Jump to content

Devilish34

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,732

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Devilish34

    Terrorist

    in Politics, Religion & War

    Posted

    This is big. How far are we willing to go to sacrifice freedom for safety? Devilish, I'm actually surprised at your comment, knowing your political leanings.

    As far as my families safety goes if it eliminates an exploding underwear terrorist from getting on a plane yes I'm fine with it.

    But in all honesty what is that much different that a metal detector or hand wand. Hell they did far worse than a full body scan

    when my wife few with my daughter who was 10 months old at the time. I would of rather had a full body scan done rather than the strip search they did to her.

    Terrorist

    in Politics, Religion & War

    Posted

    I also read that "puffer machines" that blow a small thing of air at you and then collect and analyze particles that fall off would have also detected the explosives. IE there is more then one way to skin a cat. Full body scanners as you described sound like a huge breech of privacy and I am glad they aren't being used. If you are that afraid of being blown up on a plane, stop flying. We don't need to sacrifice our civility just because a bunch of a$$holes in the middle east did.

    But I find it weird how the same people are willing to sacrifice their time, privacy, and money for a little extra security while flying yet would scoff at the idea of making cars conform to more rigid safety standards. the odds of you dying on the way to the airport because some idiot was programming his GPS or texting or trying to put 2 and a half sugars into his coffee are exponentially greater then dying on the plane you intend to take. Flying for the past few decades has been incredibly safe, I think only walking has a lower morality rate in terms of transportation yet always people freak out.

    I'm not really sure what it is that makes people go nuts. General fear of dying in a plane related way? It can't be a fear or terrorism because people still goto sporting events, shopping malls, use other forms of mass transit etc all of which are much more exposed. Hell I don't even know why terrorists would bother trying to board a plane, you could easily run into a crowded airport terminal with a bomb strapped to your chest and detonate and cause 10 times as much damage then just a single plane while it tried to land. Maybe we should start scanning people with full body scanners as they leave their house?

    If a full body scan keeps my family safe I'm fine with it.

    Terrorist

    in Politics, Religion & War

    Posted

    Watching the news last night, I was struck by something Obama said when commenting about this. He described the suspect as an "extremist". Never heard the word "terrorist". At least not in the clip I saw.

    We must not use the "T" word.

    Health Care 1/6 of our ECONOMY

    in Politics, Religion & War

    Posted

    The politicians beholden to insurance companies sadly will not let single payer become a serious possibility any time soon. Also with single payer you can choose whatever doctors you want to go to, so I'm not sure what you mean by less choices. Doctors are still private businesses so the government doesn't have control over them either. Their only involvement in single payer is paying for it. You seem to be confusing single payer with a socialized health care system.

    I don't want single payer nor do I want public option and yes your options will be reduced. Have you ever called any government agency when you had a problem with their service?

    Panel Urges Mammograms at 50, Not 40

    in Politics, Religion & War

    Posted

    Tell her what? That doctors now think the harms of once a year screenings starting at 40 now out weigh any "extra early" detection that is just as effective as every two years starting at 50? Ok. I don't see how that would offend her, why would it? If doctors tell me I need to get a colonoscopy less frequently because new research shows that there is no gain by doing it as often then I am fine with that. If they go on further to explain the harms of getting one done at the same rate and explain how I can avoid those as well I would be more then happy with their decision. I might ask more then one doctor and not just trust one article I read in a paper but if there seems to be a general consensus I'll take their word for it. Those people are a lot smarter then me in that field, just because they are saving money doesn't mean they are sacrificing my care.

    I thought you wanted more preventive HC to help reduce HC costs? So now reducing it is fine? I thought you would feel that more screening would be better.

    Panel Urges Mammograms at 50, Not 40

    in Politics, Religion & War

    Posted

    Except no one is prevented from getting a mammogram every day if they wanted too, they just have to pay for it. The difference is when it comes to Medicare should tax payers pay for a procedure at a frequency that recent studies are showing that there is no appreciable difference by testing every two years as opposed to one.

    Testing every 6 months might save a few lives too, hell testing every day might save even more yet we don't do that. Why? because we trusted scientists and doctors who said "every year starting at 40 is 'good enough'". Why would we stop trusting them now, when they are saying every 2 years starting at 50 is 'good enough'? Seems funny to me that you are willing to listen to them when it's convenient for your political point you continue to try to score.

    And again, this has nothing to do with "death panels". Sarah Palin stole that description from some other chick used to describe covering payments for end of life care. If you don't thing thats something we should cover, fine say that. I'm indifferent. But don't call it a death panel. No one is forcing seniors to go before a council of doctors to see if they have expired and it's time to toss in the towel for them. It's a ridiculous statement and shameful that people continue to purport it as such.

    Tell this to a woman who has had yearly screenings and still has to have a mastectomy.

    Exclusive: Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts

    in Politics, Religion & War

    Posted

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jobs-saved-created-congressional-districts-exist/story?id=9097853

    Exclusive: Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts That Don't Exist

    Human Error Blamed for Crediting New Stimulus Jobs to Nonexistent Places

    By JONATHAN KARL

    Nov. 16, 2009

    Another question is, since the gov't claimed to have done some fact checking to get rid of bogus numbers how do such obvious things as this get missed?

    I am certain there is a logical explanation for what have to be just simple errors.

    Now we just need someone to do this hmm

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept