Impeding changes to our Health Care system

[classicman]

Its also a wonderful extremist position to believe everything your party tells you. Unfortunately, or fortunately for me, I belong to neither party and choose to not rely on either one as a source of information. Independent corroboration is best, in my ever so humble opinion.

To continually attack someone who disagrees with your position or whatever your party says is another classic extremist cop out. You, my friend have tuned it into a fine art. You should be proud.

Originally Posted by classicman

Its also a wonderful extremist position to believe everything your party tells you. Unfortunately, or fortunately for me, I belong to neither party and choose to not rely on either one as a source of information. Independent corroboration is best, in my ever so humble opinion.

To continually attack someone who disagrees with your position or whatever your party says is another classic extremist cop out. You, my friend have tuned it into a fine art. You should be proud.

Yep....I'm proud of my understand of federal policy. It comes with 20+ years of experience (all but two of which have been with non-partisan public policy organizations), a lot of reading and talking with experts..as well as "critical thinking" as opposed to just "thinking to criticize" in which you engage.

And I have said repeatedly that neither the stimulus program nor the health reform proposal represented my view of the "best" or "perfect" approach and I pointed out the short-comings I saw in both, but that, IMO, both were still better than nothing and understood that both represented an approach that could receive enough support to be enacted and have a good chance at success.

I was honestly shocked, for example, that Merc (and prerhaps you as well) did not seem to have a clue that the largest single component of the Recovery Act was tax relief and not spending....or that he would repeatedly post columns screaming "death panels" (before finally backing away from that ignorance when called out on it)...or post industry funding studies as "objective"...and of course, your many negative/critical links in which you dont even have the balls to express an opinion at all...but just sit on the fence.

I have tried to answer questions here to the best of my understanding whenever asked, pointing to specific language in the legislation, rather than dodge and weave like you and Merc. And I am not the one who has flooded the discussions with partisan columns/opinions...then runs away from them when challenged.

Finally, I was a little disappointed that you would privately seek out and accept my understanding of policy and then mock it publicly, but I have gotten over that.

edit:
BTW, your non-partisan, objective stimuluswatch.org includes the jobs created on that Jennie-O grant award:
Jobs Summary: represented as full time equivalent weeks of work (Total jobs reported: 286).

Does that mean stimuluswatch.org is now biased?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Redux

Yep....I'm proud of my understand of federal policy. It comes with 20+ years of experience (all but two of which have been with non-partisan public policy organizations), a lot of reading and talking with experts..as well as "critical thinking" as opposed to just "thinking to criticize" in which you engage.

Without the 20 plus years of experience, most of us can only think critically and utilize unbiased sources to engage in critical thinking. Yet you continue to sling mud and offer backhanded cheapshots and demeaning posts toward anyone who differs from your opinion.

I was honestly shocked, for example, that Merc (and prerhaps you as well)

lumping people together again - BS

your many negative/critical links in which you dont even have the balls to express an opinion at all...but just sit on the fence.

More demeaning cheap shots.
I'd prefer to discuss and get a better understanding of an intensely complex issue before drawing an opinion. I believe I was doing that before the degradation of this, and other threads. You prefer to continue the insults and make your conclusions based upon that which you interpret things to be when they are not certain. Good for you. FYI - I think most intelligent non-partisan people are, as you put it "on the fence" on the healthcare issue. We want effective reform, but how that translates is another matter. You and the leftist extremists see what you want to see, just like those on the right.

I have tried to answer questions here to the best of my understanding whenever asked, pointing to specific language in the legislation, rather than dodge and weave like you and Merc.

Do you get a warm fuzzy feeling posting all the negative cheapshots?
I don't have the answers - I honestly don't think anyone does - That in and of itself is troubling to me.

And I am not the one who has flooded the discussions with partisan columns/opinions...then runs away from them when challenged.

I am not here to defend their opinions. Just to bring an alternative perspective to the discussion. Just because I post something doesn't mean I agree or disagree with it. Many times it is an angle or point that I hadn't thought of. I used to enjoy getting other peoples input and discussing things here. Since you have reactivated yourself that has ceased.

Finally, I was a little disappointed that you would privately seek out and accept my understanding of policy and then mock it publicly, but I have gotten over that.

I asked you for some Gov't links for my sons friend knowing that you work in the Gov't . I never asked for your understanding of policy. please don't get over it, take it and shove it somewhere.
I was quite thankful and appreciative to you as well. Something which you have conveniently forgotten to mention. Since you have gotten it out can we be done with it? At this point you might as well post them in their entirety. I would like anyone else considering PM-ing you to know that you cannot be trusted with the contents of a PM. They will either be used to discredit or demean them or will not be kept private. A valuable lesson learned. Thanks for reminding me.

BTW, your non-partisan, objective stimuluswatch.org includes the jobs created on that Jennie-O grant award:
Jobs Summary: represented as full time equivalent weeks of work (Total jobs reported: 286).
Does that mean stimuluswatch.org is now biased?

How could you possibly draw that conclusion? My issue with that was primarily using stimulus money that was presented as creating and developing infrastructure was instead used for deli meat. We have already discussed the jobs saved/created issue. Were those 286 created, saved, full-time, part-time. The way the reporting is done now there is no answer. Either way, I still disagree with the way the money was spent. THAT was and remains my point.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

I was honestly shocked, for example, that Merc (and prerhaps you as well) did not seem to have a clue that the largest single component of the Recovery Act was tax relief and not spending....or that he would repeatedly post columns screaming "death panels" (before finally backing away from that ignorance when called out on it)...

That is a completely false statement. I posted one bit about "Death Panels" and retracted my position when presented with more accurate data. And yet you continue to deny that rationing of healthcare will occur.

I have tried to answer questions here to the best of my understanding whenever asked, pointing to specific language in the legislation, rather than dodge and weave like you and Merc. And I am not the one who has flooded the discussions with partisan columns/opinions...then runs away from them when challenged.

Mischaraterized again. I have quoted specific language from the Bill, and when in error I corrected myself. What you consider "flooding" a discussion I consider the posting of information from known subject matter experts in health policy, not the ramblings of a partisan hack for the Demoncrats.

I understand.

You dont like when tw or I or anyone call you out on on the fact that all you do is criticize using the standard extremist talking points (BTW, that is not critical thinking) or you post critical partisan opinions of others w/o comment...and NEVER offering anything constructive.

You dont like the sitmulus program (even though the evidence is overwhelming that it is working) and again demonstrated your ignorance about it....It was never ALL about infrastructure jobs. And, you never offer a better solution.

You're all over the place on the health reform legislation. I have no clue where you really stand. You bend like a cheap cigar, depending which way the wind is blowing in the Cellar that day.

You bitch about the banks and then bitch when a bill is enacted in the House to address the issue through new regulations.

[classicman]

Avoid, deflect and demean. Typical.

Are you enjoying the misrepresentations of my opinions, putting words in my mouth, telling me what I do or don't stand for, what I like or dislike ...

[Shawnee123]

I am not here to defend their opinions. Just to bring an alternative perspective to the discussion. Just because I post something doesn't mean I agree or disagree with it. Many times it is an angle or point that I hadn't thought of. I used to enjoy getting other peoples input and discussing things here. Since you have reactivated yourself that has ceased.

Oh yeah, before Redux came along these threads were all about intelligent and reasonable discourse.

He singlehandedly changed the tone of the place from rainbows and butterflies to the current hell of spite and hate and regurgitation of pop politics.

[SamIam]

Yeah, I've noticed myself how Redux brings the entire tone of the place down. If only we had more posters like UG or members who shall remain nameless who threaten other members with bodily harm. Reading that junk certainly makes my day. NOT.

[classicman]

Well this "member who shall not remain nameless" will not put up with anyone calling my wife a "gonorrhea dripping whore". Perhaps thats ok with you. It isn't ok with me, nor will it ever be.

And you'll note that it was an emotional outburst which I deleted and apologized for.

[Shawnee123]

You're not married...

So confusing.

However, if you had a wife and she were called a gonorrhea-dripping whore then perhaps you'd have a case about that. It's like the Cunt Calling Fiasco of 2010: ain't no fun for the whore or the cunt, let me tell you.

I won't feign innocence of any shit-slinging, but I'm hardly going to point at Redux and say he broke the internet!

He has provided some insider's facts. These facts don't make you happy because you can no longer wax poetic and have anyone still think there are viable opinions (when you point to pasted articles you refer to as fact, it is not your long-suffering opinion) being presented.

*shrug*

[Pete Zicato]

Originally Posted by classicman

Well this "member who shall not remain nameless" will not put up with anyone calling my wife a "gonorrhea dripping whore". Perhaps thats ok with you. It isn't ok with me, nor will it ever be.

And you'll note that it was an emotional outburst which I deleted and apologized for.

I don't get why you brought this up, classic. SamIAm was defending Redux, not TW. AFAIK, redux has never made a personal attack.

I don't know about other folks, but I tend to flip the bozo bit on people who use personal attacks. If your intention is to convince others to your point of view, keep it rational and informational.

BTW if anyone is wondering where the whole gonorrhea thing came from, you can start here.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Pete Zicato

I don't get why you brought this up, classic. SamIAm was defending Redux, not TW. AFAIK, redux has never made a personal attack.

I've been called a few things by him. I was trying to point out the double standard. Merc calls someone a bad name and is an asshole. redux does it and gets a pass or the lil tag-alongs come and pile on. I failed. I realize that. I'm done with it.

I don't know about other folks, but I tend to flip the bozo bit on people who use personal attacks. If your intention is to convince others to your point of view, keep it rational and informational.

So noted and will try harder to do so in the future.

[Pete Zicato]

Originally Posted by classicman

I've been called a few things by him. I was trying to point out the double standard. Merc calls someone a bad name and is an asshole. redux does it and gets a pass or the lil tag-alongs come and pile on. I failed. I realize that. I'm done with it.

So noted and will try harder to do so in the future.

Both Merc and TW have made personal attacks. As far as I am concerned neither should get a pass on this kind of behavior (as I indicated in the original thread). And Bruce called TW on that language, so he did not get a pass even then.

I have not seen a personal attack by redux. Can anyone document this?

[SamIam]

I don't recall Redux sinking to the extreme nastiness that some other members resort to. And I was NOT defending tw's unpleasant comment, either - thank you.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Pete Zicato

Both Merc and TW have made personal attacks. ... And Bruce called TW on that language, so he did not get a pass even then.

Let's not forget that I preceded those intentional personal attacks by saying I was going to do it because of constant personal attacks. It was started because another was constantly posting personal attacks AND the powers that be choose to ignore it. I do not apologize for escalating so that the cheap shots would be stopped. And am quite pleased how so many here have finally stood up to address the problem.

Before I started replying to constant insults with equivalent replies, I said exactly what I was going to do and said why. I am now seeing results that I intended. Sharp rebuke has changed the tone in a Cellar that had become a haven for cheap shots. It is a shame things had to become so nasty. I am only sorry that it had to get that nasty to fix things. I said exactly what I was going to do and why before I started.