[DallasFlier]

Originally Posted by JSanders

Does seem one or two here need to chill out, get some editing done or go away.

I would define a personal attack as intentionally making reference to another user here in a damaging manner. We can call Obama a nutjob liberal rascist, and you can refer to Republicans as a whole as idiot fascists.

But you will not refer to members of this forum in any similar damaging manner.

That is the way I understand the statement above.

JS, and the other mods - one comment on the above, from someone who's moderated another forum where the political discussions got out of hand from a select few.

To say "you can refer to Republicans (or Democrats) as a whole as idiot fascists" as long as you don't refer to members of the forum in any similar damaging manner leaves a loophole big enough to drive a truck through. We had this very problem, finally had to ban one poster permanently. Doesn't matter what party he was, but everytime a poster of the opposite made a comment in a political thread, he'd reply by first saying something like "All <name the party you hate> are clueless morons. Anyone who would advocate <position of the other party> is obviously an idiot with no brain."

When confronted, he'd hide behind the defense that he hadn't made reference specifically to any member of the forum. He hadn't, but the timing of his remark along with the context made it very obvious which member he was replying to and who he was in essense calling an idiot.

So, my plea would be - don't let that happen here - from either side!

[JSanders]

Good point, Dallas.

Don't call Republicans idiot fascists. We know who really is, right? Just kidding!

I think you are correct though in that is a broad rule. Damn I hate rules. And personally, I'd rather have none in this section of the forum... be civil and don't make personal attacks. Period. We all know what that means and IF you have a doubt, then don't, and you will be safe.

[turn_key]

Not to continue the above disagreement, but the term "illegal alien" isn't a racist comment, it's a fact. However, the left has turned any criticism of any race/culture into professed bigotry, and the media has made Hispanics synonymous with illegal immigration. In Chicago an illegal alien's child is more likely to be of European decent than Hispanic, but the fact remains; they are here illegally and the burden of education and health care falls on the legal, law abiding, taxpaying citizens.

I stand with Dawg and his opposition to the school's redistribution of wealth policy. The school, and the government for that matter, should not have the power to take what he worked so hard for to give it to anyone else, whether it's pencils or money... but that's what the underlying problem is with government health care, or any other type of socialist policy; it punishes those who work and rewards those who don't. Realistically Dawg is getting double taxed; he pays taxes to support the school system and paid for supplies for his children twice. I don't see how anyone could justify that.

On the topic of health care, all I have to imagine is Cook County hospital and most Veteran's hospitals; you go there because it's free and if you had a choice they would be last. Having those as my only options is a frightening thought. The free market is what drives quality and price; through competition. I choose to travel downtown, pay for parking and pay higher rates to see a specialist at Northwestern hospital because he is one of the best in his field and Northwestern is one of the best hospitals in the city. I have the choice and I don't want the government telling me where to go, what doctor to see and what procedures/medications I can have. And I certainly don't want to wait months to get them.

There is no doubt that our current system is wrought with problems, and it's not perfect, but I don't believe socialized health care is the answer. Government regulation I can understand and support to an extent, but total government control never works in the way we want it to. The answer is elusive, but tort reform and eliminating health care for illegals would be a good start.

The thought of free health care is appealing. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to pay nothing for the quality of service I get, but I really think the quality would diminish if the government controlled my hospitals. Cook County and Jesse Brown VA hospitals are like the Secretary of State's office (or DMV); stand in one line for an hour to be told you're in the wrong line, then stand in another to pay then go back to the end of the line again. I would not receive the same quality of care from either of those hospitals as I do from my own.

[Dawg]

Originally Posted by turn_key

Not to continue the above disagreement, but the term "illegal alien" isn't a racist comment, it's a fact. However, the left has turned any criticism of any race/culture into professed bigotry, and the media has made Hispanics synonymous with illegal immigration. In Chicago an illegal alien's child is more likely to be of European decent than Hispanic, but the fact remains; they are here illegally and the burden of education and health care falls on the legal, law abiding, taxpaying citizens.

I stand with Dawg and his opposition to the school's redistribution of wealth policy. The school, and the government for that matter, should not have the power to take what he worked so hard for to give it to anyone else, whether it's pencils or money... but that's what the underlying problem is with government health care, or any other type of socialist policy; it punishes those who work and rewards those who don't. Realistically Dawg is getting double taxed; he pays taxes to support the school system and paid for supplies for his children twice. I don't see how anyone could justify that.

On the topic of health care, all I have to imagine is Cook County hospital and most Veteran's hospitals; you go there because it's free and if you had a choice they would be last. Having those as my only options is a frightening thought. The free market is what drives quality and price; through competition. I choose to travel downtown, pay for parking and pay higher rates to see a specialist at Northwestern hospital because he is one of the best in his field and Northwestern is one of the best hospitals in the city. I have the choice and I don't want the government telling me where to go, what doctor to see and what procedures/medications I can have. And I certainly don't want to wait months to get them.

There is no doubt that our current system is wrought with problems, and it's not perfect, but I don't believe socialized health care is the answer. Government regulation I can understand and support to an extent, but total government control never works in the way we want it to. The answer is elusive, but tort reform and eliminating health care for illegals would be a good start.

The thought of free health care is appealing. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to pay nothing for the quality of service I get, but I really think the quality would diminish if the government controlled my hospitals. Cook County and Jesse Brown VA hospitals are like the Secretary of State's office (or DMV); stand in one line for an hour to be told you're in the wrong line, then stand in another to pay then go back to the end of the line again. I would not receive the same quality of care from either of those hospitals as I do from my own.

Awesome post. And summed up exactly what I have been trying to say.

[test54]

very well, I will edit my above statements to comply with Jsanders.

I agree that the redistribution of the school stuff is wrong and should not happen.

[test54]

Originally Posted by turn_key

There is no doubt that our current system is wrought with problems, and it's not perfect, but I don't believe socialized health care is the answer. Government regulation I can understand and support to an extent, but total government control never works in the way we want it to. The answer is elusive, but tort reform and eliminating health care for illegals would be a good start.

well I agree tort reform would be a great start but its far from a solution. The bottom line will still be both insurance companies and hospitals as a for-profit business where their first priority is the share holder and not the patient. The bottom line will control the level of care you get.

[djm2]

And don't assume that simply going to a not-for-profit model will work either. BCBS is not-for-profit here -- must be by law -- and they manage to jack up the prices quite nicely, thank you, and pay exorbitant administrative salaries while cherry picking their coverage.