Unfortunately, it takes 2-3 hour close examination to reveal these propagandists for what they are. Fortunately, those with common sense don’t need such a waste of time to correctly assess these nutbags.
I guess I’m in the minority here as I think that Stewart was beaten soundly on substance in this debate. Yes, she was disheveled and poorly organized, but when she did finally make her points, Stewart had no real response.
It was nice to hear someone (beside Adam C) point out the obvious flaw in the life expectancy/health-care argument that’s being trumpeted by supporters of health-care reform. Just because a country’s populace lives longer doesn’t mean they have a superior health-care system. And she made another good point on real substance: Why would we have a law that rewards doctors for having their patients *adhere* to an advance directive they wrote earlier in life? That seems wrong. And if we’re proposing to cut Medicare by 5% during a period of time when boomers will cause the retired population to swell, that means we’ll be cutting something. That might not be the wrong decision, but lets not delude ourselves into thinking this bill won’t cut some services to seniors.
In this debate, she came with the facts and Stewart came with bluster and misdirection as he couldn’t contend with her arguments. At least that’s how I saw it.
I’d like to be on the death panel, I’d volunteer my time. Alf, get in the box…
#21
“get in the box…”
Yah Ed that’s what your Mom says to all the sailors on Saturday night.
Here’s the full unaired Daily show segment with Betsy.
Unfortunately, it takes 2-3 hour close examination to reveal these propagandists for what they are. Fortunately, those with common sense don’t need such a waste of time to correctly assess these nutbags.
#4
Sounds like someone is kinda jealous of Guilherme…
I guess I’m in the minority here as I think that Stewart was beaten soundly on substance in this debate. Yes, she was disheveled and poorly organized, but when she did finally make her points, Stewart had no real response.
It was nice to hear someone (beside Adam C) point out the obvious flaw in the life expectancy/health-care argument that’s being trumpeted by supporters of health-care reform. Just because a country’s populace lives longer doesn’t mean they have a superior health-care system. And she made another good point on real substance: Why would we have a law that rewards doctors for having their patients *adhere* to an advance directive they wrote earlier in life? That seems wrong. And if we’re proposing to cut Medicare by 5% during a period of time when boomers will cause the retired population to swell, that means we’ll be cutting something. That might not be the wrong decision, but lets not delude ourselves into thinking this bill won’t cut some services to seniors.
In this debate, she came with the facts and Stewart came with bluster and misdirection as he couldn’t contend with her arguments. At least that’s how I saw it.
NO COMMENT
Short of running out of time, I think they would’ve have done the same regardless; that is to pull the plug on the whole talk between her and Jon.
Was nauseating to hear her talk. Can’t shut up, can’t back up her talks and keeps referring to pages she can’t find…priceless.
Great show btw