Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 289

Thread: The President Barack Obama Discussion Thread

  1. #101
    Cyburbian The One's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where Valley Fever Lives
    Posts
    7,527
    Blog entries
    1

    Hmmm.....

    Quote Originally posted by Whose Yur Planner View post
    Personally, if I was Obama I would resign. I think this county has become ungovernable. I though that sports were our gladitoral games, our bread and circuses. I was wrong, its politics and Washington DC is our Coliseum.

    Folks, he's only been in office 2 months and he inherited a horrible mess. Obama has to get us going in the right direction while appeasing the different types of people that make up the democrats. He has to repair our standing with the rest of the world. The Republicans are only conserned about the next election cycle and getting back into power while limiting Obama's damage to the people who actually run their party. Basically, they are useless.

    At least he is trying in spite of all the odds, all the problems and the constant second guessing and backstabbing. We elected him to get us out of the very big ditch that W and his crew ran us into. Let's at least let him try before trying to wrench the steering wheel out of his hands.
    Well said.......gotta give the guy a shot.....it would be difficult to drive the family car into a tree when the engine is dead and all the tires are flat By the way all new cars are upside down in their loans once they leave the dealership, I don't care how great a deal you get and that's counting the down payment and trade in sometimes
    "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    John Kenneth Galbraith

  2. #102
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,593
    Obama is screwing up his chance to really fix the health care system. Instead of sacking up and exploring single payer he is looking at creating a huge mess that is only going to make things worse. And whats the deal with the democrats not even letting single payer advocates participate in the discussion - limiting the policy forulation pretty much to insurance executives is not going to help anyone. What a freaking corrupt system this is. Bunch of jerk faces.

  3. #103
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    Obama is screwing up his chance to really fix the health care system. Instead of sacking up and exploring single payer he is looking at creating a huge mess that is only going to make things worse. And whats the deal with the democrats not even letting single payer advocates participate in the discussion - limiting the policy forulation pretty much to insurance executives is not going to help anyone. What a freaking corrupt system this is. Bunch of jerk faces.
    The day could be saved yet, as long as there is a public (gov) insurance plan. The corporate heath interest is TERRIFIED of such a possibility. If that is not included as a minimum, then he will have failed terribly at health care reform.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  4. #104
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,593
    Quote Originally posted by Duke Of Dystopia View post
    The day could be saved yet, as long as there is a public (gov) insurance plan. The corporate heath interest is TERRIFIED of such a possibility. If that is not included as a minimum, then he will have failed terribly at health care reform.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090514/...ealth_overhaul

    This sounds terrible. Its only going to make things worse and not do anything to reign in skyrocketing costs.

    All things considered - Obama really sucks. So far my opinion of him is that he is going to be the equivalent to domestic policy that Bush was to foreign policy. Bush brought us to the brink of disaster and Obama is going to just push us off the ledge.

  5. #105
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090514/...ealth_overhaul

    This sounds terrible. Its only going to make things worse and not do anything to reign in skyrocketing costs.

    All things considered - Obama really sucks. So far my opinion of him is that he is going to be the equivalent to domestic policy that Bush was to foreign policy. Bush brought us to the brink of disaster and Obama is going to just push us off the ledge.
    Read the end of your own article. The for profit health insurers are terrified of the public insurer option because it cuts the profit out of the industry, bringing down the cost of providing health care. The condition of forcing competition has them running scared. That should tell you something. If it scares them, it is probably what we need.

    Again, access to health care should be a right, not something people wish they had. It does not belong as a function of a non health care business. Business may still have to be the collector and conduit, but they should not have to deal with the provision and picking of the health coverage.

    Under the present model, competition to fix a broken arm @ $12 or @ $10K is laughable, because neither is affordable. "I am sorry for going through the admittance procedure, but I found out that the hospital across town is $2k cheaper. I am going over there instead." What does it matter when it is unaffordable at any option offered? What does it take to get across that something has to change, and it just might cost something to do it?
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  6. #106
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,593
    Quote Originally posted by Duke Of Dystopia View post
    Read the end of your own article. The for profit health insurers are terrified of the public insurer option because it cuts the profit out of the industry, bringing down the cost of providing health care. The condition of forcing competition has them running scared. That should tell you something. If it scares them, it is probably what we need.

    Again, access to health care should be a right, not something people wish they had. It does not belong as a function of a non health care business. Business may still have to be the collector and conduit, but they should not have to deal with the provision and picking of the health coverage.

    Under the present model, competition to fix a broken arm @ $12 or @ $10K is laughable, because neither is affordable. "I am sorry for going through the admittance procedure, but I found out that the hospital across town is $2k cheaper. I am going over there instead." What does it matter when it is unaffordable at any option offered? What does it take to get across that something has to change, and it just might cost something to do it?

    Something has to change but I don't think that what they are proposing is going far enough. Because its sort of a half-a$$ attempt i think its only going to make things worse. Requiring people to have insurance but not providing it as a fundamental right as a citizen is just going to create more problems. Creating one more insurance but leaving all the other for profit insurance companies in place in similar structures is not going to really do anything. Getting the insurance companies to agree to a 5% per year increase in cost as opposed to a 6% a year increase is laughable, yet the administration is touting that as a HUGE success. This is not going to fix anything. There needs to be a complete overhaul of the healkth system. That is NOT what is being proposed. This is probably the only chance to really fix the system and the democrats are rolling over and giving up on substantial change.

  7. #107
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    Something has to change but I don't think that what they are proposing is going far enough. Because its sort of a half-a$$ attempt i think its only going to make things worse. Requiring people to have insurance but not providing it as a fundamental right as a citizen is just going to create more problems. .........
    AGREED!

    I think they need to go further as well.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  8. #108
    Cyburbian stroskey's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2008
    Location
    the delta
    Posts
    1,207
    How can anyone get behind a universal system when the financial status of our two largest entitlement programs, medicare and social security, just said they have even less than they thought! This new program would dwarf those in cost.

    We all think the industry is overpaid but I bet no one would think nurses are overpaid. Where I live a brand new nurse with a 2 year community college degree can make double what I make with a BA plus half a Master's (still working on it). Would anyone be willing to go on record against nurses, or just the big bad faceless companies?

  9. #109
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally posted by stroskey View post
    How can anyone get behind a universal system when the financial status of our two largest entitlement programs, medicare and social security, just said they have even less than they thought! This new program would dwarf those in cost.

    We all think the industry is overpaid but I bet no one would think nurses are overpaid. Where I live a brand new nurse with a 2 year community college degree can make double what I make with a BA plus half a Master's (still working on it). Would anyone be willing to go on record against nurses, or just the big bad faceless companies?
    We do have issues to tackle. Much of the issue is that we have a private system that is a public necessity (like public water provision and systems, and power systems that deliver electricity). Access is limited not by the cost, but the factors of how much economic benefit for shareholders can be gained by setting costs ever higher.

    A free market thinker will say "Make hospitals compete". The problem is they are "for profit" and being asked to perform a public good. As mentioned above with a broken arm, when the "Cheep" place is still unfordable, the system is broken and needs a radical fix. 911 does not send you to the most inexpensive place to be treated, they send you to the nearest place in general.

    I will defend nurses right beside you, but are you really going to sit and defend a system where if you contract a disease or condition that needs treatment, you can't even see that nurse because you can't afford to talk to the nurse let alone a doctor or treatment?

    A hospital gives you 1 over the counter aspirin, they charge for a bottle, at 10,000 times the markup or more. The same drug you get at Wal-Mart for 4 dollars per month with a 90 day prescription, they give you 1daily dose at the hospital (because they won't let you use your own) and they charge for the whole bottle at $50 or more for the bottle. I have coverage that comes with a health insurer that will only pay so much, so they cut a deal. You, have no coverage, so you pay the WHOLE PREDETORY PRICE OR ELSE! You are going to say that is a better way to do things?

    So yah, we love the nurse to, especially when she is wearing that short little outfit with the white thigh highs and the pink garter belt . That has nothing to do with how broken the system is.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  10. #110
    Cyburbian stroskey's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2008
    Location
    the delta
    Posts
    1,207
    I suppose that's part of the problem as well - there is no consumer choice.

  11. #111
    Cyburbian otterpop's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Down by Dun Ringill
    Posts
    6,265
    Blog entries
    6
    I liked the way the President rolled with not getting the honorary degree and still giving the commencement address. He said it was no big deal and made jokes about it. Still it gotta hurt the Ivy Leaguer not to get that sheep skin from a party school.
    "I am very good at reading women, but I get into trouble for using the Braille method."

    ~ Otterpop ~

  12. #112
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dubai, United Arab Emirates
    Posts
    417
    I wouldn't call health care a right, but a privilege. Guaranteeing free health care is not enshrined in the constitution (neither is public schools).

    Do I think the US is at a position when it needs to offer this privilege to the citizens?

    Yep.

    Do I think this health care is going to be much more costly than previously imagined or claimed?

    Yep.

    Do I think a national health care system is going to resemble something like the UK system, which features long waiting lists for even simple operations and procedures?

    Yep.

    Do I think we'll end up having something like the US public schools: good health care in richer areas, poorer health care in poorer areas, and private alternatives for those who can afford it?

    Yep.

    Health care is coming, one way or another, but it won't match the rosy expecations of some people.

  13. #113
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    I wouldn't call health care a right, but a privilege. Guaranteeing free health care is not enshrined in the constitution (neither is public schools).
    But it should be, as a matter of moral and ethical living.



    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    Do I think this health care is going to be much more costly than previously imagined or claimed?
    Agreed, but there are models of regulation that could be used to alleviate ALL of your concerns and maintain the profit function as well. Unless of course you are a free market only type. In which case, nothing will make someone from the mid 1700's social darwinist crowd happy. Think regulated power, rather than Enron.

    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    Do I think a national health care system is going to resemble something like the UK system, which features long waiting lists for even simple operations and procedures?
    It doesn't have to. Having experienced the German system, they don't seem to have those same issues AND they have a public insurer option the us companies above want to fight tooth and nail to stop. So that would be the second model mentioned here that would work and provide the services you desire.

    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    Do I think we'll end up having something like the US public schools: good health care in richer areas, poorer health care in poorer areas, and private alternatives for those who can afford it?
    Show me a place in the US where that is NOT the case right now? If you live in a rural area, your access to health care is limited by the physical location of health care resources as well as the cost of that health care. Your observation is a no-brainer that is not a prediction, it is present fact.

    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    Health care is coming, one way or another, but it won't match the rosy expecations of some people.
    I expect that single males/females/families/everybody can get the pharmaceuticals needed to control conditions without having to make a choice of electricity or treatment. I expect that a car crash injury, broken arm, falling injury, and other types of immediate medical crisis will not drive people into bankruptcy. Not really all that much to demand.

    It should not be a business function at every business under the sun.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  14. #114
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,593
    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post

    Do I think a national health care system is going to resemble something like the UK system, which features long waiting lists for even simple operations and procedures?

    Yep.

    Do I think we'll end up having something like the US public schools: good health care in richer areas, poorer health care in poorer areas, and private alternatives for those who can afford it?

    Yep.
    .

    There already are long wait lists for simple procedures and operations and even more serious problems. My wife and I have great insurance and it still took over two months for her to get in the to see an oncologist when she was first diagnosed with cancer.

    Having lived in both rich and poor areas I can say that this is already the case that the richer areas have better health care and the poorer ones have worse health care.

  15. #115
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    There already are long wait lists for simple procedures and operations and even more serious problems. My wife and I have great insurance and it still took over two months for her to get in the to see an oncologist when she was first diagnosed with cancer.

    Having lived in both rich and poor areas I can say that this is already the case that the richer areas have better health care and the poorer ones have worse health care.
    IMA-sorry to about your wife. I've also worked in poor areas. The health care there was iffy, so your concerns are already being realized under our current system.
    When did I go from Luke Skywalker to Obi-Wan Kenobi?

  16. #116
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dubai, United Arab Emirates
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally posted by Duke Of Dystopia View post
    But it should be, as a matter of moral and ethical living.


    Why? Using what examples? Here's a question: why should my tax dollars go to subsidize the health care of a life-long smoker or alcoholic? While some health problems are tragic, a lot are self-induced. So there's a moral reason to pay for a smoker's health problems?


    Agreed, but there are models of regulation that could be used to alleviate ALL of your concerns and maintain the profit function as well. Unless of course you are a free market only type. In which case, nothing will make someone from the mid 1700's social darwinist crowd happy. Think regulated power, rather than Enron.

    Such as? You seem to be more interested in calling people names rather than providing examples that worked.


    It doesn't have to. Having experienced the German system, they don't seem to have those same issues AND they have a public insurer option the us companies above want to fight tooth and nail to stop. So that would be the second model mentioned here that would work and provide the services you desire.

    I've experienced the UK system, having lived in the UK for a number of years. Also have good friends in Ireland and Italy. National health care is rarely perfect. Sure, no one wants to get rid of their national system (except New Zealand, which gave up its national health care in favor of nation-wide private health care), but it doesn't mean that there are endless funding problems, quotas, waiting lists, rejections of serious health claims and so forth. My mother's cousin is married to an Irishman and lives in Ireland and happily survived on Irish health care until one day she discovered she needed to have a major heart surgery that required cracking open her rib cages. But the US hospitals, using cutting edge technology, could have performed the operation without ripping apart her ribs. Ireland told her she'd have to pay for the operation privately. Which she did and the end result was a recovery time 1/4 that for the older procedure.

    Show me a place in the US where that is NOT the case right now? If you live in a rural area, your access to health care is limited by the physical location of health care resources as well as the cost of that health care. Your observation is a no-brainer that is not a prediction, it is present fact.

    Merely pointing out that national health care isn't going to solve all of today's health problems.

    I expect that single males/females/families/everybody can get the pharmaceuticals needed to control conditions without having to make a choice of electricity or treatment. I expect that a car crash injury, broken arm, falling injury, and other types of immediate medical crisis will not drive people into bankruptcy. Not really all that much to demand.

    That I agree with.

    It should not be a business function at every business under the sun.
    Hmm. Why not? Services are provided. Someone has to pay for the services. Someone has to pay for the research into latest health care trends. Someone has to pay the inventors of the latest technology.

    There are two reasons why US health care is so expensive and hasn't been discussed so far on this thread:

    1) Americans expect far more from health care treatments than most other Western nations. We expect private hospital rooms shared with at most two other people (unlike when I visited a friend at London's newest hospital and found her in a recovery room shared with seven other people). We expect access and quality to a degree most other countries don't.

    2) tort. Insurance (not health insurance, but the insurance of health practioners) is so extremely high that the cost is passed in higher health costs. Hospitals are sued all the time, doctors are always under the cloud of possible lawsuits, which often run into the millions. Thus their insurance liabilities are enormous.


    I am sorry to see that Obama's health care plan does not include tort reform. That must be addressed if we are to have a cheaper and more efficient health care system.

  17. #117
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    Hmm. Why not? Services are provided. Someone has to pay for the services. Someone has to pay for the research into latest health care trends. Someone has to pay the inventors of the latest technology.
    There are two reasons why US health care is so expensive and hasn't been discussed so far on this thread:

    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    1) Americans expect far more from health care treatments than most other Western nations. We expect private hospital rooms shared with at most two other people (unlike when I visited a friend at London's newest hospital and found her in a recovery room shared with seven other people). We expect access and quality to a degree most other countries don't.
    If you don't have insurance at all, you can't get the help needed, let alone expect extra procedures and treatments. As far as room infrastructure goes, its a straw man argument. If you needed treatment, what need is there for single rooms with outpatient services (broken bones, viral/bacterial infections, abraided corneas, abrasions and stitches, hernias, GI tract issues....etc). If US hospitals built 10 person bays, they would use them and be none the worse for wear. Not even in the UK would they put a serious burn patient or a person with a severely compromised immune system in a 7 person bay.

    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    2) tort. Insurance (not health insurance, but the insurance of health practioners) is so extremely high that the cost is passed in higher health costs. Hospitals are sued all the time, doctors are always under the cloud of possible lawsuits, which often run into the millions. Thus their insurance liabilities are enormous.[/B]
    If you leave an instrument in a patient, you deserve to be sued big time. If you are negligent, the same. If you are a crapy Dr., you should not be a doctor. If you mix up medications, amputate the wrong persons limb, or some other such idiocy, why should you deserve protection?

    Quote Originally posted by PennPlanner View post
    I am sorry to see that Obama's health care plan does not include tort reform. That must be addressed if we are to have a cheaper and more efficient health care system.
    At a meeting with GOP senators, the Obama administration asked them what the GOP would be willing to compromise on if tort reforms were included in the future health bill. The GOP answered with silence. Also, there is no significant study that blames the cost of health care on medical lawsuits.

    At some point, end of life issues need to be dealt with as well. The elderly account for approximately 60% of health care expenditures, 35% of hospital discharges, and 47% of hospital days. They purchase 74% of all prescription drugs and buy 51% of all over-the counter Drugs.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  18. #118
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dubai, United Arab Emirates
    Posts
    417
    Hmm.

    Looks like I'm trying to argue against someone who writes off anyone who disagrees with him as a Republican.

  19. #119
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    10,972
    Quote Originally posted by Duke Of Dystopia View post
    [B]If you leave an instrument in a patient, you deserve to be sued big time. If you are negligent, the same. If you are a crapy Dr., you should not be a doctor. If you mix up medications, amputate the wrong persons limb, or some other such idiocy, why should you deserve protection?

    At a meeting with GOP senators, the Obama administration asked them what the GOP would be willing to compromise on if tort reforms were included in the future health bill. The GOP answered with silence. Also, there is no significant study that blames the cost of health care on medical lawsuits.

    At some point, end of life issues need to be dealt with as well. The elderly account for approximately 60% of health care expenditures, 35% of hospital discharges, and 47% of hospital days. They purchase 74% of all prescription drugs and buy 51% of all over-the counter Drugs.
    Note: I am biased about this subject as my wife is in this field.

    I don't think that tort reform would involve dr's who are negligent. I think under our current system, negligence is not defined, and mistakes (whether they are harmful or not) are paid for by the entire system. When a dr. has to pay an enormous amount of money for malpractice insurance, not because they were negligent, but because they might be part of a negligence suit, there is something wrong with the system.

    The way our current system is set up, my wife can get sued by someone who saw her in the ER, but who she didn't do anything more than refer them to a specialist, if the specialist doesn't fix the problem. Instead, if people could accept that not all problems are easily fixed, or at best, people could understand that some methods are used to try and save lives, but don't always work, we would see less stupid lawsuits. If a dr. does everything in their means to save a life, but fails, should the family get money because of some small thing that the dr. could have done which probably wouldn't have worked, but someone deemed necessary after the fact?

    I agree with you that there is not sufficient data to suggest that these completely correlate, but I ask you to give it the logic test. We expect dr's to be successful 100% of the time, and if they are not, we expect to be able to sue them and have them be liable for whatever mistakes they have made.

    Let us pretend that the dr. has done nothing wrong in terms of attempting to save a life, or heal a problem. The liability of whatever procedure was done is ALL medical costs (those done by ANY dr. in the process) and some amount of pain and suffering, or disability number. Logically, how does someone who has done nothing
    wrong have to support such numbers?

    Do not get me wrong, dr's make mistakes. Those mistakes are just viewed much differently than mistakes you and I make in our everyday world. It is unfortunate that we do not accept that these mistakes are the risk of the patient, not the doctors. Because we view it as the risk of the doctors, we pay a tremendous amount more to cover costs for extra procedures, extra tests, and any other way to put liability on someone else.

    I agree with you Duke on end of life issues....

    Sorry for the long post. I digress....
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  20. #120
    Cyburbian fringe's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Comer, GA
    Posts
    570
    Big "O" needs to learn how to say "No" to War, Incorporated. I think he is paying out rope to them as they are in such full stride, but every week just breeds more hatred of our troops and our influence.

    Big "O" needs to put Ralph Nader on his cabinet or somewhere on his staff and kick some butt on lobbyist row.

  21. #121
    Separation Clause? What Separation Clause? Rummy don't need no stinkin' Separation Clause. Onward Christian Soldiers!
    Je suis Charlie

  22. #122
    Cyburbian mgk920's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Appleton, Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,185
    Some states have lost nearly all of their OB-Gyn doctors due to out-of-control tort/liability law - "MY baby is not PERFECT??? - Someone owes me and my lawyer millions!!!".



    The USA desperately needs a 'loser pays the winner's legal bills' tort system.

    Also, 'defensive' medicine is incredibly costly - doctors running unnecessary tests and so forth simply for the purpose of trying to protect not their patients from any potential harm, but to protect themselves from out-of-control greedy trial lawyers.

    Mike

  23. #123
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Packing to move out of the icebox.
    Posts
    13,566
    I think that it was appropriate for him to speak at Notre Dame, I do not think the ‘Catholic’ university should give an honorary degree to someone who is actively pro-choice and voted to prevent heath care for infants who lived through an abortion.
    "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. Time makes more converts than reason." - Thomas Paine Common Sense.

  24. #124
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,593
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    and voted to prevent heath care for infants who lived through an abortion.
    I have never heard this before. What on earth are you talking about?

  25. #125
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    I think that it was appropriate for him to speak at Notre Dame, I do not think the ‘Catholic’ university should give an honorary degree to someone who is actively pro-choice and voted to prevent heath care for infants who lived through an abortion.
    But it was okay to award them to Reagan and both Bushes, all of whom supported the death penalty, which the Catholic church opposes?
    Je suis Charlie

+ Reply to thread
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 ... LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 30
    Last post: 01 May 2009, 8:31 PM
  2. Good Luck President Obama
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 14
    Last post: 06 Nov 2008, 4:58 PM
  3. Replies: 71
    Last post: 20 May 2008, 9:20 AM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last post: 19 Feb 2007, 7:30 PM