tea party loyalists you have been duped.

Gabfly1 · Nov 10, 2010

Quote from Tsing Tao:

1. if he truly said he was a certified opthalmologist, and he is not a certified opthalmologist (with the AMA) then that is a lie. he should be called out on it.

2. can you post the original BP comment where it was first uttered (article or video) so i can view in context? otherwise i cannot form a valid opinion.

3. business owners have the right to refuse any and all customers for whatever reason at all, unless they are funded by the government (state, federal or local). a business is a private enterprise, and government has no more right telling a person how to run their business than they do how to live in their home.

4. as for rallying against government healthcare, yet still accepting medicaid or medicare - people tried to use a similar argument on joe miller. my answer is this in comparison: i may take unemployment if i am let go from my job, because i pay into the taxes to get it. but that doesn't mean i have to agree with all aspects of the program, or how the program is run. for example, i do not believe anyone should get 99 weeks of unemployment.

1. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20007639-503544.html

"...Paul's claim that he is a "board-certified" ophthalmologist is tied to his certification by the National Board of Ophthalmology.

Yet that's a group that Paul himself founded in 1999; he also serves as its head.

The organization that works with the American Medical Association to approve specialty boards of this nature, as the Courier-Journal notes, is called the American Board of Medical Specialties. And it does not recognize Paul's group..."

2. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/us/politics/22paul.html

âWhat I donât like from the presidentâs administration is this sort of, âIâll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,â â Mr. Paul said, referring to a remark by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar about the oil company. âI think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. Iâve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think itâs part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that itâs always got to be someoneâs fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen.â

3. Really? Wow. Can't imagine where that might lead, notably in the South...

4. http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy...ays-doctors-should-make-a-comfortable-living/

http://www.kentucky.com/2010/06/13/1304856/paul-says-cut-government-spending.html

"...On the campaign trail, Paul calls for the abolition of entire agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Education, while complaining that Medicare payments to doctors have been cut too deeply, making it one of the few government expenses he consistently defends.

"Physicians should be allowed to make a comfortable living," Paul told supporters in Louisville in May, according to the Wall Street Journal..."

Tsing Tao · Nov 10, 2010

1. sounds to me like he was pissed off the American Board of Ophthalmology required it's members to be re-certified each decade if they had originally been certified after 1992, so he created his own board. in my opinion, both are in the wrong - ophthalmologists should be certified every 10 years regardless. but paul stated he was certified - according to the board he founded. i cannot find his board's website - it seems they have none (which makes me wonder how official it can be - not that having no website means you're unofficial, but it's a sign). still, it's not like he said he served in vietnam, yet didnt.

2. it would seem from the article you posted that paul's statements were misguided at the very least. either he didnt understand the gravity of the spill BP caused, or he subscribes to a deep libertarian (or more anarchist) view of "no government regulation". but this is one of those things where i believe government is the only thing that can correct the problem - as they have the resources to regulate and enforce compliance/reconciliation.

3. regardless of where it might lead, that is personal freedom. if you start a business, you have the right to serve whomever you want. it is legal, and should remain so regardless of whether you or i agree with it.

4. the department of education SHOULD be disbanded. it should be a state only responsibility. a better example of waste could probably not be found. and i agree physicians have gone to great expense in time and money through schooling to take up that profession. they are entitled to make some of that back.

Gabfly1 · Nov 10, 2010

Quote from Tsing Tao:

4. ...i agree physicians have gone to great expense in time and money through schooling to take up that profession. they are entitled to make some of that back.

It seems we are only in full agreement on No. 2. As for No. 4, are you intentionally missing the point? Paul doesn't want the government involved in health care and yet:

"...On the campaign trail, Paul...complaining that Medicare payments to doctors have been cut too deeply, making it one of the few government expenses he consistently defends. "

Mnphats · Nov 10, 2010

Quote from Gabfly1:

1. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20007639-503544.html

"...Paul's claim that he is a "board-certified" ophthalmologist is tied to his certification by the National Board of Ophthalmology.

Yet that's a group that Paul himself founded in 1999; he also serves as its head.

The organization that works with the American Medical Association to approve specialty boards of this nature, as the Courier-Journal notes, is called the American Board of Medical Specialties. And it does not recognize Paul's group..."

2. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/us/politics/22paul.html

âWhat I donât like from the presidentâs administration is this sort of, âIâll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,â â Mr. Paul said, referring to a remark by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar about the oil company. âI think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. Iâve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think itâs part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that itâs always got to be someoneâs fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen.â

3. Really? Wow. Can't imagine where that might lead, notably in the South...

4. http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy...ays-doctors-should-make-a-comfortable-living/

http://www.kentucky.com/2010/06/13/1304856/paul-says-cut-government-spending.html

"...On the campaign trail, Paul calls for the abolition of entire agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Education, while complaining that Medicare payments to doctors have been cut too deeply, making it one of the few government expenses he consistently defends.

"Physicians should be allowed to make a comfortable living," Paul told supporters in Louisville in May, according to the Wall Street Journal..."

1. Only a small portion of Doctors are belong to the AMA. The AMA morphed into a left-wing loony central.

2. You are taking this out of context. In America we have laws and no person can strong arm somebody else or a corporation.

3. Paul is correct in saying private business should serve who they want.

4. You are apparently woefully ignorant on heath care. Medicare is precisely the cause of rising health care costs. If doctors are losing money on medicare patients, the people with insurance will be forced to pay their fair share AND the loss on medicare patients.

Tsing Tao · Nov 10, 2010

Quote from Gabfly1:

It seems we are only in full agreement on No. 2. As for No. 4, are you intentionally missing the point? Paul doesn't want the government involved in health care and yet:

"...On the campaign trail, Paul...complaining that Medicare payments to doctors have been cut too deeply, making it one of the few government expenses he consistently defends. "

why would i intentionally miss the point? are you intentionally trying to insult me?

i've stated that it is possible to be against the government taking control of health care and still be for certain aspects of a program. i liked the health care system we had before. could it have been improved? of course. was it? no, it was not, in my opinion. but i dont want the government mandating that i have to buy insurance. it is not their right to do so. therefore, i am against the government involved in healthcare. but i still think it should run medicare and medicaid for those who need it.

Gabfly1 · Nov 10, 2010

Quote from Tsing Tao:

why would i intentionally miss the point? are you intentionally trying to insult me?

i've stated that it is possible to be against the government taking control of health care and still be for certain aspects of a program. i liked the health care system we had before. could it have been improved? of course. was it? no, it was not, in my opinion. but i dont want the government mandating that i have to buy insurance. it is not their right to do so. therefore, i am against the government involved in healthcare. but i still think it should run medicare and medicaid for those who need it.

I just think it's telling that Rand Paul picks and chooses that which benefits him personally. Truly a man of the people. Ayn would be so proud:

Tsing Tao · Nov 10, 2010

Quote from Gabfly1:

I just think it's telling that Rand Paul picks and chooses that which benefits him personally. Truly a man of the people. Ayn would be so proud:

time will tell on rand paul. in the meantime, there are many, many other senators and congressmen/women who appear far worse occupying current seats. so if rand brings improvement, even slightly, then i say we're going in the right direction.

Arnie · Nov 10, 2010

Quote from Gabfly1:

And vacuity. Don't forget about the vacuity.

Nice catch, Thunderpussy

tea party loyalists you have been duped.

Attachments