represent us, as people, not pander to an global organization that has zero care for you and me, and even people who actually really need their help. The people who actually really need their help only get such help when it's politically convenient. There's been genocide going on in Sudan for quite some time now, child soldiers in Uganda, and actual government sanctioned slavery going on In UN countries. The UN has its usefulness sure, but is overstepping where they shouldn't, and underperforming where they are direly needed. They are in no way any such moral authority to look up to.

3. No both the sunis and the Kurds wanted to oust saddam. They together make up a majority. Iraq was 3 nations, Sunni, Shiite, and Kurds, thrown together into one by Sykes-Picot, for one reason...to get these 3 nations to quarrel with each other, fund and back a strong man to take over while everyone's fighting with each other, and have control of that region through that dictator. So by your standards, bush indeed did the right thing by taking out saddam because of unpopularity?

 

[sakinago]

Socialized medicine does exactly what socialism does, just on medical level. Creates a utilitarian environment where one does/should not exist. It's very convenient for the everyday joe making up the majority with a cold, broken arm, etc. but when it comes to elective surgeries needed, and sometimes even urgent surgeries needed...it's the few who need these and the few who get the short end of the stick. Waiting list for chemo treatments, a cane instead of a new knee, pain pills instead of spinal fusion etc. My work is 4 hours from the Canadian boarder, yet we get patients from Canada for chemo infusions who direly need them...so why aren't accusing the Canadian system of letting people die?

Mostly because Canadian Medical Tourism is a myth.

Phantoms In The Snow: Canadians’ Use Of Health Care Services In The United States

To examine the extent to which Canadian residents seek medical care across the border, we collected data about Canadians’ use of services from ambulatory care facilities and hospitals located in Michigan, New York State, and Washington State during 1994–1998. We also collected information from several Canadian sources, including the 1996 National Population Health Survey, the provincial Ministries of Health, and the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association. Results from these sources do not support the widespread perception that Canadian residents seek care extensively in the United States. Indeed, the numbers found are so small as to be barely detectible relative to the use of care by Canadians at home.

Almost 40 percent of the facilities we surveyed reported treating no Canadians, while an additional 40 percent had seen fewer than ten patients (Exhibit 1⇓). Fifteen percent of respondent sites reported treating 10–25 Canadian patients, and only about 5 percent reported seeing more than 25 during the previous year (generally 25–75 patients; none reported more than 100). These findings were fairly consistent across the service categories. The overall response rate was 67 percent, and it varied across type of clinical facility from 56 percent for ambulatory surgery centers to 80 percent for cancer centers.

I searched for health affairs in both pub med, and OMICS. Not there. I also read it and found zero empirical data in it. Not peer reviewed medical journal, but made to look like one. I'll even search for it on the hospitals database on lunch break, but not finding it in my app, which is pretty much the same thing. But yea I'm pretty sure this is a gun for hire publication. And I'm not lying about the fact that we do have on average 4 Canadian patients in chemo regimes at any given time. For the lay person that doesn't mean 4 Canadians in my building a day, it means 4 patients receiving chemo regimes from us for however long it is prescribed for. For a like month a year ago we didn't have any, but the law of averages corrected that.

 

[JoeB131]

I thought they were paying St. Jude. It is a charity auction. Ivanka doesn't get the money. She doesn't get paid.

Don't be naive... this is selling influence.

 

[JoeB131]

I searched for health affairs in both pub med, and OMICS. Not there. I also read it and found zero empirical data in it. Not peer reviewed medical journal, but made to look like one. I'll even search for it on the hospitals database on lunch break, but not finding it in my app, which is pretty much the same thing. But yea I'm pretty sure this is a gun for hire publication. And I'm not lying about the fact that we do have on average 4 Canadian patients in chemo regimes at any given time. For the lay person that doesn't mean 4 Canadians in my building a day, it means 4 patients receiving chemo regimes from us for however long it is prescribed for. For a like month a year ago we didn't have any, but the law of averages corrected that.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-...e-US-border-to-receive-US-health-care-persist

I worked within the US healthcare system for my entire career, then became a Canadian permanent resident in 2013, so I've seen healthcare from both sides of the border. Although my personal experience with the healthcare system here in Canada is limited, my in-laws (who've been here for many decades) have had extensive experience with it. Many of my family members--the Conservative ones--remain skeptical even after hearing my first-hand experiences and those of my husband's family. I think there are 3 main reasons people still believe medical tourists are the norm:

1. The rumors persist because so many people don't "believe" facts unless they are told to them by a source that they already trust. Even when these facts are countered by someone they know, it takes a lot to break through years of skepticism crafted by both real facts and propaganda.
2. Health care for all does not appeal to Americans as a whole, conservative ones in particular, because for some reason they have this idea that nobody worthy of care is slipping through the cracks. Until it's someone they love, that is, and then they usually experience quick conversion.
3. And most importantly, they persist because American insurance companies really, really do not want the US to adopt a Canadian system, and they spend a ton of money to ensure that Americans keep right on hurting themselves.

 

[JoeB131]

Look we probably have similar views on what should be done concerning foreign policy. I just think you buy into narratives that are more convenient for your side at the time. I'm guilty of the same but I try my best to remain consistent with my values. So...

1. It didn't seem convenient to you that as soon as Gaddafi tried to take their oil out of the US dollar and instead trade it as their dinar, that's when the US and France decided to get involved? I mean there's been civil unrest in that country since Gaddafi has been in power...but it just so happens that at the time...thats the country they took drastic intervention to ensure Gaddafi was out of power. Despite not doing it anywhere else during the time of the "Arab spring". Yea I'd say the reasons we went into lybia were lies.

I do think that the French did manipulate world opinion on Libya for their own purposes. That said, the thing is, Khadafy was kind of a bastard. Let's not forget, this is the guy who blew up Pan Am 103, killing hundreds, who armed just about every group of radical assholes in Europe through the 80's and 90's. If the Europeans took advantage of the situation, it wasn't like Khadafy was sitting their minding his own business.

2. Not much to say other than I don't believe that a group of unelected foreign diplomats should be able to overrule our constitutional republic...who happens to give a ton of tax payer dollars to them. Our elected officials were put there to represent us, as people, not pander to an global organization that has zero care for you and me, and even people who actually really need their help. The people who actually really need their help only get such help when it's politically convenient. There's been genocide going on in Sudan for quite some time now, child soldiers in Uganda, and actual government sanctioned slavery going on In UN countries. The UN has its usefulness sure, but is overstepping where they shouldn't, and underperforming where they are direly needed. They are in no way any such moral authority to look up to.

Here the thing... Congress had every opportunity to put an end to what Obama was doing in Libya. they didn't. In fact, most of them didn't give a crap about Libya until Stevens was killed.

The thing was, we call on the UN, NATO and the Arab League as partners to help keep the peace in the world, and the one time they get their shit together and say, "Yup, this is something we need to take care of", that's the time we don't get involved, after all this asshole has done to us? I really don't think so.

3. No both the sunis and the Kurds wanted to oust saddam. They together make up a majority. Iraq was 3 nations, Sunni, Shiite, and Kurds, thrown together into one by Sykes-Picot, for one reason...to get these 3 nations to quarrel with each other, fund and back a strong man to take over while everyone's fighting with each other, and have control of that region through that dictator. So by your standards, bush indeed did the right thing by taking out saddam because of unpopularity?

Not really. They weren't trying very hard to take him out, were they? they were perfectly happy with the status quo, until Bush fucked everything up. (which come to think of it, is what he did best. Fuck everything up.)

 

[Tresha91203]

I thought they were paying St. Jude. It is a charity auction. Ivanka doesn't get the money. She doesn't get paid.

Don't be naive... this is selling influence.

Ugh. You are making crap up. It's not even Donald, it's Ivanka ... for her brother. Eric has a particular affinity for St Jude. He's contributed heavily and fundraised for them long before Donald ran. If Donald had never run for president, Ivanka would be auctioning off a dinner w her for St Jude. They do this fundraising thing every year! Eric and Ivanka are the philanthropists, not Donald.

 

[sakinago]

I searched for health affairs in both pub med, and OMICS. Not there. I also read it and found zero empirical data in it. Not peer reviewed medical journal, but made to look like one. I'll even search for it on the hospitals database on lunch break, but not finding it in my app, which is pretty much the same thing. But yea I'm pretty sure this is a gun for hire publication. And I'm not lying about the fact that we do have on average 4 Canadian patients in chemo regimes at any given time. For the lay person that doesn't mean 4 Canadians in my building a day, it means 4 patients receiving chemo regimes from us for however long it is prescribed for. For a like month a year ago we didn't have any, but the law of averages corrected that.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-...e-US-border-to-receive-US-health-care-persist

I worked within the US healthcare system for my entire career, then became a Canadian permanent resident in 2013, so I've seen healthcare from both sides of the border. Although my personal experience with the healthcare system here in Canada is limited, my in-laws (who've been here for many decades) have had extensive experience with it. Many of my family members--the Conservative ones--remain skeptical even after hearing my first-hand experiences and those of my husband's family. I think there are 3 main reasons people still believe medical tourists are the norm:

1. The rumors persist because so many people don't "believe" facts unless they are told to them by a source that they already trust. Even when these facts are countered by someone they know, it takes a lot to break through years of skepticism crafted by both real facts and propaganda.
2. Health care for all does not appeal to Americans as a whole, conservative ones in particular, because for some reason they have this idea that nobody worthy of care is slipping through the cracks. Until it's someone they love, that is, and then they usually experience quick conversion.
3. And most importantly, they persist because American insurance companies really, really do not want the US to adopt a Canadian system, and they spend a ton of money to ensure that Americans keep right on hurting themselves.

Again the article looks like a gun for hire article. And I'm not claiming that there are hoards of Canadians coming across the boarder for healthcare. But there are Canadians in need of specialized care that they cannot get in time through the Canadian system, and who spend their entire life savings (now go fund me pages are taking care of this) on getting the care they need in the US. It's a utilitarian system no matter which way you want to spin it. They are the few, that the system cannot afford time/money wise. Is that system convenient for the average joe, yes absolutely. But when grandpa needs a new knee in the us, grandpa gets that knee quick.

You want further proof of this look at the amount of doctors in specialized medicine in the us vs the number of doctors in specialized medicine in Canada. They're all practically family practitioners over there. Even better, look at the headway in medical research and technology the US has made for years compared to every other country on the planet. The numbers are staggering.

If you surrender control of something as broad as medicine to a single entity, that entity, by nature, is only capable of processing the masses as statistics and demographics, not as the individuals they are (and the individual needs that come with each individual).

 

[sakinago]

Look we probably have similar views on what should be done concerning foreign policy. I just think you buy into narratives that are more convenient for your side at the time. I'm guilty of the same but I try my best to remain consistent with my values. So...

1. It didn't seem convenient to you that as soon as Gaddafi tried to take their oil out of the US dollar and instead trade it as their dinar, that's when the US and France decided to get involved? I mean there's been civil unrest in that country since Gaddafi has been in power...but it just so happens that at the time...thats the country they took drastic intervention to ensure Gaddafi was out of power. Despite not doing it anywhere else during the time of the "Arab spring". Yea I'd say the reasons we went into lybia were lies.

I do think that the French did manipulate world opinion on Libya for their own purposes. That said, the thing is, Khadafy was kind of a bastard. Let's not forget, this is the guy who blew up Pan Am 103, killing hundreds, who armed just about every group of radical assholes in Europe through the 80's and 90's. If the Europeans took advantage of the situation, it wasn't like Khadafy was sitting their minding his own business.

2. Not much to say other than I don't believe that a group of unelected foreign diplomats should be able to overrule our constitutional republic...who happens to give a ton of tax payer dollars to them. Our elected officials were put there to represent us, as people, not pander to an global organization that has zero care for you and me, and even people who actually really need their help. The people who actually really need their help only get such help when it's politically convenient. There's been genocide going on in Sudan for quite some time now, child soldiers in Uganda, and actual government sanctioned slavery going on In UN countries. The UN has its usefulness sure, but is overstepping where they shouldn't, and underperforming where they are direly needed. They are in no way any such moral authority to look up to.

Here the thing... Congress had every opportunity to put an end to what Obama was doing in Libya. they didn't. In fact, most of them didn't give a crap about Libya until Stevens was killed.

The thing was, we call on the UN, NATO and the Arab League as partners to help keep the peace in the world, and the one time they get their shit together and say, "Yup, this is something we need to take care of", that's the time we don't get involved, after all this asshole has done to us? I really don't think so.

3. No both the sunis and the Kurds wanted to oust saddam. They together make up a majority. Iraq was 3 nations, Sunni, Shiite, and Kurds, thrown together into one by Sykes-Picot, for one reason...to get these 3 nations to quarrel with each other, fund and back a strong man to take over while everyone's fighting with each other, and have control of that region through that dictator. So by your standards, bush indeed did the right thing by taking out saddam because of unpopularity?

Not really. They weren't trying very hard to take him out, were they? they were perfectly happy with the status quo, until Bush fucked everything up. (which come to think of it, is what he did best. Fuck everything up.)

1. Yea Gaddafi was asshole, but there are and have been much bigger assholes we did nothing about. Gaddafi was only an asshole to the administration when he tried to get his oil traded off the US Dollar. Which is kind of an un-asshole thing to do for rest of French Africa, that's been getting shit on by the west for decades. And yea congress didn't do anything...but it was also controlled by the democrats, fresh off of the election of our first black president.

2. There's a good amount of petroleum politics going into that scenario that is also fueling the UN.

3. That's like saying the South Koreans are fine with Kim jeoung un. We're talking about people with no viable means to go against their dictator. Even then they (the Kurds) still tried and had their own genocide to fight against. Saddam used chemical weapons to keep the Kurds in check

 

[Clementine]

Ivanka auctioned off a coffee with her for 70k, which went to St Jude. Living in Memphis, Sgt Ju de e is a great charity. Kids get treatment, parents never pay a dime.
But the left has to put politics above everything and bitches about it. If it was Michelle Obama or one of their kids, they wouldn't care a bit.

Fucking disgusting people who do not like charities and place politics over everything.



Trump Family Tried To Auction Coffee With Ivanka, Raising Ethical Concerns

They are going to pick apart anything the Trumps do. Nothing will please them and we may as well get used to seeing the entire family treated like dirt all the time.

 

[JoeB131]

Ugh. You are making crap up. It's not even Donald, it's Ivanka ... for her brother. Eric has a particular affinity for St Jude. He's contributed heavily and fundraised for them long before Donald ran. If Donald had never run for president, Ivanka would be auctioning off a dinner w her for St Jude. They do this fundraising thing every year! Eric and Ivanka are the philanthropists, not Donald.

Here's the thing. No one would pay 70K to have dinner with Ivanka if her dad wasn't Resident-Elect (I refuse to call him President).

so this is influence peddling... plain and simple.

 

[JoeB131]

1. Yea Gaddafi was asshole, but there are and have been much bigger assholes we did nothing about. Gaddafi was only an asshole to the administration when he tried to get his oil traded off the US Dollar. Which is kind of an un-asshole thing to do for rest of French Africa, that's been getting shit on by the west for decades. And yea congress didn't do anything...but it was also controlled by the democrats, fresh off of the election of our first black president.

I think you are a little confused here, buddy. this happened in 2011, when the GOP just took the house...

You can come up wiht all sorts of conspiracy theories, but the reason why Gaddaffi is with his 76 virgins right now is because his own people got fed up with his shit... and when the money ran out to pay African Mercenaries, he was done.

 

[JoeB131]

They are the few, that the system cannot afford time/money wise. Is that system convenient for the average joe, yes absolutely. But when grandpa needs a new knee in the us, grandpa gets that knee quick.

You obviously have never had to fight with an insurance company to get treatment, or you wouldn't say anything so fantastically stupid.

I was a hard right wing Republican, until I slipped on some ice and busted up my knee. My employer and Cigna quickly cured me any Republican stupidity... although getting my knee treated took considerably more work.

 

[Tresha91203]

Ugh. You are making crap up. It's not even Donald, it's Ivanka ... for her brother. Eric has a particular affinity for St Jude. He's contributed heavily and fundraised for them long before Donald ran. If Donald had never run for president, Ivanka would be auctioning off a dinner w her for St Jude. They do this fundraising thing every year! Eric and Ivanka are the philanthropists, not Donald.

Here's the thing. No one would pay 70K to have dinner with Ivanka if her dad wasn't Resident-Elect (I refuse to call him President).

so this is influence peddling... plain and simple.

A "meet & greet" Brittney Spears auction is valued at 10K. Certainly, Ivanka is at least 7x more valuable than frickin Brittney Spears, even if her father had NEVER run for president.

Charitybuzz: Meet Britney Spears with 2 Tickets to her Las Vegas Show - Lot 1209403

It's odd, this celebrity auction thing. I mean, what has Paris Hilton done for the world? You wouldn't believe what an auction for coffee with her would bring in for a needy charity. I know of no one interested in peddling to St. Jude, but whatever. It's no different than Prince William auctioning off his Range Rover for charity. It's just bad now because a Trump is involved.

 

[JoeB131]

A "meet & greet" Brittney Spears auction is valued at 10K. Certainly, Ivanka is at least 7x more valuable than frickin Brittney Spears, even if her father had NEVER run for president.

Why? Most of us never heard of Ivanka Trump before her father's practical joke on the GOP went too far. I never heard of her before this year. And after hearing Trump's creepy talk about how he'd like to bang her if she wasn't his daughter, I kind of wish I hadn't.

It's odd, this celebrity auction thing. I mean, what has Paris Hilton done for the world? You wouldn't believe what an auction for coffee with her would bring in for a needy charity. I know of no one interested in peddling to St. Jude, but whatever. It's no different than Prince William auctioning off his Range Rover for charity. It's just bad now because a Trump is involved.

Brittany Spears and Prince William don't make policy. Trump does.

 

[sakinago]

They are the few, that the system cannot afford time/money wise. Is that system convenient for the average joe, yes absolutely. But when grandpa needs a new knee in the us, grandpa gets that knee quick.

You obviously have never had to fight with an insurance company to get treatment, or you wouldn't say anything so fantastically stupid.

I was a hard right wing Republican, until I slipped on some ice and busted up my knee. My employer and Cigna quickly cured me any Republican stupidity... although getting my knee treated took considerably more work.

NHS hospital elective procedure waiting times 2014 | United Kingdom

These are all very common elective surgeries here that get taken care of quickly and conveniently in the US. There's also a lot of other statistics on that site as well.

I don't try to defend the current/past system as infallible, or as the best, or running on all cylinders. But it does have some major major advantages that should not be overlooked. One of those areas is how we greatly reward and fund medical research.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/807796

I am sorry you had such a hard time with your knee. I don't wish that on anyone.

 

[sakinago]

1. Yea Gaddafi was asshole, but there are and have been much bigger assholes we did nothing about. Gaddafi was only an asshole to the administration when he tried to get his oil traded off the US Dollar. Which is kind of an un-asshole thing to do for rest of French Africa, that's been getting shit on by the west for decades. And yea congress didn't do anything...but it was also controlled by the democrats, fresh off of the election of our first black president.

I think you are a little confused here, buddy. this happened in 2011, when the GOP just took the house...

You can come up wiht all sorts of conspiracy theories, but the reason why Gaddaffi is with his 76 virgins right now is because his own people got fed up with his shit... and when the money ran out to pay African Mercenaries, he was done.

You're right about the congress control, I though it happened earlier in obamas term...but what I'm stating isn't conspiracy theory. Gaddafi did try to get his oil off the US dollar. Our government responded by setting up a no fly zone, which Gaddafi no longer had air superiority over rebels, which we (the US) knew would give the rebels an edge to win. When they did no such thing in any of the other Arab spring countries at the time. And now that is oil is being traded on the USD.

 

[Syriusly]

Ivanka auctioned off a coffee with her for 70k, which went to St Jude. Living in Memphis, Sgt Ju de e is a great charity. Kids get treatment, parents never pay a dime.
But the left has to put politics above everything and bitches about it. If it was Michelle Obama or one of their kids, they wouldn't care a bit.

Fucking disgusting people who do not like charities and place politics over everything.

Trump Family Tried To Auction Coffee With Ivanka, Raising Ethical Concerns

Michelle didn't do something likethis, that's the point.

Paying for access is what you guys accused the Clintons of doing, and here you are doing it.

I thought they were paying St. Jude. It is a charity auction. Ivanka doesn't get the money. She doesn't get paid.

It is the same 'ethical concerns' raised by the Clinton Foundation- people paying a charity to gain access to a politician.

Personally, I think it is as stupid as the Clinton allegations- but at the root- that is the contention.