• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Specter: Protests not 'representative of America'

LaMidRighter said:
I can't find the link at the moment, but there was an event where Obama tried to deflect when a guy was talking about his 101 year old parent who got a pacemaker when the second surgeon determined that the person obviously wanted to live, after the first surgeon said the parent was too old. Obama said something that was callous, something to the effect of the parent would need to realize that they were done with life or along those lines.
Click to expand...

Perhaps this is what you were eluding to.
Obama to Jane Sturm: Hey, take a pill - Google Videos
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Note the bolded part. Not people opposed to the bill, but people disrupting the town hall meetings.
Click to expand...
If you mean that most Americans do not/would not disrupt a town hall meeting, then you have a point.
But then... so what?
 
Last edited:
This is probably the wrong place for me to mention that I have a total girl crush on Ms. Claire, and follow her on twitter. OMG, I love her.
 
Goobieman said:
If you mean that most Americans do not/would not disrupt a town hall meeting, then you have a point.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is what I am saying, and what he said. People disrupting meetings is not representative of America. Thank you.
 
Councilman said:
LaMidRighter said:
Perhaps this is what you were eluding to.
Obama to Jane Sturm: Hey, take a pill - Google Videos
Click to expand...

I don't want to sound harsh, but one thing that we need to figure out in America is not if we CAN take extreme measures to preserve life, but if we SHOULD. There are a lot of expensive procedures performed on seniors and preemies, and other groups, and the fact of the matter is that we are all paying for them, in one form or another.

And life isn't mean to go on forever. Sometimes, the quality of life for someone after having these extreme life-preserving measures is really not good. Check out the research on preemies, for instance.

Does anyone here really support heart valve replacement for a woman who is 101 years old?
Click to expand...
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I don't want to sound harsh, but one thing that we need to figure out in America is not if we CAN take extreme measures to preserve life, but if we SHOULD. There are a lot of expensive procedures performed on seniors and preemies, and other groups, and the fact of the matter is that we are all paying for them, in one form or another.

And life isn't mean to go on forever. Sometimes, the quality of life for someone after having these extreme life-preserving measures is really not good. Check out the research on preemies, for instance.

Does anyone here really support heart valve replacement for a woman who is 101 years old?
Click to expand...
Yes I do, if that person has a good quality of life and wants to live I absolutely support their decision, it should be between that person and their doctor.....alone, it isn't Obama's call, it isn't some government board's call, and it is no one else's business.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
So you are saying most people support disrupting town hall meetings? Or did you misunderstand his point? Or, most likely, are you just misrepresenting what he said?

I also noticed you did not include this quote from him:
Click to expand...

I am in favor of free speech. At the same time, to let all participants be heard, they can't be heard through screaming and interrupting someone who is already speaking. Rudeness is not helpful to intelligent discussion and debate. It's unskillful and polarizing.

There is a way to let all be heard in an orderly manner. I'm into finding win win and not compromise situations.

Negative feelings come from unmet needs. Marshall Rosenberg says he can resolve a conflict between any two parties in twenty minutes once both sides can articulate their needs and the needs of the other side.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Yes, that is what I am saying, and what he said. People disrupting meetings is not representative of America. Thank you.
Click to expand...
But then... so what?
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Councilman said:
I don't want to sound harsh, but one thing that we need to figure out in America is not if we CAN take extreme measures to preserve life, but if we SHOULD. There are a lot of expensive procedures performed on seniors and preemies, and other groups, and the fact of the matter is that we are all paying for them, in one form or another.

And life isn't mean to go on forever. Sometimes, the quality of life for someone after having these extreme life-preserving measures is really not good. Check out the research on preemies, for instance.

Does anyone here really support heart valve replacement for a woman who is 101 years old?
Click to expand...

Particularly considering end of life care is a massive drain on the system. End of life means just that. My mom used to work at a geriatric nursing home. I used to go there after school to await my ride home. The number of people who were already dead (i.e. an unrecoverable mere shadow of themselves) was incredible. And keeping them alive drooling is very, very expensive for the system. Frankly, some life is not worth saving. That may may sound cold, but it's also true.
Click to expand...
 
stekim said:
Particularly considering end of life care is a massive drain on the system. End of life means just that. My mom used to work at a geriatric nursing home. I used to go there after school to await my ride home. The number of people who were already dead (i.e. an unrecoverable mere shadow of themselves) was incredible. And keeping them alive drooling is very, very expensive for the system. Frankly, some life is not worth saving. That may may sound cold, but it's also true.
Click to expand...
I'll ask again:
Do you REALLY trust the government to make those decisions?
REALLY?
 
stekim said:
Particularly considering end of life care is a massive drain on the system. End of life means just that. My mom used to work at a geriatric nursing home. I used to go there after school to await my ride home. The number of people who were already dead (i.e. an unrecoverable mere shadow of themselves) was incredible. And keeping them alive drooling is very, very expensive for the system. Frankly, some life is not worth saving. That may may sound cold, but it's also true.
Click to expand...
While I agree when there is no quality of life a person's family should re-evaluate their choices in life support, and end of life care, but the woman's mother that is the focus had all of her faculties, was completely coherent, and met none of the criteria for disablility or LTC, thus Obama's answer was cold.
 
Goobieman said:
I'll ask again:
Do you REALLY trust the government to make those decisions?
REALLY?
Click to expand...

When did I ever say I did? I don't trust families to do it either!
 
stekim said:
When did I ever say I did? I don't trust families to do it either!
Click to expand...
So then, who does?
Under The Obama's plan, the government does.
 
too many americans are misinformed, because their "facts" come from RW talking points. i would love to see one of those backed against the wall and forced to voice their objections concretely. won't happen, of course.
 
Goobieman said:
So then, who does?
Under The Obama's plan, the government does.
Click to expand...

Under the current system, families do. That's not working, either. Let's move to Plan C.
 
liblady said:
too many americans are misinformed, because their "facts" come from RW talking points. i would love to see one of those backed against the wall and forced to voice their objections concretely. won't happen, of course.
Click to expand...
Care to back that up? You may want to start by stating what mis-information you are alluding to, since nobody pushing for this turd of a bill seems to be able to dispel the info with anything other than saying it's mis-information and right-wing talking points.
 
stekim said:
Under the current system, families do. That's not working, either. Let's move to Plan C.
Click to expand...
There is no plan C, either families make the decisions, or the government does.
 
Goobieman said:
But then... so what?
Click to expand...

So that is not how Rev represented what he is saying. He was not talking about people against the bill, but those disrupting meetings.
 
LaMidRighter said:
There is no plan C, either families make the decisions, or the government does.
Click to expand...

How about a panel of physicians working under established guidelines about end of life care? Or a panel of doctors working with the insurance company to exclude certain coverage? If you want a valve replacement on a 101 year-old woman you pay cash. Whatever Plan C is, it's better than A or B. Families making those decisions clearly is not working. And no one trusts the government to do it. Physicians take an oath to look out after the best interests of their patients. Sometimes that may mean not treating them.
 
Goobieman said:
I'll ask again:
Do you REALLY trust the government to make those decisions?
REALLY?
Click to expand...

Right now, they're being made by insurance companies. Do you really think the government would be more heartless? Setting parameters on what kinds of care can be paid for, and what can't, through insurance policies, is going to have to happen, one way or another.

And the doctors aren't going to be the ones to decide, regardless.

If families want extreme measures, they should be prepared to pay for them.
 
stekim said:
How about a panel of physicians working under established guidelines about end of life care? Or a panel of doctors working with the insurance company to exclude certain coverage? If you want a valve replacement on a 101 year-old woman you pay cash. Whatever Plan C is, it's better than A or B. Families making those decisions clearly is not working. And no one trusts the government to do it. Physicians take an oath to look out after the best interests of their patients. Sometimes that may mean not treating them.
Click to expand...
I don't agree that anyone but the family should make that call with one exception, if the person is still mentally stable and has some qualtiy of life. I would never let a stranger make decisions on my life if given the choice, hell, I would fight any efforts to take that choice away from myself or those that care about me, if I am dying, it is my family's call alone, unless I've made a living will, if a doctor suggested his opinion to end life on behalf of my loved ones I'd probably hurt him to be honest, as it's none of his business.
 
Rudeness is not representative of American values. Free speech is, which is allowing all to speak and voice their opinons free of intimidatation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom