Health, Humor, Legal, McCain, politics, Satire, Trifling Person of the Week

TPN‘s Trifling Ex-Politico of the Week

sarah-palinSarah Palin

Death camps? What in the name of hyperbole have you been smoking, Mrs. P? I get that you’re trying to be the voice of those who think Ann Coulter is too liberal. But this is why you’re trifling: I want DEBATE over Obama’s healthcare plan. I want people in your position to tell me why you think it’s bad (or good) without resorting to irresponsible sound bites that get us away from the question of what we can do for the millions who have no health care. If I want bluster, I can listen to all the shouting and pushing at the town halls. From the people who’ve been elected to office and then stepped down when it became too much, I expect–umm, no, actually, I’d like a bit more restraint.

–Xavier Muhammad

© 2009 The Peoples News

Advertisements

Discussion

18 thoughts on “TPN‘s Trifling Ex-Politico of the Week

  1. Trifling indeed. But perhaps even worse are the people who are being so easily led by all of this propoganda—which is most likely coming from people who are affiliated with big business. The insurance companies exist to deny claims…that’s how they maintain a profit. How’s that any worse than these so called “death panels” that all these bozos are shouting about.

    You are being manipulated by these corporations to speak on their behalf…get a clue folks. And half of those guys disrupting town hall meetings are middle-aged and overweight. You’ll be wishing for that “socialized medicine” in a few short years dumb@ss.

    Xavier Muhammad responds: Come on, Lou. I understand the emotions this topics causes, but words like ‘bozos’ and profanity are just as charged as ‘death camps.’

    Posted by LOU | August 14, 2009, 11:31 am
  2. How about this – there are over 300 million people in the USA – only about 5% do not have access to health care. Why in the ‘heck’ does the government feel moved to overhaul an entire industry when they have proven to be completely inept at so many things. (We all know the list)
    Look at the time and money they are pouring into this charade.
    Xavier, seriously… if our government thinks nothing of destroying unborn children how high up on their priority list is an 82 year old man in need of heart surgery. He is not going to even make the list unless… he has MONEY! So we are going to find ourselves in a situation where the rich will go where ever they need to, to get what they need and even more of us middle class and poor folk will be waiting and waiting… unable to get what is available to us at least for now.

    Xavier Muhammad responds: THANK YOU, Renee, for providing some reasonable points. It’s not Sarah’s objection that I object to. It’s her language.

    Anyone else?

    Posted by Renee | August 14, 2009, 12:12 pm
    • I was totally following you – everyone needs to reason this out. Our elected officials like to keep the public in a state of panic or confusion, as long as we keep that in mind – we can reason it out.

      Posted by Renee | August 14, 2009, 8:09 pm
  3. Evidently Sarah brought up a legitimate concern, the ‘end-of-life’ provision has been dropped from the bill:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090813/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_end_of_life_2 (Can also be found on Drudge)

    No one would have listened unless Sarah used her “language”!

    Posted by Jim | August 14, 2009, 2:17 pm
  4. Page 425 – 450 of the dems health care plan for you liberals that care to know the truth. And yes, this provision that our dear leader said did not exist has now been deleted from the proposal.

    Xavier Muhammad responds: Yeah, see, ‘you liberals’ is the kind of thing I’m trying to get past. But we can’t even do it for one comment? That does not bode well.

    Posted by Mike | August 15, 2009, 4:49 am
    • Xavier, why does “you liberals” upset you? Also, please talk to an ER nurse and ask her (or him) how much it costs taxpayers for the uninsured to use the ER for their ‘social gatherings’.

      Xavier Muhammad responds: ‘You liberals’ in itself does not upset me, Jim.(And NOT just because I’m not liberal). But I’d like to avoid name calling here so we can have a good, RATIONAL discussion. Please re-read my criticism of Palin. It wasn’t her objection to Obama’s plans that annoyed me. It was the hyperbole she used.

      I take it you’ve talked to an ER nurse or two. What do they say? (And I’m not sure what you mean by ‘social gatherings,’ so please explain that too. Thanks)

      Posted by Jim | August 15, 2009, 8:51 pm
  5. And dear Moh’d, elected and STILL serving dems call opponents to massive government spending “radicals” “fringe elements” and worse? You don’t object to that? Yet you still have a sore spot for what an ex-vice presidential candidate says? What gives?

    Posted by Mike | August 15, 2009, 4:52 am
  6. I have a contribution to make, for all those “millions” that don’t have health care, go buy some. I have five kids, and guess who provided food, health care and education for them? One guess.

    Xavier Muhammad responds: You put millions in quotes. That sounds like you don’t believe that many people lack health care, Mike. How many would you say are without? Thousands? Dozens? No one?

    I will say that your solution to the lack of health care, however–just go buy some–is genius.

    Posted by Mike | August 15, 2009, 5:11 am
  7. Renee, it’s odd how you advise that I ‘think outside of party lines”… and then go through a list of partisan talking points–the old straw man arguments abortion and killing old people. Perhaps you should take your own advice!
    The bottom line is that there are millions who don’t have anything, so the existence of an option can only be of benefit because it’s better than nothing.

    At any rate, this is a moot point now that the whole thing will most likely be shot down by the senate anyway.

    Posted by LOU | August 17, 2009, 9:01 am
    • LOU – so you do listen to AM radio then?
      First – these are ‘personal talking points’ – I made them up in my own head based on how I see things – if I happen to agree with a certain party… sorry… I just respect human life…
      Second, I see your confusion – abortion really is legal and really does destroy human life – It is never a “straw man” argument. Of course “abortion” is used as a threat ever four years: “if we elect a conservative we will lose our right to abortion” ARGH! “Anything but that!” Hyperbole indeed!
      Tell me LOU – how many conservatives have been in the White House since abortion became legal – and -this is the point: we haven’t lost our right to rip an inconvenient truth from the womb. Thank GOD!
      hhmm… (that last part was sarcasm LOU)
      Anyway – my main point was – our govenment does not need to change anything I have to provide for the ‘have-nots’ and I would prefer they didn’t.

      Posted by Renee | August 20, 2009, 1:34 am
  8. I believe you misunderstood my point… I’m referring to how the threat of government funded “abortion” and “euthanasia” are being used as detractors to health care reform. I’m not an advocate of either. My concern is over the crookedness of modern day health insurance companies, who see fit to conduct practices like post-claim underwriting and go out of their way to deny claims after charging exorbitant monthly premiums to their clients. The health insurance game is a racket and deserves the same kind of treatment as credit card companies were recently given.

    Posted by LOU | August 21, 2009, 8:11 am
    • What? They are not! Not in one single conversation, that I have had, in the last 6 months, has “abortion” or “euthanasia” come up.
      There is a big difference between letting or forcing someone to die and helping someone end their life. Don’t ya’ think?
      My daughter and son both have government health insurance through the military. My son says it is a fiasco and my daughter pays for additional coverage from a private company.
      What personal experience are speaking from LOU? This is exactly why I said you need to think outside your party line box.
      If the problem is with the insurance companies – (my little birdies say it is the HMO’s) – then let’s set some rules for insurance –
      And did you notice LOU that even though a majority of the people are against health care reform – the Congress is thinking of pushing it through anyway… NICE!
      So… from your original comment: “You are being manipulated by your party to speak on their behalf…get a clue folks.”

      Posted by Renee | August 24, 2009, 8:01 am
      • I’m not thinking within any party line–I’m just thinking period. Your making ridiculous assumptions about something that hasn’t even come into existence yet!Scroll up a bit and read your own comment. You make mention of abortion and some hypothetical scenario about the government letting an 82 year-old man die…when private health insurance is already doing this in some cases, not to mention contributing to the economic collapse of this country by leaving people in 100’s of thousands of dollars worth of debt. (One of the foremost reasons for bankruptcy filing in America) If not an option than at least some type of reform is needed. Tell me, what exactly is my ‘party line”? Oh that’s right you have no idea cause we’re on an internet response forum!

        Take care.

        Posted by LOU | August 25, 2009, 11:53 am
  9. …and abortion is a political football, used by BOTH PARTIES as a scare tactic to rally people to the voting booths. The pro-life stance is a convenient hat that can be worn to get the evangelical vote, yet with a republican controlled congress from the early nineties to 2006, nothing has changed. Politicians have a vested interest in keeping this debate going!Better to leave such sensitive topics up to personal choice and vote on the bigger issues.

    Posted by LOU | August 21, 2009, 8:37 am
  10. “The pro-life stance is a convenient hat that can be worn to get the evangelical vote,” – Is this a bad thing? – For a politician to state his position and then for those who feel the same way to vote for him? What is your point?
    “Politicians have a vested interest in keeping this debate going! Better to leave such sensitive topics up to personal choice and vote on the bigger issues.”
    Let me think…. something bigger than life…. actually I made this point two weeks ago.

    Posted by Renee | August 24, 2009, 8:08 am
  11. …If you think any of them care about or are even capable of outlawing abortion, you’re kidding yourself.

    Posted by LOU | August 25, 2009, 8:59 am
  12. LOU are you reading what I write? I am guessing from your responses – you are not. I already pointed out that the abortion laws haven’t changed regardless of who is in the White House – did you miss that?
    Here’s the deal with picking pro-life people: it is not about changing the abortion laws. a person who is pro-life is certainly going to have a different “world-view’ than someone who thinks it is okay to destroy their little problem.

    Posted by Renee | August 25, 2009, 2:37 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Peoples News on Twitter

The People’s News Archive

invisible hit counter
%d bloggers like this: