• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

John McCain Diagnosed With Brain Cancer

simonxlong said:
What a load of horse manure. All a ground swell of well wishing means is that people sympathize with someone who has a horrific disease. We tend to send well wishes to anyone when we hear they have such an illness, at least I do, and it has been my general experience that most others seem to as well. My wife has been fighting cervical cancer for over two and half years and complete strangers send her well wishes all the time through Facebook ,e-mail, and even occasionally random phone calls simply because they hear about her illness from a friend, church, coworker, support group, etc. No kidding, she has literally gotten random calls from complete strangers offering prayers and well wishes simply because they happen to hear about her illness from a friend or coworker and actually take the time to track down her phone number. The only difference is that McCain happens to be famous, so more people hear of his illness, which means more well wishers. It is no way implies that one life is more valuable than another and his comments are insulting to good sense. It takes a really crappy human being to criticize people simply for offering support for someone in a bad way.
Click to expand...
:thumbsup::thumbsup: nommed
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Don't forget the dishonesty here, after McCain said the health care bill should fail so it can be addressed like a regular bill, not this 51 vote shenanigans.

And the hypocrisy in taking health care away from millions while he gets cadillac treatment on the taxpayer's dime.
Click to expand...

But if there are 51 votes tomorrow it still gets talked about, right? Hearings, public comment, etc.? I am not really clear on this.

ETA: I'm not sure senators are really clear on this either.
ETA2: CNN took out one of the "criticals" and the reworked version is clearer. As far as I can tell Tuesday's vote does not do much in terms of binding senators' commitments. If there are 51 votes the bill will not be strangled at birth. But I could be wrong!!
 
Last edited:
logger said:
Lol
The only thing I can guess is the site must originate from the UK. Ive changed the spelling so many times I quit doing it awhile ago.
Click to expand...

Where do you originate?
That is the question.

Of course, I am joking. :D

Mostly.
;)

My computer is in the USA, in the State of Georgia.
When I lived in Pennsylvania, or when I lived in Michigan,
my computer never reset itself to anything other than
American English.
 
snoop_doxie said:
my computer never reset itself to anything other than
American English.
Click to expand...


Because it's not something that computers or web browsers do on their own. Language settings are for you, the user, not whatever site you happen to be visiting.

Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP> Edited for rule 0 and rule 12
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Minoosh said:
But if there are 51 votes tomorrow it still gets talked about, right? Hearings, public comment, etc.? I am not really clear on this.

ETA: I'm not sure senators are really clear on this either.
ETA2: CNN took out one of the "criticals" and the reworked version is clearer. As far as I can tell Tuesday's vote does not do much in terms of binding senators' commitments. If there are 51 votes the bill will not be strangled at birth. But I could be wrong!!
Click to expand...
There's too much to distrust to think moving the bill to the floor is the innocent move McConnell is claiming.

McConnell says the bill will be open for all discussion and all amendments. Yet we see again he wants a vote on a bill that only a select few have seen the most recent changes. How are those two things consistent?

It's been said that there is pork for whichever Senators are holding out to get to the 51 votes.

So the scenario that appears to be forming is, get an unknown bill past a technical step that needs to happen, then watch all the amendments offered by Democrats go down in minority flames, while McConnell buys GOP Senators with state pork or pet issue bribes.

I see no other scenarios that fit the evidence. Anyone care to suggest another?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
There's too much to distrust to think moving the bill to the floor is the innocent move McConnell is claiming.

McConnell says the bill will be open for all discussion and all amendments. Yet we see again he wants a vote on a bill that only a select few have seen the most recent changes. How are those two things consistent?

It's been said that there is pork for whichever Senators are holding out to get to the 51 votes.

So the scenario that appears to be forming is, get an unknown bill past a technical step that needs to happen, then watch all the amendments offered by Democrats go down in minority flames, while McConnell buys GOP Senators with state pork or pet issue bribes.

I see no other scenarios that fit the evidence. Anyone care to suggest another?
Click to expand...

Sadly, sounds about right :(

It's astonishing how principles can evaporate when your mouth is stuffed with gold.

GOP senators will be voting in favour of something about which they have no idea and are gambling on the fact that when the negative impact comes around, they won't be held accountable by the people who put them in office. Unfortunately I think that's a pretty good bet.
 
logger said:
Excep in the second post I said "the democrat party is made up of single issue voters" that might have been your clue that I was discussing "voters" not "congress people"
Click to expand...

Not even a remotely serious response! "democrat party" is in no way synonymous with "voters" in general elections given that we were talking about how Democrats and Republicans vote in the Senate.

Just give it up!
 
angrysoba said:
Not even a remotely serious response! "democrat party" is in no way synonymous with "voters" in general elections given that we were talking about how Democrats and Republicans vote in the Senate.

Just give it up!
Click to expand...

Why should I give it up, I get the opportunity to explain my meaning making your post look foolish. Besides, the rest of the sentence should have been your clue. ;)
 
Should someone with a brain tumour be allowed to vote? They would not be allowed to fly a plane, or drive (at least in the UK). This is someone who literally is not in his right mind (if we believe the mind is a product of the brain). Why should someone with brain disease be allowed to take decisions that could result in thousands of deaths?

More generally I would introduce a don't drink and vote law, politicians should be subject to breathalyser and not allowed to vote if they are not fit to drive.
 
Planigale said:
Should someone with a brain tumour be allowed to vote? They would not be allowed to fly a plane, or drive (at least in the UK). This is someone who literally is not in his right mind (if we believe the mind is a product of the brain). Why should someone with brain disease be allowed to take decisions that could result in thousands of deaths?

More generally I would introduce a don't drink and vote law, politicians should be subject to breathalyser and not allowed to vote if they are not fit to drive.
Click to expand...

The issue for driving, flying etc. is perception and reaction time, not information processing and rational thought. I would think that Sen. McCain might have some exceptionally valuable insights into our health care system that he didn't have a month ago. He might even be responsive to a question like "Senator, what would you do now if you didn't have health insurance provided to you by taxpayers who might not have it for themselves?" (We don't need to mention his rich wife.)
 
angrysoba said:
John McCain has outlived any respect I might have had for him.
Click to expand...

Why is this even a surprise ?

For well over a decade his words (pretending to be an independent minded representative for his constituents) and deeds (slavishly following the party line however much that contradicts his promises, rhetoric or stated principles) have been at odds. His selection of Sarah Palin as running mate IMO marked him out as a party shill no longer deserving whatever respect people may have had for him for his independent-mindedness.
 
The Don said:
Why is this even a surprise ?

For well over a decade his words (pretending to be an independent minded representative for his constituents) and deeds (slavishly following the party line however much that contradicts his promises, rhetoric or stated principles) have been at odds. His selection of Sarah Palin as running mate IMO marked him out as a party shill no longer deserving whatever respect people may have had for him for his independent-mindedness.
Click to expand...

It's not much of a surprise. I was actually hoping that his experience would give him the clarity to see what it was would happen if he denied more people healthcare.
 
angrysoba said:
It's not much of a surprise. I was actually hoping that his experience would give him the clarity to see what it was would happen if he denied more people healthcare.
Click to expand...

He did manage to heroically fly to Washington to kill thousands of Americans, that has to count for something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom