Mickey Kaus directs attention to this piece of interest group payola larded into the House version of the healthcare bill. The bill calls for cultural and linguistic training for healthcare professionals. In making grants for this purpose, the bill says:
The Secretary shall give preference to entities that have a demonstrated record of the following:
(1) Addressing, or partnering with an entity with experience addressing, the cultural and linguistic competency needs of the population to be served through the grant or contract….
The health industry is already a bonanza field for diversity professionals, with results half-comic, half-sinister. The University of Chicago operates a “Center for Latino Mental Health,” based on the proposition that American Hispanics have “unique” mental health needs. Except in the bland sense that all individuals are unique, what does it mean to suggest that one ethnic group is somehow mentally set apart from others?
To write this disturbing industry into the very structure of the complex new health bureaucracy the president and Congress seeks to create – well, maybe that’s not the very worst thing in their plan. But it surely ranks near the top.
55 responses so far
1 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:00 am
……..Get used to it……we live in a multicultural society……..and guess what David I think it highly probable that you and I have somewhat different mental interior than say a hispanic……..I find your xenophobia considering you are 1) Jewish and 2) Canadian rather difficult to explain
2 Observer // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:32 am
There’s a long list of shots I could take against Frum but I’m not clear on how “xenophobia” is one of them.
3 Churl // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:36 am
I think ottovbs is trying to say that Hispanics are differently abled than the immigrants who arrived earlier and need special help that the Hungarians, Poles, Germans, Syrians, Norwegians, Finns, Armenians, Slovenians et al. could somehow do without.
4 Observer // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:55 am
Sounds like a xenophobic argument to me.
5 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:56 am
observer // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:32 am
“There’s a long list of shots I could take against Frum but I’m not clear on how “xenophobia” is one of them.”
…………You obviously haven’t read any of his anti immigration reform diatribes……but you don’t need to go that far, just absorb the meaning of this sentence:
“what does it mean to suggest that one ethnic group is somehow mentally set apart from others?”
………..To suggest that different ethnic groups have must have the same interior lives and view things through a predominantly white anglo saxon prism suggests a certain contempt for other cultures
6 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:57 am
observer // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:55 am
“Sounds like a xenophobic argument to me.”
…………You apparently don’t understand the meaning of the word xenophobia
7 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Churl // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:36 am
“could somehow do without.”
…………They didn’t have indoor bathrooms, pre natal care or bathrooms either……..but this is 2009
8 franco 2 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:03 pm
ottovbvs is a devout leftist and EVERY post he spews the party line. He claims to have voted for lots of Republicans in his past, either he has had a complete conversion to marxism in the last 12 years or he is a liar. In either case, none of his posts are relevant here.
9 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:05 pm
observer // Aug 4, 2009 at 11:55 am
……….This might help you out
According to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), the word xenophobia consists of two parts: xeno (a combining form meaning “guest, stranger, person that looks different, foreigner”) and phobia, (”fear, horror or aversion, especially if morbid”).[1]
It is more broadly defined in the Dictionary of Psychology “a fear of strangers”. [2] As defined by the OED, it can mean a fear of or aversion to, not only persons from other countries, but other cultures, subcultures and subsets of belief systems; in short, anyone who meets any list of criteria about their origin, religion, personal beliefs, habits, language, orientations, or any other criteria. While some will state that the “target” group is a set of persons not accepted by the society, in reality only the phobic person need hold the belief that the target group is not (or should not be) accepted by society. While the phobic person is aware of the aversion (even hatred) of the target group, they may not identify it or accept it as a fear.
As with all phobias, a xenophobic person, or a xenophobic is aware of the fear, and therefore has to genuinely think or believe at some level that the target is in fact a foreigner. This arguably separates xenophobia from racism and ordinary prejudice in that someone of a different race does not necessarily have to be of a different nationality. In various contexts, the terms “xenophobia” and “racism” seem to be used interchangeably, though they can have wholly different meanings (xenophobia can be based on various aspects, racism being based solely on race and ancestry).
For xenophobia, there are two main objects of the phobia. The first is a population group present within a society that is not considered part of that society. Often they are recent immigrants, but xenophobia may be directed against a group which has been present for centuries, or became part of this society through conquest and territorial expansion. This form of xenophobia can elicit or facilitate hostile and violent reactions, such as mass expulsion of immigrants, pogroms or in the worst case, genocide.
The second form of xenophobia is primarily cultural, and the objects of the phobia are cultural elements which are considered alien. All cultures are subject to external influences, but cultural xenophobia is often narrowly directed, for instance, at foreign loan words in a national language. It rarely leads to aggression against individual persons, but can result in political campaigns for cultural or linguistic purification. Isolationism, a general aversion of foreign affairs, is not accurately described as xenophobia.
10 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:11 pm
franco-2 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:03 pm
………Your postings are frequently amongst the most offensive Franco, hence your deletion history, but they are a source of much merriment to me ……A marxist, a liar, such fun
11 barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Re: Franco-2 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:03 pm –
“Ottovbvs is…”
Now if there was ever a lob over the plate…
(*GRIN*)
Anyway…. Franco… of course you’re free to do what you want, but as a fellow conservative I can attest to the fact that there are plenty of reasonable “moderate” and even liberal “regulars” who post here at NM whose posts are worth reading and responding to.
Anyway…
As to Frum’s thread post…
Thanks, David! Yep… that’s how the game is played; that’s how the government gravy train runs.
(*NOD*)
Did Republicans do the same thing when they were in power? Sure. Looking at our watches is it 2009… yes.
(In other words, let’s stick to the present since that’s where we happen to be.)
As to the substance of the legislative language as it applies to providing medical care…
(*SIGH*)
Hey. While I think it’s wonderful that many nurses, doctors, and hospital workers speak Spanish (and other languages) in addition to English, I’m not willing for ANY of my tax dollars to go towards servicing the non-English speakers seeking medical care (or indeed any other care/benefit/service).
And yeah… when I travel abroad… my views are intellectually consistent. I don’t think the taxpayers of “Nation X” should have to subsidize English language services for the benefit of foreigners visiting – let alone living – in THEIR nation(s).
BILL
12 barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Re: Barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:24 pm –
In other words, Franco… ignore Otto. Just skip right over his posts. That’s what I do.
(*SHRUG*)
BILL
13 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:31 pm
barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:26 pm
“Just skip right over his posts. That’s what I do.”
……….We know you’re not interested in learning anything Baarking…….and you have so much to learn
14 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:34 pm
barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:24 pm
” I’m not willing for ANY of my tax dollars to go towards servicing the non-English speakers seeking medical care (or indeed any other care/benefit/service).”
………….Practical and humane wisdom……..Baarking style
15 sinz54 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:41 pm
As a patriot and conservative, I’ve always wanted all immigrants to learn to be proficient in English.
BUT a hospital is not the place to enforce that requirement. Communication errors between doctor and patient, and patient non-compliance with prescribed care (which is often due to poor communication) is a serious health problem. It can also lead to unnecessary stress on the patient, who doesn’t understand what his condition is all about and what he needs to do to care for it properly.
Example: Here is an excerpt from an actual pamphlet I was given on care for my condition. Would you like to try explaining it to a Hispanic or Asian immigrant who can barely speak only a few words of English:
“The best access for hemodialysis patients is a vein in the forearm that
is enlarged by creating a fistula. A fistula allows blood from the artery to
flow into the vein. The higher blood pressure in the artery forces blood
into the vein and safely enlarges the vein, creating a good site for the
large gauge dialysis needles at the end of the flexible blood transport
tubes.
“Other access types include grafts (using a synthetic tube to connect
the artery to a vein in the arm) and catheters (needles “permanently”
inserted into a regular vein, but left protruding from the skin)….
“During duplex Doppler ultrasound, a handheld instrument (transducer) is passed
lightly over the skin above a blood vessel. The transducer sends and receives sound
waves that are amplified through a microphone. The sound waves bounce off solid
objects, including blood cells. The movement of blood cells causes a change in pitch
of the reflected sound waves (called the Doppler effect). If there is no blood flow,
the pitch does not change. Information from the sound waves can be processed by a
computer to provide graphs or pictures that represent the flow of blood through the
blood vessels. These graphs or pictures can be saved for future review or evaluation.”
We dialysis patients are supposed to understand all this stuff.
In my dialysis center, we have bilingual staff who are called upon to translate this stuff for Hispanic patients. If they were not around due to illness or reassignment, we would have a serious problem.
Beyond that, Muslims have special cultural concerns (their women are often reluctant to expose themselves to male doctors).
So I’m not ridiculing this issue. It’s a real issue.
16 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:56 pm
sinz54 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:41 pm
“So I’m not ridiculing this issue. It’s a real issue”
……Of course it’s an issue……..but understanding that requires C-O-M-M-O-N-S-E-N-S-E and a dose of humanity…..but these are increasingly alien concepts amongst far right conservatives…….it’s to be expected from the buffoons but you’d think Frum would have more sensibility on the issue
17 sinz54 // Aug 4, 2009 at 1:00 pm
barker13 sez: “I’m not willing for ANY of my tax dollars to go towards servicing the non-English speakers seeking medical care (or indeed any other care/benefit/service).”
History lesson:
In the late 19th and early 20th century, many immigrants swarmed into America. Most could not speak a word of English yet.
But the New York City Health Department couldn’t just ignore these people, even if they wanted to. There were these pesky contagious diseases like diphtheria (which killed my mom’s little brother), tuberculosis, polio, etc. Which knew no class or ethnic boundaries, and could spread from poor immigrant neighborhoods into wealthy WASP ones. So the NYC Health Department made house calls into those immigrant slums, knocking on doors, quarantining sick kids, treating others–and became famous for stopping the diphtheria epidemic in its tracks.
Today, we’ve got AIDS, swine flu, bird flu, MRSA, etc.. And tuberculosis is still around. Not to mention the threat of bio-terrorism. When it comes to public health, you can’t just ignore certain ethnicities or communities. And being pro-active today can help stave off a real disaster tomorrow.
18 Observer // Aug 4, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Otto, thanks, but I did skip over one of your posts – namely the detailed etymological study of the word xenophobia. I’m quite familiar with it. And frankly, just as being critical of Israeli policy shouldn’t automatically brand someone as an anti-semite, so too is there a difference between critical immigration policy and racist immigration policy. I don’t agree with many of Frum’s ideas on immigration, and personally believe in a wide open door. But despite those differences, calling his ideas xenophobic is quite a leap.
Sorry to infect a forum like this with a demand for nuance and subtlety, but I suspect you’re the first to ask for it from other people.
To take your rather pathetic example:
(FRUM)“what does it mean to suggest that one ethnic group is somehow mentally set apart from others?”
(EVIL OTTO)………..To suggest that different ethnic groups have must have the same interior lives and view things through a predominantly white anglo saxon prism suggests a certain contempt for other cultures…”
Well no, that’s not what he said. In fact, if you read what he wrote instead of what you’d wished he’d written, he was arguing that generalizations about differences in an ethnicity’s *mental health* were exaggerated or unfounded. And frankly, since the alternative position to that can only be a belief that people should be treated for mental illnesses based on their ethnicity – !?! – “them #$%@#$ sure seem crazier to me – it’s because of their culture!” – surely your position is the one that’s founded on prejudice, and not his?
19 Moderate // Aug 4, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Anyone who’s read a bit about abnormal psychology knows that there are scores of mental health issues that are exclusive to certain cultures. There are mental health issues which only exist amongst the people of India, some that are found only in Papua New Guinea, and some that are nearly exclusive to Hispanic peoples. Amongst people of a similar ethnicity, a disease can be much more prevalent in city-dwellers than in rural populations.
In the United States, we have a large Hispanic minority. It’s reasonable to have care tailored to them, just as it would be to have care aimed at rural white populations, etc.
20 franco 2 // Aug 4, 2009 at 2:54 pm
I skip over most of ottos posts too. Nothing but default left-wing drivel. But every now and then I just need remind everyone what they are dealing with. Otto claims to have voted for Nixon Reagan Ford and Bush 41 (not Perot?) and he spouts nothing but Marxist talking points. Either he’s had an amazing conversion or he’s lying.
I would read a post of his that explains how he converted but I doubt he can make up a plausible account of his ideological journey. He would need a lot of dots to connect, and he already uses a lot of dots….in fact they are the most substantive points he makes!
21 barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Re: Sinz54 // Aug 4, 2009 at 12:41 pm –
“As a patriot and conservative, I’ve always wanted all immigrants to learn to be proficient in English. BUT…”
“…BUT…”
(*SNORT*) (Why is it I saw that one coming from word one?)
“…patient non-compliance with prescribed care…”
So first I have to pay to subsidize foreign language provision… then I have to pay for the care itself no doubt… and then on top of this it’s my problem if the “patient” isn’t… er… “compliant.”
Hey… I’ve got a better idea! If the “patient” is a citizen tell him or her to either learn English or else hire a translator or if the “patient” is an illegal alien spend my tax money on deportation of said “patient.”
“…unnecessary stress on the patient…”
Unfrigg’believable!
Sinz. Get this through your head: “Stress on the patient” isn’t a big concern of mine.
“Here is an excerpt from an actual pamphlet I was given on care for my condition. Would you like to try explaining it to a Hispanic or Asian immigrant who can barely speak only a few words of English:”
Legal or illegal “immigrant,” Sinz?
Legal? Let the immigrant find someone who speaks his or her language and can translate/explain.
Illegal? DEPORTATION…!!!
“In my dialysis center, we have bilingual staff who are called upon to translate this stuff for Hispanic patients. If they were not around due to illness or reassignment, we would have a serious problem.”
No… THEY would have a serious problem. I don’t want THEIR problem to be MY problem.
(Are you getting my general drift here, Sinz…???)
“Beyond that, Muslims have special cultural concerns…”
Again… THEIR problem! I don’t want it to be MY problem or the problem of other American citizen or legal resident taxpayers.
Re: Sinz54 // Aug 4, 2009 at 1:00 pm –
“In the late 19th and early 20th century, many immigrants swarmed into America. Most could not speak a word of English yet.”
We didn’t have a welfare system then. We needed/wanted low skilled immigrants then. They either learned to speak English or they didn’t then. We made no special “accommodations” for them that cost taxpayers millions upon millions of dollars. (In fact, Sinz… to “return the favor” of your… “history lesson”… we didn’t have a federal income tax back then – not till 1913 if memory serves.)
“So the NYC Health Department made house calls into those immigrant slums, knocking on doors, quarantining sick kids, treating others–and became famous for stopping the diphtheria epidemic in its tracks.”
Hey… I’m all for quarantining! I’m all for refusing to let diseased immigrants/visitors into my country in the first place! And if we’re talking illegal aliens… one more time… DEPORTATION.
(BTW, Sinz… this has nothing to do with the specific issue under discussion relating to the thread post.)
BILL
22 barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Re: Franco-2 // Aug 4, 2009 at 2:54 pm –
“…[Otto] already uses a lot of dots…”
http://www.guide4living.com/drugabuse/lsd.htm
“Dots,” huh? Hmm… explains a lot…
(*WINK*)
BILL
23 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 4:51 pm
observer // Aug 4, 2009 at 2:37 pm
“Well no, that’s not what he said. In fact, if you read what he wrote instead of what you’d wished he’d written, he was arguing that generalizations about differences in an ethnicity’s *mental health* were exaggerated or unfounded”
……observer………I think you must have skipped those comprehension classes along with the classes devoted to the events of 1930-1941…….What Frum said in full was:
” The health industry is already a bonanza field for diversity professionals, with results half-comic, half-sinister. The University of Chicago operates a “Center for Latino Mental Health,” based on the proposition that American Hispanics have “unique” mental health needs. Except in the bland sense that all individuals are unique, what does it mean to suggest that one ethnic group is somehow mentally set apart from others?”
……….His meaning is fairly clear……..The idea that hispanics have “unique” mental or other health needs than the rest of us is either “half comic or half sinister.” If that doesn’t qualify as a xenophobic statement under the definition I provided above which apparently you felt was beneath your need to read I don’t know what is……… The fact you couldn’t manage without the stage directions tells all I fear.
24 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 4:53 pm
moderate // Aug 4, 2009 at 2:51 pm
“Anyone who’s read a bit about abnormal psychology knows that there are scores of mental health issues that are exclusive to certain cultures.”
………One would have thought this fairly self evident but not to observer, Frum, Barking or Franco apparently.
25 ottovbvs // Aug 4, 2009 at 4:57 pm
franco-2 // Aug 4, 2009 at 2:54 pm
“I skip over most of ottos posts too”
………For someone who skips most of my posts you seem very familiar with their content……..probably because some of them are concentrated on puncturing your very large red balloon.
26 sinz54 // Aug 4, 2009 at 8:56 pm
barker13: The history of medicine has taught us the hard way that public health doesn’t divide up neatly among class, racial, or even national lines.
We got a good lesson on that this year, with H1N1 flu boiling up out of Mexico to infect the entire world within a few months.
Your scenario of just deporting desperately sick illegal aliens may sound plausible to you, but the Government of Mexico won’t want them back. They had their hands full coping with the H1N1 flu cases they had; they didn’t want us to dump a million more across the border on their territory.
Inaction in public health can have nasty consequences. At the turn of the century, a couple of Chinese immigrants to California brought bubonic plague with them. Public health officials took your advice and ignored it, rather than aggressively treating it. As a result, the bubonic plague escaped, and spread into the deserts of the Southwest where it continues to circulate to this day. Let’s hope it never mutates and breaks out of there.
On the other hand, in New York City, faced with a diphtheria epidemic among New York’s poor immigrants at around the same time, the NYC Board of Health intervened aggressively, making house calls, treating and quarantining the sick, all at public expense. The result: The diphtheria epidemic was stopped cold, which given the teeming slums back then was quite an achievement.
27 barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Re: Sinz54 // Aug 4, 2009 at 8:56 pm –
“…the Government of Mexico won’t want them back.”
And who really cares what the Government of Mexico wants…???
Seriously… are you frigg’n KIDDING me…???
HELLO! Mexican citizens! Mexico! What are they gonna do, shot their own people as we expel them from our country? What are you BABBLING about Sinz…?!?!
“Inaction in public health…”
Who’s talking “inaction…???” Again… what are you BABBLING about…?!?! I’m proposing action… specific action.
Hey… while I’m at it…
Every frigg’n red cent we spend on social providing for Mexican citizens who are illegally in OUR country… WE BILL MEXICO!
Yep… BILL MEXICO!
Once citizenship is established we provide minimum treatment and deport as quickly as possible – keep track of and accounting for every single red cent we spend – and we BILL MEXICO!
(And yeah… same deal for ALL nations; Ireland, Italy, whoever from wherever…) (*SHRUG*)
“They had their hands full coping with the H1N1 flu cases they had; they didn’t want us to dump a million more across the border on their territory.”
And again… this is MY frigg’n problem…??? HOW SO…?!?! You may wanna borrow from China in order to support Mexicans… call me crazy… I don’t.
“At the turn of the century, a couple of Chinese immigrants to California brought bubonic plague with them. Public health officials took your advice and ignored it…”
(*HEADACHE*)
Again, Sinz, I’m not suggesting we ignore anything! Just the opposite!
Sinz. While I certainly don’t fault you for your pedantic focus on turn of the 19th century California and New York health policy trivia, I’m talking 2009.
Bottom line… once again… you – the self-described conservative “independent” who voted for Clinton twice – is calling for more government spending on policies that spread separatism and retard assimilation.
Typical…
(*SHRUG*)
BILL
28 RLHotchkiss // Aug 5, 2009 at 12:53 am
The funny thing is that you think that this is an instance of ideological rigidity on the left. But actually it is the conservative ideology which is making you blind to reality. The majority of the mentally ill are harmless. In fact mentally ill persons are much much more likely to be victims of crimes than perpetrators.
The exception are the paranoid schizophrenic. The mental health professional’s job is to get this patient to take medicine that makes him feel much worse, causes impotence, and extreme intestinal issues. This person sees people who aren’t there. And the voices are realer than anything that you have ever experienced in your life. Many of his family members will not want him to be diagnosed as mentally ill. Many will try to influence him to seek solace in the church.
When you see a Hispanic man apparently talking to himself as he loads his shot gun in a parking lot a couple blocks from your kids school. I’d advise that you pray real hard you just can’t see the blue tooth headset in which he is using to tell his hunting buddies were to pick him up.
Because if not the voices in his head speak fluent Spanish and are telling him go on a killing spree. If his therapist is some white suburbanite who doesn’t speak a word of Spanish, my guess is that he is going to listen to the voices, who after all from his point of view already are much more real.
29 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 8:24 am
barker13 // Aug 4, 2009 at 10:10 pm
” And who really cares what the Government of Mexico wants…???”
……….We fire them from cannons over the border?……….or drop them from planes?…..no parachutes of course!
30 sinz54 // Aug 5, 2009 at 9:34 am
barker13 sez: “And who really cares what the Government of Mexico wants”
This is EXACTLY the point I made earlier. Among the GOP base, a lot of the opposition to health care reform is actually coming from nativism: “Immigrants shouldn’t get any health care! Send them away sick, back to whereever they came from!”
That position, once the Dems gleefully make it known to minorities, will wreck any hopes that Steele has to reach out to minorities. This is sheer political suicide.
barker13 also sez: “[I advocate] government spending on policies that spread separatism and retard assimilation. ”
Treating sick immigrants at hospitals is “retarding assimilation”??? You’re going to teach them English while they’re dying? I tried to explain the heroic efforts of the New York City Health Department with immigrants of the first third of the 20th century, but it just fell on deaf ears.
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about weeks before: The combination of nativism and an (unworkable) pure free-market approach to health care leads to Social Darwinism (indeed, I’ve seen a column on Townhall.com that actually approves of this). That would represent a step backward of 100 years–and destroy the GOP’s chances of appealing to a more diverse society.
Bottom line: You can’t build a “New Majority” on nativism.
31 sinz54 // Aug 5, 2009 at 9:43 am
franco-2 sez: “Otto claims to have voted for Nixon Reagan Ford and Bush 41 (not Perot?) and he spouts nothing but Marxist talking points. Either he’s had an amazing conversion or he’s lying.”
Apostates can be the most militant of all.
Some of the angriest, most militant atheists I’ve seen, are ex-Christians who feel they have been wronged or betrayed by their Church. Such as gays who came out and were then shunned.
Jeane Kirkpatrick used to be a Democrat. Then she left, and constantly attacked the Dem Party from then on.
It’s entirely possible that “ottovbvs” is the same way. The GOP took a different turn than the one he would have liked. So he left, and is now spending lots of time denouncing it, just like Jeane Kirkpatrick did with the Dem Party.
32 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 9:54 am
sinz54 // Aug 5, 2009 at 9:43 am
………..Partially true……the GOP is becoming an increasingly ugly joke……but it’s more than that……..I have a deep attachment to rationality, facts and empirical evidence and once you start claiming water runs uphill you’re done in my book…….it’s exactly the same reason that only 8% of scientists remain Republicans…….they, I, are not going to deny rationalism
33 Churl // Aug 5, 2009 at 10:24 am
‘a lot of the opposition to health care reform is actually coming from nativism: “Immigrants shouldn’t get any health care!’ -sinz54 #30
Still confusing “immigrants” with “illegal aliens” I see.
34 franco 2 // Aug 5, 2009 at 10:45 am
Sinz,
Why do you feel the need to speak for otto? The fact remains that otto is a devout leftist. The leftist perspective can be seen in almost every post. But you moderates don’t understand leftism. You really don’t, because then you wouldn’t be such fence-sitters.
This health care plan is a power grab from the left. They want to control you and every aspect of your life and this is distinctly un-American. America was founded upon the respect for the individual and his freedom. Leftists don’t want that, not at all. They want to control, arbitrate ration and confiscate for the good of “all”.
But I’m not here to educate you, sinz and other moderates. I’m here to simply tell you that you are missing something. You have to educate yourselves. The Obama administration will give you a real-life experience of what leftists want to do. You moderates need to do only one thing – make one adjustment to begin to understand:
Watch what they DO, ignore what they say (because they are lying -and leftists are good liars -they have to be).
35 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 11:00 am
34 franco-2 // Aug 5, 2009 at 10:45 am
” They want to control you and every aspect of your life and this is distinctly un-American.America was founded upon the respect for the individual and his freedom.”
……..Franco the ultimate product of the rational enlightenment…….I’d just like you to know Franco that they are setting up a special FEMA re-education camp just for you
36 barker13 // Aug 5, 2009 at 11:51 am
Re: Sinz54 // Aug 5, 2009 at 9:34 am –
“Among the GOP base, a lot of the opposition to health care reform is actually coming from nativism…”
Hmm… (*SNORT*)… allow me to rewrite you ranting so it makes sense:
Among the American People there is widespread opposition to borrowing money from China (and other nations, friendly and potentially unfriendly) or simply printing it (inflationary) in order to provide social welfare benefits to illegal aliens who shouldn’t be here in the first place.
(How’s that, Sinz? Better, right…???) (*CHUCKLE*)
Ahh… the old “nativism” canard… (*SMIRK*)… again… typical Sinz.
“That position, once the Dems gleefully make it known to minorities…”
Ahh… once again Sinz’s race based assumptions and prejudices come to the fore. (*RUEFUL CHUCKLE*)
Yes. Because being a “minority” is the equivalent to not putting your country and fellow citizens first and foremost when it comes to policy.
Yes. “Those” people – you know… blacks, browns, yellows, reds… (don’t you love the whole “People of Color schtick)… “they’re” all alike… “they” all think alike… their individual as well as group self-interests are in lock step NOT with that of their fellow American, but rather, with illegal immigrants… with foreigners… with people who “look like them.”
(*SMIRK*)
Folks… you can’t make this stuff up! This is what he believes. Nope… it’s not satire. American citizens and illegal aliens… the same in Sinz’s world. In fact, they’re a unified block! (*SNORT*) In Sinz’s world that is…
(*SIGH*)
“Treating sick immigrants at hospitals is “retarding assimilation”???”
No, Sinz… creating “separate” (but equal…???) (*SNORT*) systems based upon the color of one’s skin… the ethnicity… the “preferred” language… that’s retarding assimilation.
Sinz. Again. Putting aside for the moment there are plenty of people working in American hospitals (I’m guessing nearly all if not in fact all) who speak Spanish… the burden of providing funding for translation services and other “cultural” coddling shouldn’t be borne by me and mine – “mine” being my fellow citizens and legal visitors/residents. The burden is on “them” – those who don’t speak English – to learn English just as I would be expected to learn a foreign language if I moved to a foreign country where a language other than English was the native language.
Sinz… no matter how hard you try – in your typical disingenuous fashion – to distort my points and goals, it ain’t gonna work. (*GRIN*)
I’m not a “nativist,” I’m a nationalist. (In your parlance a “patriot.”) I’m not anti-immigrant, I’m anti-illegal immigrant. I’m not “pro-white” anti-brown/black/red/yellow… I’m PRO-American.
I’m able to prioritize. I’m able to compare and contrast resources with expenses and create a hierarchy of directed spending. Immigrant – illegal immigrants – are way down on my list of priorities when it comes to how I would pass out federal dollars.
Anyway… (*SHRUG*)… I don’t take your “attacks” (such as they are) too seriously because… well… frankly… I don’t take you all that seriously. When you’re right I’ll still be the first to give you a shout out, but I’ve gotta be honest… you really destroy your credibility when you purposefully distort others’ views and reasoning.
BILL
37 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 12:10 pm
barker13 // Aug 5, 2009 at 11:51 am
“but I’ve gotta be honest… you really destroy your credibility when you purposefully distort others’ views and reasoning”
…………Keep talking Baarking……you add to your cred with every sentence
38 sinz54 // Aug 5, 2009 at 12:54 pm
franco-2 sez: “But you moderates don’t understand leftism.”
What YOU do not understand about me, is that I call the shots as I see ‘em.
And that I don’t believe that ANY ideology has a 100% grip on truth.
Often I’ve disagreed with “ottovbs.” But sometimes I agree with him.
Often I’ve disagreed with Redstate.com. But sometimes I agree with them–and have even cited them.
I’m not here to reinforce the GOP/conservative political spin that everything they do is right, and everything the opposition does is wrong.
I don’t do spin.
39 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 12:56 pm
sinz54 // Aug 5, 2009 at 12:54 pm
“Often I’ve disagreed with “ottovbs.”
………I can attest to that
40 franco 2 // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm
sinz,
Of course you call them as you see them. You see them in a rather naive way however. You are lured into believing leftists want “solutions”. If they did that would be one thing, but they don’t, which is why you can NEVER reason with them. They claim to want solutions and when someone points out their various programs are all failures – proven failures – they come up with another rhetorical tactic or trick. They won’t admit they have ever been wrong about anything even though we all know they have been wrong many times.
Feel free to continue to be duped by liars and cheaters.” ….on the one hand the liar says this on the other hand he has a good point…” that is kinda how you see things, you just can’t understand the lefty is lying, you are that naive.
41 franco 2 // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Sinz,
By the way, agreeing or disagreeing on something is fairly meaningless. We all disagree on various things. I’m sure there are some things I can agree with rabid leftists about. But that doesn’t make me a moderate. I vehemently disagree with many Republicans on various issues – that doesn’t make me a Democrat, because I disagree fundamentally with Democrats approach and assumptions.
But you don’t look deep enough into what is BEHIND people’s opinions. Assumptions – worldviews. How do they see the world? How do they see America and the Constitution (and I mean REALLY – not their agenda driven obfuscations) How do they interpret human nature? That is a big one.
I happen to see human nature differently than leftists. Therefore their “solutions” are always wrong because these solutions are based on a false model of humanity, and thus anti-human.
This is precisely why left-wing governments limp along with no middle class, just elites and a bunch of peasants with no power or wealth, and that is EXACTLY what today’s elected Democrats (not all) want. They want a special health program for themselves and a different one for us peasants. They are not “democrats” at all, they are literally totalitarians who want government (them) to run our lives.
42 liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:33 pm
We are talking about something being codefied which is already happening in a free-market. Doctors who treat non-English speaking people ALL have translation capabilities so they can communicate effectively with their patients. No one had to tell them to do this, they do it because it is in their self-interest (Common Sense, the book).
I would like to write, “I just don’t understand why this needs to be added…” but I know the answer. the answer is to ensure greater assimilation of a greater number of illegal immigrants and to fund minority programs which provide translation services. And I can’t help to agree with Barker when he admits that if he were in a foreign country, he’d have little expectation that a translator would be paid for and provided to him in a health care crisis. But, I also know that many health care professionals around the world MUST be english speaking because 90% of their education is in English and 99% of the new medical technology is in English. English is the de-facto language of the world in medicine and business.
43 liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Oh, by the way, I happen to know (in the literal) sense that ethnic groups definately have unique mental health needs. Treatment, if it is to be successful, must take these specific cultural, linguistic and societal differences into account.
This, by the way, is one of my chief complaints about Obama’s health care approach. He seems to think health care is homogenious. He thinks all doctors are the same. He thinks all conditions are similar and he thinks all treatments can be standardized. This is a gross oversimplification of health care. Not all doctors are equally talented. Every human mind and body is different, requiring specific attention to the patient as a whole. And there are numerous treatment possibilities for certain conditions. Sometimes best treatments are discovered through trial and error.
44 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:46 pm
franco-2 // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm
“They claim to want solutions and when someone points out their various programs are all failures – proven failures – they come up with another rhetorical tactic or trick. They won’t admit they have ever been wrong about anything even though we all know they have been wrong many times”
………..You mean programs like trickle down economics, lax regulation of the financial industry, disaster management, pre-emptive wars, nation building, management of the federal budget……..Okaaayyyy
45 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:49 pm
liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:43 pm
“This, by the way, is one of my chief complaints about Obama’s health care approach. He seems to think health care is homogenious. He thinks all doctors are the same. He thinks all conditions are similar and he thinks all treatments can be standardized. ”
……..Perhaps you’d like to give us one source wherever he’s said this…..just one will do……in fact he’s said the complete reverse
46 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:52 pm
liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:43 pm
“This, by the way, is one of my chief complaints about Obama’s health care approach. He seems to think health care is homogenious. He thinks all doctors are the same. He thinks all conditions are similar and he thinks all treatments can be standardized. ”
………….And btw if you read Frum’s post he’s criticising him for designing a system that takes care of diverse needs……so which is it
47 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:59 pm
franco-2 // Aug 5, 2009 at 4:24 pm
“This is precisely why left-wing governments limp along with no middle class, just elites and a bunch of peasants with no power or wealth, and that is EXACTLY what today’s elected Democrats (not all) want. They want a special health program for themselves and a different one for us peasants. They are not “democrats” at all, they are literally totalitarians who want government (them) to run our lives.”
……….you mean in socialist hell holes like Sweden, Denmark, Britain, France, Germany………it’s hard to make you up Franco but keep talking…… you’re so enlightening
48 liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 5:00 pm
otto: ………….And btw if you read Frum’s post he’s criticising him for designing a system that takes care of diverse needs……so which is it
If you read my post, they are codifying something that the free market has already responded to. Frum is out to lunch on this one.
49 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 5:31 pm
liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 5:00 pm
“Frum is out to lunch on this one.”
………Precisely…….and when will I be getting that source for the claims you made about the president’s desire to homogenize the system?
50 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 6:14 pm
liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 5:00 pm
………..And btw even if Obama didn’t say it “homogenizing” the system is part of the key to getting cost out of it!!
51 liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Otto: Homogenizing is my term, Obama referred to it when he offered the red pill blue pill. He also referred to it when he suggested that all doctors act a certain way (I think it was the tonsil story).
One size fits all, homogenizing, can help with some, minor health care issues, but when it comes to speciality care, every human is different. Our body chemistry is different and medical solutions don’t fit work for each and every person the same. In truth, a lot of medicine is trial and error to get the right dose and mixture of drugs and other treatments. Hell, you made the same argument.
52 ottovbvs // Aug 5, 2009 at 8:18 pm
liv&win // Aug 5, 2009 at 7:42 pm
“Otto: Homogenizing is my term, ”
………So he never said it……the red pill/blue pill metaphor was simply a parable to explain we need quantitive analysis of treatment effectiveness……..A good idea I would have thought
“every human is different. Our body chemistry is different and medical solutions don’t fit work for each and every person the same. In truth, a lot of medicine is trial and error to get the right dose and mixture of drugs and other treatments. Hell, you made the same argument.”
………Of course but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a place for analysing outcomes when it comes to treatment…….what are the clinical tests of new drugs but quantitive analysis of their effects ……or that our healthcare system which is a vast patchwork quilt of different administrative systems and procedures wouldn’t benefit from the application of some MacDonalds or Wal-Mart systematization……basically you have an ideological viewpoint and you’re desperately scratching around to find reasonably coherent arguments to bolster it
53 sinz54 // Aug 6, 2009 at 8:56 am
ottovbvs: I’m always in favor of more standardization. (Where would America be today without time zones and common carriers?)
But on health care, we could have gotten standardization, a mandate on insurers for guaranteed issue, and lots of other good things–WITHOUT the insistence by liberals on a public option whose rates are set so low that the public option can unfairly compete with private insurers and drive them out of the market. (The CBO study didn’t think that would happen, but it assumed a reimbursement rate for the public option that was MUCH higher than what liberals are demanding–that it be set by Medicare rates.)
That has been the only major sticking point.
If there were real constraints on the public option so it can NEVER, EVER lead us to single-payer, I would have found ObamaCare a fairly good plan. Just like I thought RomneyCare had much to recommend it.
The liberals are losing center-rightists like me by their lying and scheming to sneak single-payer past us by stealth.
That point is non-negotiable. If ObamaCare is designed to lead us to single-payer, those of us in the center-right (as well as those on the right) cannot support it.
54 liv&win // Aug 6, 2009 at 11:53 am
Sinz: from the WSJ editorial pages today:
As for the spending, when has a new entitlement ever come in under budget? True, the 2003 prescription drug benefit has, but those surprise savings derived from the private insurance design and competition that Democrats opposed and now want to kill. The better model for ObamaCare is the original estimate for Medicare spending when it was passed in 1965, and what has happened since.
That year, Congressional actuaries (CBO wasn’t around then) expected Medicare to cost $3.1 billion in 1970. In 1969, that estimate was pushed to $5 billion, and it really came in at $6.8 billion. House Ways and Means analysts estimated in 1967 that Medicare would cost $12 billion in 1990. They were off by a factor of 10—actual spending was $110 billion—even as its benefits coverage failed to keep pace with standards in the private market. Medicare spending in the first nine months of this fiscal year is $314 billion and growing by 10%. Some of this historical error is due to 1970s-era inflation, as well as advancements in care and technology. But Democrats also clearly underestimated—or lowballed—the public’s appetite for “free” health care.
ObamaCare’s deficit hole will eventually have to be filled one way or another—along with Medicare’s unfunded liability of some $37 trillion. That means either reaching ever-deeper into middle-class pockets with taxes, probably with a European-style value-added tax that will depress economic growth. Or with the very restrictions on care and reimbursement that have been imposed on Medicare itself as costs exploded.
On the latter point, the 1965 Medicare statute explicitly stated that “Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize any Federal official or employee to exercise any supervision or control over the practice of medicine or the manner in which medical services are provided.” Yet now such government management of doctors and hospitals is so pervasive in Medicare that Mr. Obama can casually wonder in a recent interview with Time magazine how anyone could oppose the “benign changes” that he supports, such as “how the delivery system works.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203609204574314622075560890.html
55 sinz54 // Aug 7, 2009 at 12:57 pm
liv&win: I know something about the Medicare situation from first-hand experience.
It’s not that Dems “low-balled” it. It’s that medicine has changed a whole lot since Medicare was enacted, more than 40 years ago.
Back then, most folks with congestive heart failure or kidney failure didn’t have much of a chance of surviving more than a couple of years after diagnosis. So they died, and stopped costing Medicare anything more.
Today, medicine has advanced to the point that it can keep heart patients and kidney patients alive–but at a very high cost. They’re paying $100,000 this past year to keep me alive.
The skyrocketing cost of insurance, both public and private, isn’t really due to waste or low-balling or deliberate fraud. Sure, those things exist in all large organizations–but they’re an overhead charge on top of the actual cost. It’s not like there is ten times more fraud today than there was 40 years ago.
What has happened is that we have entered an age of cost-INEFFECTIVE medicine: Unlike other fields such as computers, advancing technology has RAISED the cost of health care, not lowered it. And that’s because the goal–keeping the patient alive–has no upper bound on cost. We treat each day of a patient’s life as if it’s infinitely precious–and we’ll spend whatever it takes to keep the patient alive, if the patient wants to fight to stay alive.
You must log in to post a comment.