How we can hijack the media, in four easy lessons
Love it, hate it, good story, bad story... the media are going to keep reporting on ME/CFS no matter what. But isn’t it time that we saw that coverage as an opportunity?
Discuss the article on the Forums.

letting uninsured die

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Merry, Sep 13, 2011.

  1. Merry

    Merry Senior Member

    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    Audience at Tea Party Debate Cheers Leaving Uninsured to Die

    by Rachel Ross Hartman

    If you're uninsured and on the brink of death, that's apparently a laughing matter to some audience members at last night's tea party Republican presidential debate.

    Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a doctor, was asked a hypothetical question by CNN host Wolf Blitzer about how society should respond if a healthy 30-year-old man who decided against buying health insurance suddenly goes into a coma and requires intensive care for six months. Paul--a fierce limited-government advocate-- said it shouldn't be the government's responsibility. "That's what freedom is all about, taking your own risks," Paul said and was drowned out by audience applause as he added, "this whole idea that you have to prepare to take care of everybody "

    "Are you saying that society should just let him die?" Blitzer pressed Paul. And that's when the audience got involved.

    Several loud cheers of "yeah!" followed by laughter could be heard in the Expo Hall at the Florida State Fairgrounds in response to Blitzer's question.

    To read more of the article and see the video:
    CJB likes this.
  2. Carrigon

    Carrigon Senior Member

    PA, USA
    People are so gross. I wouldn't let him die, but I would try to stick him with the medical bills.
  3. mellster

    mellster Marco

    San Francisco
    Pretty disgusting indeed. There is definitely room for limited-government while keeping essential services such as health-care, police/firefighters etc. and education available for everybody. Ron Paul is right though that this is part of the price of freedom, you would have to set up a system similar to social security and mandate everybody who can pay paying into it (like it is done in most European countries). Everybody deserves decent healthcare IMO so it might be worth it.
  4. Waverunner

    Waverunner Senior Member

    When we talk about Ron Paul we should look at the full picture. Does the current system work very well? No, it does not, it's much too expensive and there is no such thing as a free market. Big pharma is making big money by producing drugs that don't cure any disease but rather make you a lifetime member of taking them. Did the FDA ever do anything good for people with CFS? No, it didn't, we are all still ill. To the contrary, as was pointed out in another thread, the FDA has no incentive to approve drugs very fast. Does Ampligen ring a bell? The FDA makes it impossible for small companies to develop drugs but not only this, by slowing down the approval process, it kills thousands of people every year. Who is going to sue the FDA? The dead people? No, the FDA gets away with killing people by claiming that it is necessary for the benefit of all of us. All the FDA does is limit competition, secure monopolies and drive up prices for health. At the same time it keeps most people from taking care of themselves and their health on their own because they have no incentives to do so.

    Here is a video where Milton Friedman says something very interesting about healthcare in a free market:

    And here is what Ron Paul says about healthcare:

    In these United States of America, one of the wealthiest countries on the planet, many people cannot afford even basic health insurance. They suffer severely under the present system and have to live under the constant fear of not knowing what they will do if they or their loved ones ever fall seriously ill.

    But in many cases, insured individuals arent much better off either. In comparison to the exorbitant insurance premiums they pay, the medical care they receive is often very poor.

    Additionally, due to the government-enforced monopolies of HMOs (Health Maintenance Organizations) and pharmaceutical companies, many patients will never even hear about some of the most effective and non-invasive treatment methods. These natural and inexpensive ways of regaining ones health are being suppressed by the FDA and the medical establishment not because of safety concerns (theyve been around for hundreds of years), but because they cannot be patented and would therefore cut into the pharmaceutical industrys profits.

    The current system is most definitely broken, and it must eventually be abolished if we want to regain both our health and our freedom.

    But Obamacare is the worst possible answer. All it does is perpetuate a flawed system by forcing everyone to become a client of insurance companies, even those who dont want to or need to participate.

    Why should anyone be forced to subsidize the medical care of others? Very few individuals would personally assault their neighbors at gunpoint and steal thousands of dollars to pay for their own medical needs. How could any freedom loving person agree to delegate such criminal acts to the government by supporting a compulsory health insurance system?

    There is only one solution that will lead to true health and true freedom: making health care more affordable. Ron Paul believes that only true free market competition will put pressure on the providers and force them to lower their costs to remain in business. Additionally, Ron Paul wants to change the tax code to allow individual Americans to fully deduct all health care costs from their taxes.

    Through these measures and the elimination of government-sponsored health care monopolies a much larger number of people will be able to finally access affordable health care, either by paying for medical insurance or by covering their medical expenses, which are now much lower, out of their own pocket.

    As for the poor and the severely ill who can neither obtain insurance nor pay for the medical care they need, Ron Paul offers the following solution in his book The Revolution: A Manifesto:

    In the days before Medicare and Medicaid, the poor and elderly were admitted to hospitals at the same rate they are now, and received good care. Before those programs came into existence, every physician understood that he or she had a responsibility towards the less fortunate and free medical care was the norm. Hardly anyone is aware of this today, since it doesnt fit into the typical, by the script story of government rescuing us from a predatory private sector.

    Illegal aliens already receive de-facto free health care. Why cant poor Americans have the same not as a right, but as a charitable benefit provided by doctors who feel a personal responsibility for their fellow citizens?

    Unfortunately, the current medical monopoly corrupts many doctors by rewarding practices that are not in the patients best interest. Pharmaceutical companies have a vested interest in not curing people, but getting them permanently addicted to expensive drugs that have many side effects, thereby requiring additional drugs to suppress those side effects. Many doctors are afraid to speak up and question the system for fear of being ostracized by their peers or even losing their license.

    Under a liberated health care system prices would come down and additional options would become available, thereby making health care much more affordable. Moral corruption would give way to true compassion, and many doctors would remember their implicit obligation to provide free medical care to those in need, just like they did in the past.

    As a medical doctor, Ron Paul swore the Hippocratic Oath many decades ago. His entire person and career is a monument to the beauty and sanctity of human life. Ron Paul knows that life without health can be very difficult and is not what it was meant to be. He has personally cared for the poor for many years, without asking anything in return.

    The governments original role is to protect our freedoms and restrain itself from causing too much harm. Ron Paul is working to prevent greedy bureaucrats, opportunist politicians and corrupt pharmaceutical companies from having any sort of unhealthy influence over our bodies and minds.
    rwac and ggingues like this.
  5. Mya Symons

    Mya Symons Mya Symons

    How about a situation where a person does plan and does have insurance but then gets to sick to work and can't afford the COBRA payments? This happens all the time in the United States. It happened to my husband and I. I hope these people have enough money saved up so when they get sick they won't have to sell off their belongings, end up on the street and then die because they can't afford surgery. I guess that attitude is "it hasn't happened to me and my family, so why worry about it?"
  6. Tony Mach

    Tony Mach Show me the evidence.

    Upper Palatinate, Bavaria
    From here from Europe I was wondering how could you worry about the lie about "death committees", while the real problem in your nation seems to be getting, paying and keeping(!) your health insurance.

    Here in germany (as in most European nations) the health industry (insurarers, hospitals, doctors, labs, etc.) is heavily regulated, which has two advantages:

    1. The prices for every health service is regulated. The price is set by a commission at a level that should cover the real costs plus a slight profit margin. That by itself keeps the prices of health care at a reasonable level. (That even applies if you pay the health service out of your pocket. Simple things like a doctor visit and simple procedures are affordable, while the same cost in the US is tenfold) Try going to the hospital with a bleeding limb and negotiate a price - HAHA. :(

    2. Nobody can be denied health insurance, and it is mandatory for most people (with a few exceptions). There are ways to "loose" insurance, but you have to actively seek to "loose" it and it can be difficult. So everybody pays, which further lowers the individual cost that is the principle of a insurance after all: If more people pay into it who don't need it at the moment, the cheaper it gets for all. (Doh? ;))

    It surely isn't perfect (and having ME/CFS here is a real problem). It takes some time until "novel" treatments are accepted. The pharmaceutical companies are heavily gaming the system. There is the possibility to get a "private" insurance (less regulated) instead of the government mandated one so the private insurarers are trying to get a bigger market share to make more profit at the expense of the public.

    Yet, whether healthy or sick, I would choose our system over the american (whether the current or any proposed) anytime.

    So, there.
  7. Merry

    Merry Senior Member

    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    For anyone who'd like further reading on the Tea Party audience cheers and healthcare Jacob Weisberg wrote an opinion piece at Slate:

    My own interest in this topic comes from my concern for others and from my worries for myself since losing, with divorce, major medical insurance.

    I also worry about my country. So much ugliness was revealed in the laughter and cheers in that audience.
    CJB likes this.
  8. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    There is an important issue here that I would like to address. In the context of ME and CFS, almost everyone is uninsured. Insurance will not typically cover most treatments that work, and nobody is funding the research to drive the evidence base forward. Certainly the insurance industry doesn't do this. Government spends so little its ludicrous. The attitude exhibited by some discussed in the earlier posts, according to what little I have read and think I understand, is equivalent to saying that if you have ME or CFS you can just go away and die. Most people who are not in our situation simply do not realize just how pathetic the medical resources available to us really are. There is more I could say but it involves getting into the pros and cons of specific medical insurance around the world - and to my way of thinking they have all failed. I am sure this is not just true for ME and CFS but other diseases as well. Gulf War Illness comes to mind.

    There can be no addressing of medical costs without spending time addressing the dearth of research into chronic disease. We can transplant a heart, but we can't cure AIDS. Acute surgery has come a long way, but basic research into the biology of disease is massively underfunded in favour of palliative drug therapy or acute crisis care. We can expect a steadily growing cost of dealing with the chronically ill. This cannot be corrected by better health insurance, nor by cutting social benefits to those who cannot work. This can only be corrected by well funded and scrutinized medical research.

    The medical insurance experiment in the USA I regard as a grand failure. From an outside observers perspective, it looks like a system that has driven up costs enormously while downgrading health care in the process. The very best of the US healthcare sector is the best in the world, but the USA also has some of the worst in the developed world - it depends not just on who you are insured with, but who your doctors are and what you insurer covers. So you can have insurance, but just don't expect it to help you get better.

    There is also a lot more emphasis on preventative campaigns ... like promoting exercise. This can indeed improve public health, but it is of no use to anybody with ME. These kinds of strategies can reduce the incidence of chronic illness, but can't cure them for the most part. Costs will keep rising and if society tries to deal with this by slashing expenses then we are headed for a crisis that makes the current health and economic crises look like a joke.

    I think that private health insurance could work, only it doesn't. One possible way out of this, which would be very unpopular I expect, is to create a levy on every insurer, therefore raising the cost of premiums, to fund medical research into diseases that are costing the most. Another way would be to create even larger tax breaks for insurers who donate money to medical research - very large tax breaks.

    rwac likes this.
  9. SilverbladeTE

    SilverbladeTE Senior Member

    Somewhere near Glasgow, Scotland
    Not surprising, saddening, but nto surprising
    This *IS* the eventual outcome of going down the very sick "rabbit hole" the US and now UK, ha sbeen going down


    NOT hyperbole, it's inevitable. People mean nothing to these gits, only oligarchs in their freakin' gated communities/mansions are the "real Humans", and moronic, compassionless, fascist yahoos hollering like the Hordes of Hell for greed and blood support the ratpukes, blech :/
    It's really about MONEY (saving the mega-rich paying a pittance in tax) and also control: "Be a good Citizen or you get no medical care!".

    Also shows how far to the Right the USA has moved in that even the article writer cannot mention the FOURTH choice he utterly ommitted: Universal Health Care
    Angela Kennedy likes this.
  10. markmc20001

    markmc20001 Guest

    ROn Paul is kind of an idealist, but he is also practical. He would not dismantle medicare. His position is to quit the wars so the country can afford medicare and social security.

    However, his idealist nature can be spun in the media to give a different impression. Everybody here should know how the media can squew the real picture!

    Ron Paul is clearly under attack by the media. They haven't given him anywhere the credit and screentime he deserves on TV and in the newspapers. He won the presidential poll the other night by 55% and no mention was made of it.

    I'm keeping a close eye on Paul and hope he runs against Obama. If all Paul does is get into office and stops the wars that are bankrupting the USA and hurting good people, I'll be satisfied with that.

    Ron Paul issues:
  11. GaryK


    Canada Niagara Falls
    Thanks Merry for posting this.

    I was sitting in a political chat room on paltalk the other night when they where streaming this nasty right wing tea party leader debate, I was shocked to hear the crowds but not really as the people in the mostly American chat room often (right wingers) state the mismanagement of money and abuses by those on disabilities. Life does not seem to matter to these right winged politically charged people. This is a discusting self serving behaviour. A Nation is thought of by how it treats its Children, Elderly, Sick and Women.

    I think its really time fellow Americans stamp this out! Your Nation is in peril if they get the reins.
    Also Ron Paul tried to hand this over to the Churches/Charitys. I'm wondering if Ron Paul needs an up date to Churches/ Charities finacial statments these past few years. Saddly this will only inflame and stress those Churches and Charities all ready maxed ouT! Ron Paul needs to be asked these questions why he would pass the buck on Charities that are already impoverished!
  12. currer

    currer Senior Member

    The right to life and healthcare is a universal human right.

    It is not just for the rich.

    Sickness is the leading cause of bankruptcy in the US.
    Not so in Europe, where we have had social welfare systems and national healthcare systems since the second world war.

    Why? Because without them the poor die because they cannot afford to pay for a doctor and my parents remember that world in the twenties, the unjust world they grew up in, the world I thought the Americans were glad to leave behind when they set out to create a new and better society in their new world.

    It seems they have just created the same old unjust one again.

    A friend of mine had to have an emergency heart operation.
    He nearly died before they could get him to hospital
    The NHS hospital sent him to the top centre in the country once they diagnosed the problem.
    He was driven fifty miles to London in an ambulance.
    The surgeon was one of the three top heart surgeons in this country and came in on his day off, saturday, to do the emergency operation.
    My friend was then in hospital for ten weeks and in intensive care on two occasions as they fought to save his life.

    He was treated in the best hospital in Britain for his condition.
    And yes, he lived.

    The cost to his family?


    Why should the rich live and the poor die?

    I see a lot of silly statements here about "Socialised Medicine" and dont bother to correct them because of the culture gap on an american website.

    God help us British if we loose the National health service.
    It is CHEAPER TO RUN than the privatised health system in the US.

    If there has been a problem around recognising ME it seems it is the American insurance industry and its fear of loosing profits that has been behind it.

    I remember a much more socialist Britain, one that has been consistently undermined and destroyed in the last thirty years, because our governments are too weak to defend the citizen against predatory business interests attempting to substitute an american style capitalism for european social welfare systems.

    It was better, safer and fairer than the world we have now.

    Americans, you do not know what you have been missing, and certain vested interests in your country are determined you never shall know in case you want it too.
  13. rwac

    rwac Senior Member

    And no doubt this is why people are forced to hop across the pond to get treatment for lyme, long term antibiotics.
    ggingues and Angela Kennedy like this.
  14. Waverunner

    Waverunner Senior Member

    While I agree with you that the state should provide healthcare for emergency cases (heart surgery, cancer etc.) your post does not show the entire picture in Britain. The British healthcare system does not have a very good reputation in Europe. I knew of a relative who lives in Britain and needed a CT. She needed to wait 5 months before she got an appointment. So 3 months into this, she flew to Germany and got an appointment for a CT the same day. She had cancer and died a few years later, I don't know if the 3 months made a difference but 5 month waiting time for a CT is really long and does not sound very good to me. Moreover the British healthcare system is number one in the world, when the aim is to stigmatize the whole ME community as a bunch of psychs. Do Wesley and McClure ring a bell? They are a product of the great British healthcare system. CFS is classified as psychiatric illness in the UK.

    For anyone who is interested in a objective view on why Europe, the US and England are in the mess they currently are, I highly recommend you to watch this documentary from channel 4. For a few years now, the British government is spending more than all private individuals and companies put together. We never had more government spending and we never were in a greater mess. Is there a correlation? Is the British healthcare system really so great? Look where Britain is heading:

  15. mellster

    mellster Marco

    San Francisco
    The problem is that not all systems/organizations should be run for-profit. There are a few that are better run as non-profit organizations. What many people don't see is that the insurance companies make billions of $$ every year to pay CEOs, managers, and people who are paid to deny patient's claims, all for the bottom line and the shareholders. Then there are protective measures to ban cheaper generic formulations from overseas to help making big pharma more money. While the US healthcare system has (amongst other countries) no doubt the best doctors and research facilities, it is evident that treatment costs are way too expensive. I think a truly free market would bring the prices down quite a bit, but it would also come with initial brutal imbalances and people unable to pay for needed medical services. Also, simply compare the lifestyle of a doctor in Europe vs the US and you will see why it is so much more expensive in the US. Again, this is the price for freedom, which includes the freedom of greediness and maximizing your $$ if you happen to have learned a profession that is in demand and benefits form the current system and regulation. Also, the british HC system is not a good representative for modern northern European countries ;)
    ggingues likes this.
  16. markmc20001

    markmc20001 Guest

    I'm in favor of health care for everybody.
    CJB likes this.
  17. Waverunner

    Waverunner Senior Member

    In my eyes it's not the price of freedom but much more a price of monopoly as Friedman said. Doctors represent a monopoly and pharma companies represent a monopoly. The number of doctors is limited and there are high entry barriers to become a doctor. Doctors are the only people who are allowed to prescribe you drugs while the production of drugs is under strict regulation. This regulation can only be fulfilled by a few big pharma companies and requires lots of money and time which act as entry barriers for new pharma companies.
  18. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    I'm an American living in the Netherlands. My (mandatory Dutch) health insurance now costs half as much (about 100 euros), while providing far more value than my US insurance did. I have no out of pocket expenses. I have no co-pay for doctor visits now (was $30), and all treatments prescribed by a doctor are free, instead of paying up to 50% of costs as I did in the US (50% for the most expensive ones, of course).

    The quality of medical care is similar. 10 minute visits with the GP, half hour wait, and they know nothing about ME/CFS. Referral to an interist was fast, as were results. The internist visits and the labs were all free, of course, and he ordered all of the basic tests from the beginning. Getting blood drawn was fast and easy. The nurses were universally happy and pleasant people.

    My health insurance will pay for my first diagnostic visit to a CFS clinic. If I am prescribed anything, it will be free. If I am referred to a specialist, they will be free, as will be whatever they prescribe. 3 visits I made to a US doctor while I was on vacation were completely covered, as were the supplements he prescribed while I was there (over 500 euros worth).

    I will never be denied health insurance here. If I moved back to the US and tried to get insurance there again, I would not be able to. Possibly I could with a state-funded program, after years on a waiting list. And even if I had my old US insurance still, they would object to paying for most services. They would not pay for supplements prescribed by a doctor, and they would not reimburse me for visiting a naturopath.

    At the end of every year, I had to sign up for a new plan with them because they were discontinuing the old plan. The new plan would be identical to the old plan, but it would have a new name. The purpose of changing these plans every year is to get rid of the patients that are costing too much, without directly violating the laws that prohibit dumping customers for using their insurance.

    I would be one of those costly patients now, and instead of being invited to join the new identical plan, I would be invited to pay a much higher premium for the same coverage, or to join a plan with a much higher deductible, if I were invited back at all.

    I find it beyond ludicrous when people continue to advocate that free-market policies are the only solution. The free market, and the corporate greed that it cultivates, have led to the utter mess in the US. Strict regulation and mandatory policies are working just fine in Europe.

    The rejection of this "socialization" is purely ideological. The numbers talk, and highly regulated health insurance is working splendidly. The problem with a lot of people in rejecting this is that they have been brainwashed their entire lives with "American Dream" BS. "If you work hard, you can succeed. You can own a house, provide for you family, etc." It's a hopeful and attractive message.

    But the flip side is the implication that if you don't succeed, and can't provide for your family or yourself, the problem is that you didn't work hard enough. When you have a population that widely believes you get what you earn, it's easier for those people to dismiss the plight of the unemployed and/or ill. Some learn human compassion, and reject that notion, and others get sick or unemployed themselves, and reject that notion if they can, but are haunted by guilt that they have failed, and those doubtful looks from friends and family. But most hang onto those beliefs for generations, and will never let go of them.
    CJB and Merry like this.
  19. Parismountain

    Parismountain Senior Member

    South Carolina
    There's an implication in this post that TEA Party leaners are just a mob wanting to gleefully off whoever isn't pulling their own weight. TEA stands for taxed enough already and despite media attempts and democrat spinmiesters attempts to denigrate people who align to those beliefs it just isn't working.

    I suppose a jaded view of the laughter is somehow CNN managed to congregate the most vile and hideous people society had to offer. That's apparently pretty easy to pull off if you just put out the word there is a TEA Party event and there you have your perceived misfits. I personally watched the event on television and came away with a different take on the laughter. The laughter involved Blitzer and his question. As posed if a libertarian's answer is this person was irresponsible and it will take charity to solve the problem the crowd there understands personal responsibility is a foreign concept to a liberal like Walt. It's my guess most people there are of the opinion that CNN and Blitzer are part of the liberal media machine and I personally knowing that in advance might also have chuckled at the crowd hurling suggestions at him to spotlight the difference in the two competing philosophies.

    It's fine to have the opinion that all conservatives are cold nasty hate mongers, that's one's opinion which doesn't make it true btw. I think I read in the Obama care bill he removed 500 billion in Medicare funding. We'll see how well that works out for us on Medicare. Here's where the TEA Party leaning people are coming from; suppose Obama could wave a wand and make every person earning over $250,000 a year to give all their earnings to the IRS. All as in 100%. Add that to what the rest of us pay and corporate taxes collected and you know what, you would still not have enough money collected to pay for this year's spending. (I would say budget but the Dems have not submitted a budget in over two years)

    Tea party people see this as our biggest problem, the growth of spending and are simply reacting to what they know about financial conditions.

    Personally I think the Titanic has hit the iceberg already and we're just arguing over who is going to captain for the next 3 hours. One captain's idea is to send his engineers to try to make the hole bigger. The want to be captain isn't aware that the ship isn't fixable.

    I keep using the term "reset" because looking financially at our condition that's what I predict is going to happen. Nothing new in the history of the world as far as that goes. There's still Chinese people living in China and French people living in France and Japanese people living in Japan. They've been through a few different forms of government over the years though.

    And please don't think I have any advocacy for changing our system I'm just looking at numbers and seeing promises that can't be filled and am just predicting some form a reset in either our form of governance or breaking a large number of promises to people.

    For this post I'm probably going to be banned. Somehow the great social welfare net has managed to miss me, government couldn't figure out the little out of the way situation I could find myself in and rectify it. I was a white color worker for Lucent Technologies who was put out under their disability plan. My "plan" had medical coverage for myself and family. Somehow Lucent woke up one day (ten years later) and discovered that a promise isn't an enforceable contract so they took my medical insurance away. This meant looking for health insurance for two insureds under me with preexisting conditions. I'm angry that the welfare state couldn't make Lucent pony up on their promise of medical care. I have the benefit book where it states what my benefits will be but because I wasn't a government worker or a union member I'm simply swept under the rug. Further when the prescription part of Medicare formed my plan from Lucent was superior but right away they dropped their plan and I went on the inferior Medicare plan. For that I just say thank you very much government, (and I won't say thank you republicans and blame them totally since the dems bill which also didn't work was twice as expensive as proposed so I understand that argument about Bush blew up the budget with unpaid for medicare D, easy to say when the other party's plan was double his and not paid for)

    Now for a person who hasn't had a disability wage increase in over ten years my medical costs now out of pocket for my family and myself are over $2,000 a month which is of course more than my social security. If you'd agree this is a type of misfortune, unlucky, it still hasn't moved me off the conservative side of the political spectrum. I just have a better understanding of how fallible people are and simply stating you're for the unfortunate doesn't equate to always being the case.

    Sorry to be rough in this post but I think I've expressed how I feel. I didn't attack anyone (I don't think) so we'll see how the mods handle this. Maybe just probation is in order.
  20. madietodd

    madietodd Senior Member

    East Coast, USA
    I sit happily way over on the left, and the view from here is very much like yours. If we wanted to blame individuals, they would probably have different names, but you know what? It's just a mess out there. People are scared they'll lose homes and health, and nobody has an answer.

    I'm very sorry that the support you were promised was taken away from you. This has happened to a great many of us, here. Sometimes the support lost is friends, sometimes family, sometimes spouse, sometimes insurance, sometimes home. It's always awful.

    The media sell advertising by keeping us incensed or afraid. They cut and paste until they generate the visceral response they're looking for. This has nothing to do with telling the truth - a total win for them is making us angry AND scared, and a little under-informed so we come back later for more information

    I keep my stress levels very very low, in part by completely avoiding television. I'm sure I could find a clip of the event under discussion on the internet, and try to figure out what "really" happened. But we're in pre-election insanity here, and the politicians are all pitching out sound-bites to excited constituents in front of omnipresent cameras. I don't trust any of it.


See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page