don't call something what it is
man, is it sad to watch people with no first principles wallowing in their stupidity projection. hey, if they're stupid, everyone else must be too, right? the painfully stupid ezekiel emanuel:Nearly two decades after the West's victory over communism, one might have thought it possible to discuss reform of the health-care system without invocations of the old saw "socialized medicine." But no.is that kinda like the "old saw" where you call somebody who murders someone a "murderer", ezekiel dumbshit?
but i spoke too soon! he has an explanation:
To the extent that any health insurance scheme involves spreading among members of society the financial risk of getting sick, all insurance "socializes" the risk. This is, of course, not what people mean when they level charges of "socialized medicine."and there's the key — the laughable attempt to equate aggressive systems with voluntary. no, you despicable sophist fuck, no matter how you might like to fallacy your way around the violent nature of what you advocate, you cannot through equivocation mistake the violent form of "socialize" with the peaceful form. "hey, 'socialize' — like at a party!"
the terms, though the same word, are radically opposed, and not suitable for mixing. shame how you have to ride herd on language distortion from the moment you wake up. damned farcical technique, only worth mentioning and being pissed about because there are hordes of fools who fall for it. those fools are violent voters.
This term is never used in reference to police protection, fire departments or highways -- all of which are provided by government.never used? maybe in your delusional world where up is down. in rational world (e.g., here), pigs, coercive fire departments, and coercive highways are regularly called socialistic. here's a clearer definition of socialism for you, tool, since people as stupid as you can't find it in your minuscule brains to associate purse strings with control:
socialism: theory advocating that people be forced, via violence or the threat of it, to put their money in a pile and then fight one another for pieces of what was stolen from them.control over the various "services" always follows. back to dipstick:
Properly speaking, socialism is when the state owns or controls the means of production.good thing health care in the US isn't under the "control" of the official crime syndicate... uh... what sized rock have you been hiding under, moron boy? but wait! he has a rebuttal:
Socialized medicine cannot mean that the government pays for part or all of health care while it is provided by doctors in their private practices and at private and (frequently) for-profit hospitals, commercial drugstores and the rest. If that were the case, Medicare would be socialized medicine.time to revamp your world view, asshole, because medicare sure as fuck is socialized medicine. it's also 100% illegal.
None of the proposals by the three major Democratic presidential candidates can be characterized as socialized medicine. None calls for government ownership or control over U.S. hospitals, drugstores or home health agencies, or for making doctors employees of the federal or state governments.tell ya what, lying puke. start up a hospital in the US, then presume you control it. good luck with that. and that's before the furthering of the existing soviet love fest.
oh, good. he's asking me something now:
Those who invoke the specter of "socialized medicine" should answer this question: Do you think the government should help fund medical care for those who cannot afford it, just as it funds education for children whose parents cannot afford to educate them? If not, say so explicitly and justify your position.first, "government" doesn't fund anything. never has, because the official crime syndicate practices robbery and distribution of the booty. period. having cleared that up, no, the crime syndicate shouldn't have a goddamned thing to do with medical care or education. justify my position? i refuse to advocate or participate in robbery. that was easy enough.
But, please, spare us the derogatory language.not when you're a lying fuck in denial. pick up a weapon and execute your socialistic schemes directly, hypocrite coward. you can start by robbing me — this time in person. it'll be a little more difficult than your present plan.
Labels: coercionists, deficient press, up is down
posted by saltypig @ 02:38
Brilliant! Insightful and inciteful.
Surprised it hasn't already generated lively commentary, but perhaps that's just a sign that your post is complete.
Man, you're on fire of late. Lots of new stuff. Thanks for your efforts.
thanks. obviously just blowing off steam. much better when you can corner one of these assholes in person. violent is the last thing they think they are.
do such stupid articles deserve a detailed, dispassionate rebuttal? i wonder.
<< Home