Supreme stupidity

This has been a week of dreadful news from the USA. The Democrats lost their safe base in Massachusetts that puts reforming Obama power at risk. The new President is already locked in a toe to toe war with the the country's real power brokers, the  lobbyists and special interest groups.

The Supreme Court in a disastrous decision has handed ultimate power to special interests. They have given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money into politics.  There will no limits to the cash they can use to buy power by buying political parties. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that bully their decisions  into law every day in Washington. The voices of of the voters and their elected politicians will be diminished by the hullabaloo from big money buying access to the media and obedience from political hacks.

This ruling gives the already mighty special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington. The influence of  average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates and parties becomes meaningless.

Obama has hit back strongly, 'I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less'.

It's good luck that we have the only President for a generation who is tough and intelligent enough to take on the special interests. They have already targeted him and damaged his health reforms. Using their near infinite wealth to corrupts politicians  could transform American Government into a Mega Money-making Corporation. What hope then for policies to repair our habitat if the Oil gluttons call the tune? It could be eternal wars to satisfy the greed of the arms makers. The US health service would be forever devoted to maximise profits not to improve health.

The Supreme Court has opted for commercial power over the public interest. It's the worst decision in their long history. This is a fight that Obama must win.

Best

Regular contributor Kay Tie has sent this spoof of the much-mocked Cameron Poster. Are there any better ones?

This is a good one.

 

Murder

You can fool some of the people all of the time.

The story sounded improbable. A voodoo explosive detecting device was sold at a cost of £50 million to Iraq. It's useless. It has no means of detecting anything. It's all a matter of faith.  It was just an outrageous scam the details of which was published months ago. Why was nothing nothing done to stop its use? It has costs lives as vehicles loaded with explosives have been waved through by the say-so of this bundle of junk.

I hope there is an exemplary punishment for the slaughter that has resulted from shameless greed.
 

Comments

[mikey]

daveisms

i was told this sight was for intellects by paul and i thought i might learn something from the bloggers

there are some good posts but mostly i read kids throwing big words at each other and stupid comments.

i thought this site was for debating not childish insults.

you are on this site arguing with yourself most days and suffer with verbal dioreah.

you write rubbish most of the time and attack anyone that doesnt agree with you.

your just bitter and twisted

get some batteries and release that tension

[dave]

and there you have it,give the uk economy to kaytie and she will solve all our problems.
the economy,taxation,healthcare,education,foreign affairs, this girl is an expert in anything she opens her mouth on.

all bow down and acknowledge the super brain kaytie.

arent you lads fed up of making her bite,its easier than shooting fish in a barrel.

i was told this sight was for intellects by paul and i thought i might learn something from the bloggers.

there are some good posts but mostly i read kids throwing big words at each other and stupid comments.
wanna be intelligent snobs

[Kay Tie]

"The Tories are just a corporate style party that will offer the world and deliver the same old crap as before, massive cuts in services , high interest rates and mass unemployment."

Same old yakyak I used to hear at uni from the socialist workers in their donkey jackets flogging their rag ("Neither Moscow nor Washington but Planet Mars").

Massive cuts in spending doesn't imply cuts in service: removing the billions spent on checking half the population to see if they might be kiddie-fiddlers is not a "service". Nor is having your windows inspected by the council for hundreds of pounds when you want to replace the rotten frames. Nor is having the bin police snooping through your rubbish to see if you have sinned against Gaia.

High interest rates come from high borrowing and high inflation, something that comes from high-spending Labour governments (see 1974-1979). Yes, we are going to get high interest rates, and they will be a lot higher if Gordon Brown continues to borrow money at present rates.

And tax loopholes. Like what? Do you actually know anything about the tax system? What loopholes do you actually know anything about? I've never met a bitter old Trot who knew anything about how money works. I suppose it's not a skill that's needed when the glorious People's Republic comes into being and everyone will do as the People's Committee says or else be shot in the back of the neck.

[patrick]

Do you want to discuss the Free School ideas?

The Tories are just a corporate style party that will offer the world and deliver the same old crap as before, massive cuts in services , high interest rates and mass unemployment.
sorry forgot to mention massive loop holes for high earning tax evaders!

[Kay Tie]

"It is interesting to look at the mentality of a person that votes out governments rather than votes in."

The backstop to democracy is the peaceful removal of a government. It is impossible to vote for a party and endorse all of its policies, and naturally I don't support all the Tory policies. In the end one must go on beliefs and tone, and the Tories have it better than Labour at present.

Yes, one day the nasty social authoritarian elements of the Tories will surface, just as the nasty authoritarian puritan elements of the Left surfaced in New Labour. And no doubt when the dam breaks, I shall vote for someone else.

You say you are interested in the policies of the Tories. Do you want to discuss the Free School ideas?

[patrick]

I am interested in their policies.
The end product is very similar to New-Labour, that's why i won't be voting for either.They might as well merge together.

It is interesting to look at the mentality of a person that votes out governments rather than votes in.

you voted for Blair and now you will vote for Dave then probably for the labour guy that will replace Dave when he makes a complete mess and so on ........

So you will perpetually vote in right wing parties that promise to deliver ,then don't ,then vote them out to be replaced by the same.

In a word.... Pointless!

[Kay Tie]

"It's also of interest that you have failed to offer any reason why you will vote for the party of stench apart from your deranged
aversion to labour."

It's deranged to be averse to Labour is it? Interesting definition of deranged.

Anyway, I will positively vote Tory for several reasons. One of which is the Free Schools proposals. This will undoubtedly improve education (although will hurt the interests of the LEA and Whitehall officials).

There are others, but I suspect you have no interest in even looking at the policies, let alone discussing them.

[Patrick]

It's also of interest that you have failed to offer any reason why you will vote for the party of stench apart from your deranged
aversion to labour.

[Patrick]

Kay-Tie Quote
"I even voted Labour in 1997 (for the same reason I will vote Tory: putting a broken and incompetent government out of its misery)."

I then write the following
She voted out the the Tories in '97 'to put them out of their misery.

you then reply

"I didn't. Perhaps if you learned to read you'd be able to see that."

So you clearly state you voted Labour in '97 to put the Tories 'out of their misery'.
When i bring up your own statement you then accuse me of not being able to read.

you are clearly either intoxicated or a complete imbecile.

[Kay Tie]

"Amid your anti-communism there is the interesting answer."

Just for clarification, Adam, are you in favour of communism?

[Kay Tie]

"You would prefer the wealthy to go there own way and resent paying into the NHS?"

I think universal healthcare is a hallmark of a (rich) civilisation. Of course I want to see it, and I want a system good enough that the rich don't opt out. The NHS evidently does not do this.

[Kay Tie]

"She voted out the the Tories in '97 'to put them out of their misery'."

I didn't. Perhaps if you learned to read you'd be able to see that.

I'm not a Tory: Tories are socially authoritarian. Of course, so is Labour at its heart (its roots lie in the Temperance movement) but many on the Left are socially liberal enough for me to like.

"but completly bereft of an original policy, thought, or idea."

Again, I've proposed many ideas. The Citizens Basic Income. The Free School System. A Learning Bank.

What have you proposed, Patrick? A return to the 1970s at best, a re-trying of communism at worst. I look to future ideas, you cling to hackneyed leftie slogans.

[Patrick]

'fiscally conservative' - Please!

IE Tory - An excuse for a party that will always be anti social welfare programmes.

What's interesting about Kay-Tie's mindset? She voted out the the Tories in '97 'to put them out of their misery'.
She will vote Tory this time 'to put Labour out of it's misery'. No doubt she will vote out the next Government again and again....
Guess why ? 'to put them out of their misery'

Like an armchair slob that shouts at the telly. Fantastic at thought provoking criticism of everyone and thing but completly bereft of an original policy, thought, or idea.

Far easier to criticise and vote out than to construct or support an idea and vote in.

Why not let the blog know why you support a future Tory government rather than your lame hatred of the present?

[Adam]

Amid your anti-communism there is the interesting answer.

'I don't think healthcare is a fundamental right in the same category as right to freedom of speech or a fair trial. These rights are freedoms from oppression.'

Healthcare if it is available to anybody in this country should be accessable to all.

You would prefer the wealthy to go there own way and resent paying into the NHS?

[Kay Tie]

Fiscally right-wing, yes. Anti-communist, yes. Aren't you anti-communist too? Or do you think secret police and gulags and food queues are fine and dandy?

I don't think healthcare is a fundamental right in the same category as right to freedom of speech or a fair trial. These rights are freedoms from oppression.

We do have enough income in this country to give universal healthcare. As all EU countries do. They way we achieve it does not require state supply, merely state funding for those who cannot afford it. As a baby-eating right-winger I'm very content for my taxes to pay for healthcare for the needy. The same as I want to give people without resources opportunities to make the best of themselves.

Why do the left think they have a monopoly on wanting to help their fellow man?

[Adam]

Kay Tie, as our resident right wing free market anti-communist, may I ask whether you agree with me that healthcare is a basic right for the British citizen?

[Adam]

You sound like you have been reading to many conspiracy sites dave. Such a skewed and unbalanced argument. You need to look at the other angle and interpretation with the details.

They tend to sew up various circumstances and half-truths to make a story. Surely you are able to recognise what is suspect. If they say 'buy my DVDs to stop the New World Order' you can safely discount them. A lot of them will simply make things up or claim credible sources which either do not exist or are no what they are claimed to be.

[dave]

kaytie its all mind over matter
i dont mind and you dont matter.

get some batteries and release that tension.

you are on this site arguing with yourself most days and suffer with verbal dioreah.
you write rubbish most of the time and attack anyone that doesnt agree with you.
your just bitter and twisted

huw you say drivel.
i respect your views and as long as you dont get personal whatever you or anyone else says i will read and investigate before making up my own mind.
please respect other peoples views or intelligently argue your point.

i know my rant at kaytie is a contradiction but she doesnt want a debate or be constructive with her critism,she just wants an arguement and see's herself as some superior being.
not!!!

[Kay Tie]

Paul, do you want to take out the e-scalpel and start excising these 9/11 Troofers? There are plenty of other forums to engage in their online frottage.

[Kay Tie]

"unless you have proof it wasnt an inside job whats the problem."

I don't have proof it wasn't aliens. Do you want to discuss that conspiracy too?

[Kay Tie]

If you're going to witter about the conspiracy surrounding the bombings, you might want to make sure you get the dates right. Like 7/7 not 7/11. Or do you think a well-known American chain of convenience stores is masterminding the plan to install World Government?

Who owns the 7-11 stores? A mysterious cabal of neo-cons and Zionists who are addicted to Twinkies? I think we should (not) be told.

[HuwOS]

If you expect to be taken seriously Dave you'd have to drop the inane drivel of conspiracy theory. You are making your own choice about how you wish to be perceived.

[dave]

huw your very brave behind your keyboard.
if you have a counter arguement fair enough otherwise dont use words like
"I am paranoid and delusional".
making a nasty comment or joke of mental health issues is just like using racist,sexist,bullying language.

do you torment people with mental health problems,the disabled or the handicapped ?

i thought this site was for debating not childish insults.

[dave]

what about 7/11.
Like 9/11, there were drills taking place at the same exact time the bombings occured. Not only were they at the same time but at the same exact stations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKvkhe3rqtc

The only thing with the video is that Peter Power says that the only difference between the drills and the real thing is that with the drills the bombs went off simultaneously. A few days later the London Metropolitan Police released a report to the press telling them that the bombs did actually go off simultaneously so the bombings and the drill were exactly the same! There are 240+ train stations in London.
What are the chances of that?

Regrets that we have a 'conspiracy' theory on 9/11. This is a pointless waste of time.

how is the 911 conspiracy a theory a waste of time.the family of the victims and people who were in the disaster want the truth.the people around the world who's lives have been changed because of the disaster want the truth. we all deserve the truth and unless you have proof it wasnt an inside job whats the problem.

[Paul Flynn]

Are you a constituent on mine. You give no address.
 
Paul Flynn MP House of Commons London SW1A OAA
Dip into now daily blog on paulflynnmp.co.uk.

[Kay Tie]

"I don't know about anyone else, but I for one am utterly shocked and surprised that KayTie would vote Tory. She doesn't seem the type at all."

Never voted Tory until last year's Euro elections. And yes, I have voted in every election since I was 18. I even voted Labour in 1997 (for the same reason I will vote Tory: putting a broken and incompetent government out of its misery).

[Paul Flynn]

Thanks for the very lively debate on the NHS.

Regrets that we have a 'conspiracy' theory on 9/11. This is a pointless waste of time. I do not want to block debate, but I do not want this section of the web littered with discredited theories.

[Adam]

I know what you mean Kay Tie but that is something of a 'straw man' statement if it is in reponse to me.

The fact the Joint Enquiry was impeded and censored is public record not theory.

[Kay Tie]

The 9/11 Truthers are out there. And here on this blog.

I'm sick of hearing how steel can't be melted by aviation fuel, how the FBI-planted bombs explode just before the aircraft hits, how there were no Jews in the towers, how the plane that hit the Pentagon couldn't have been flown that accurately and it must have been a missile made by Haliburton. Blah blah blah blah.

[Adam]

“911 was an inside job." -dave

There has certainly been a cover up of important information.

In December 2002 the Senate and Congressional ‘Joint Enquiry into the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001’ released a report. Less publicised than the later 911 Commission report, it had a whole section redacted by the White House.

Former Senator Bob Graham who led the investigation tried in vain to get the information released. Sensitive names or details can always be withheld. Blacking out a 28 page section is just a cover up.

These 28 blacked out pages relate to what a former FBI agent named Steve Butler told Sen Grahams’ investigators.

An FBI informant was the landlord of two of the 911 hijackers during their residence in San Diego prior to the attacks (al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi). The White House prevented the Joint Enquiry from interviewing the informant.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/pdf/fullreport_errata.pdf

The two hijackers were given financial assistance by two men who were ‘probably Saudi intelligence agents’. These guys received their funding from the wife of then Saudi ambassador to the US Prince Bandar. Prince Bandar is a close friend of the Bush family, who have dubbed him ‘Bandar Bush’.

The congressional record of an attempt to get the suppressed pages of the report released is interesting.

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/s102803.html

Also an interview here with Sen Bob Graham:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2004/11/intelligence-matters

It is clear that the White House impeded and suppressed the investigation and report without reasonable justification. This needed further investigation not supression. Not least to establish whether the other hijackers were getting this assistance which (as Sen Graham says) only came to light because al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi happened to be living with an FBI informant.

[HuwOS]

Dave, you do realise you have just put up a lot of text which gets across exactly the same message as the rather shorter
"I am paranoid and delusional"

[dave]

jimmy carters national security advisor zbigniew brzenzinski was breeding these terrorist organisations, funding them and training them to attack America. Zbigniew Brzezinski actually bragged in his 1998 book The Grand Chessboard of how America would be attacked by Afghan Terrorists and how a war for global government would then take place In central Asia. All of this being planned in the 70s, 80s & 90s.

america would never attack itself you say.
13th march 1962 north woods document shows federal government needed an excuse to invade cuba .one proposal was to blow up american aeroplanes with passengers onboard.
this was reported on abc and other tv stations. david ruppe wrote may 1st 2001 of it.http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662
general ll lemnitzer chairman joint cheif of staff who was the architect of this plan even suggested bombing washington and other cities in the usa.
it was approved all the way up to secretary of defence .this was stopped by president kennedy.
other plans were to attack marines in guantanamo bay ,using american soldiers dressed in cuban uniforms.or sinking a usa ship. like they had done before with the maine to get in the american spanish war.

maybe this might interest you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNGukcPO3XY&feature=PlayList&p=38CF20CFBC5C39B3&index=0&playnext=1

911the truth.org

the financial collapse
the fantastic larry sommers part of obamas administration helped dismantle the glass steagle act.the banking act that was put inplace in the 1930's to stop bankers doing what they have done.

in the early 1990's you had the begining of the derivatives bubble thanks to people like alan greenspan.rubin summers who are in the obama administration. i think you realise the derivatives are the center piece of the problem we have today.
now they have timothy geithner the us treasury secretary and ex president of the new york federal reserve bank who is the prodigy of robert rueben of the larry sommers group to sort out the problem.
a joke.

"the money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity,its more dispotic than monarchy,more insolent than ortocracy,more selfish than beurocracy.i see in the near future a crisis approaching that un-nerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country.corporations have been enthroned an era of corruption will follow and the money power of the country will endevour to prolong its reign by working upon the predudices of the people until the wealth is agrigated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed.

president licoln

[HuwOS]

I have already said, that the amount of money spent on healthcare cannot be everything.
Life styles, competency of health care, access to healthcare, access to medication etc all will play their parts and no doubt many other factors too.
But funding certainly effects the number of healthcare practitioners and the availability of medical equipment etc.
Switzerland for example with its much more highly funded healthcare system,
in 2005
had more doctors, 3.8 per 1000 compared to 2.5 per thousand in the UK
More Nurses 14.1 per 1000 compared to 9.1 per 1000 in the UK
More specialists 2.6 per 1000 compared to 1.7 per 1000 in the UK
Nearly 3 times as many MRI scanners, over twice as many CT scanners again per thousand etc.
Perhaps this only has a tiny impact on the healthcare they deliver, but it is hard to imagine that that would be the case.
Perhaps they would do just as well as they do now, if they had less funding, fewer doctors and nurses and less equipment although I doubt they'd be willing to try.
Perhaps KayTie can come up with something that would help us to believe that the amount of funding has nothing to do with the ready availability and quality of care.

"For me the Tories do offer something truly unique: the end of Gordon Brown's regime. I'll vote for that because things could not be worse than being governed by him. And that's the reason I shall - with a peg on my nose - vote Tory." - KayTie

I don't know about anyone else, but I for one am utterly shocked and surprised that KayTie would vote Tory.
She doesn't seem the type at all.

[Kay Tie]

Labour believes in big, intrusive government. The Tories believe in slightly smaller and differently-intrusive government.

For me the Tories do offer something truly unique: the end of Gordon Brown's regime. I'll vote for that because things could not be worse than being governed by him. And that's the reason I shall - with a peg on my nose - vote Tory.

[HuwOS]

"nothing worthy to contribute."

So often what you say KayTie, applies to yourself and yourself alone.

Facts,
1) The World Health Organisation, in 2008 ranked France number 1 for the provision of health care UK 19th, Switzerland 20th and the US 37th.
2) considerably more is spent on all 3 foreign systems listed, both as a percentage of GDP and per capita.
3) the amount spent is not in itself the whole story as demonstrated by the fact the the execrable US system is the most costly of the lot, but clearly has to be a factor.

"Quoting per capita expenditures on health without discussing outcomes is a pointless recitation "

The facts I have quoted could not be the whole story, but as of yet KayTie, you have quoted no facts at all, unsurprising as it is unlikely you are unaware of any that might exist that would support your argument.
You have not mentioned any outcomes from any system that you have compared to ours but are finding fault with me for not doing so, it would seem the fault is yours.

I have presented facts, you have made statements with nothing to support them at all.
When you do make your first attempt to have a rational discussion KayTie, we will surely be able to tell as you will put forward facts and not just unsupported statements or out and out falsehoods.
Believe me KayTie, readers will notice the change in you immediately.

[HuwOS]

"So where is my choice eh?"

Any of the candidates that don't belong to new labour or the tories.

[Tony]

Th esecond of the posters was spot on - and that is my problem with Cameron and Labour at the moment. They are basically the same party , agreeing on the common apporach to society and differing over 1-2 % at most in terms of spending

Both are promising cuts in spending and increases in taxes - and both have a track record in delivering these

But they both want an economy that is broadly what it is today with some tweaks for nicer banks, little less war mongering , same ld sucking up to the US who interests are similar to ours BUT NOT the same

So where is my choice eh?

[Kay Tie]

"I didn't, I asked a question"

Yes, asking a question can (as in this case) be insinuation. And you still haven't retracted your accusation that I was defending this wretched device. What a gentleman you are.

[Kay Tie]

Quoting per capita expenditures on health without discussing outcomes is a pointless recitation of Stalinist tractor production statistics. Go away and actually read about those healthcare systems, Huw. Until you do that you have nothing worthy to contribute.

[HuwOS]

"the fact you accused me of being financially connected with the company." - KayTie

What I actually said,
"Do you have some financial connection KayTie with the scam artists selling this fake explosive detecting kit that you are so robustly defending them.
Or is it just your ideology conquering common sense yet again..." - Huw

"the fact you accused me of being financially connected with the company." - KayTie

I didn't, I asked a question,
a fact which, as you apparently can read, you already know.
Eventually you always seem to fall back on lies and false accusations KayTie, must be an inherent understanding of the weakness of your position.

[HuwOS]

"911 was an inside job and the financial collapse was created to usher through the new world order." -dave

Honestly, and I thought KayTie was the most deranged person posting here.

[dave]

It's good luck that we have the only President for a generation who is tough and intelligent enough to take on the special interests
lol obama is a puppet for the new world order.

america has been fighting since it inception to stop the central bankers and military industrial complex from taking over the country.
the take over has happend and its a corporate takeover.
wall st has killed main st

in between 2 ages zbigniew brzenzinski co-founder of the tri-lateral commision with david rockerfella said "we will put presidents in who will have personality cults,we shall creative massive personality cults through the same tecniques as hollywood has used.
obama is that man the globalists have chosen for america.

edward bernaise invented public affairs.he said if you manufacture an authorative figure who repeats the same messages over and over that this will appeal to the masses subconcious desires.the unwashed masses will helplessly follow the leader and go along with any message they spout.

obama was kissingers prodigy and he was groomed by the bilderberg group to push through their plans.
look at the team he has surrounded himself with and you will see they are ex bush,wall st, bilderberg,trilateral commission and council of foreign relations people.
robert gates ,rahm emanuel,henry kissinger ,larry sommers,alan greenspan,rueben sommers,timothy geithner,hilary clinton,susan rice,gen.james.l james,thomas donilon,paul volcker,admiral dennis c blair,james steinberg,richard m haass,richard c hol,william lynn raytheon lobbyist,mark patterson [goldman sachs],george mitchell the list goes on and on.

they give him the money, they give him the bundling, they give him vote fraud,they give him the media hoares,they give him goons,they even have elected officials making threats to put people in jail if they critisize obama in public.

he's a puppet.

911 was an inside job and the financial collapse was created to usher through the new world order.

[HuwOS]

According to 2007 figures
per capita expenditure on healthcare in dollars
was
$7290 in the US
$4417 in Switzerland
$3601 in France
$2992 in the UK

Value for money
We are already extracting a lot out of every pound spent, the solution as it obviously is to the French who were paying 20% more per capita and the Swiss who were paying 50% more per capita, is to fund these services appropriately.
What the solution is not is to let right wing idealogues look for any opportunity for themselves or their greedy compadres to divert funds from necessary and life saving resources into their own extra large and double wide pockets.

[Kay Tie]

"KayTie, you tried to make out that selling people small doses of water equated to selling explosive detecting coat hangers in a situation where explosives are a real and regular threat."

Don't try your sophistry to wriggle out of the fact that you accused me of defending these ridiculous devices or the fact you accused me of being financially connected with the company.

[HuwOS]

"And for the record, I do have a better answer: the Swiss system"

Which once again just like the french one has more money spent on it than ours does.
10-11% of GDP
until recently we were spending 5% of GDP on ours
You have heard the expression that you get what you pay for, right?

[HuwOS]

KayTie, you tried to make out that selling people small doses of water equated to selling explosive detecting coat hangers in a situation where explosives are a real and regular threat.
The situations were and are not comparable so your desire to do so was as usual dodgy.
Yes I agree you did not outright defend the situation but by concatenating the two unrelated and incomparable issues you effectively were defending those con artists.
Kaytie, you have yet to engage in any kind of rationality whatsoever on this site so I cannot see any reason for me to engage you in conversation in the hope of rationality or sense from you nor is any attempt to have such a conversation with you anything other than a waste of time.

[Kay Tie]

"KayTie I do not need to Google the words "medicare" and "medicaid". "

If you are not prepared to learn facts about a topic then there's no point discussing it with you: you prefer to let your lazy ancient opinions fester in the darkness of ignorance. It's a waste of time having any kind of conversation with someone who refuses to read.

"Neither your ideology nor you yourself could give a toss about most people and how they are treated, you simply use flaws or failures against a system in the same way that creationists attack evolution, you don't have a better answer"

I do give a toss. Since I'm the person giving the toss, I think even you (a veritable pastiche of a nasty bitter old Trot) have to accept that I am the final arbiter of the giving of tossedness by myself.

And for the record, I do have a better answer: the Swiss system. Since you're an ignorant curmudgeon who refuses to listen or learn, you won't know how that system works. I suggest that until such times as you can demonstrate that you have acquired knowledge in this area, you take your groundless bitter opinions elsewhere.

[Kay Tie]

"Surely even you cannot be of the opinion that suicide bombers do these things because of their religion?"

Other societies equally oppressed don't do this. And yes, they have certain religious beliefs (obviously twisted into political aims, usually by other people).

The game is moving on now, and suicide bombers are increasingly drawn from the ranks of the mentally disabled. Another example of the wicknedness to which some people will stoop.

"Nerves might give them away if they believe they are being scanned, but that would not justify people being allowed to sell "explosive detecting" coathangers for thousands of pounds."

I didn't say it did. If you read what I wrote, it was merely an explanation of a placebo effect for why some Iraqis stubbornly cling to the idea that it does work. I'm sorry if your stereotype of me as an evil top-hatted capitalist out to buy and sell babies on margin doesn't conform to the real me and the words I write, but if anything has to give, it ought to be your stereotype (fat chance, though).

"Do you have some financial connection KayTie with the scam artists selling this fake explosive detecting kit that you are so robustly defending them."

Read what I wrote. Of course I bloody well don't. What are you, some kind of moron? Or so angry with the world that you want to make crap up? Do you ever actually read words, or do you just scan down the page and fit them to your pre-conceived notions?

Stop and think for a moment and decide whether you want to engage in a rational conversation or not. If you're not prepared to actually read what people write then go away and stop wasting our time.

[Kay Tie]

"What about the atrocities carried out by the anti-communists?"

Indeed. Unlike the bitter old Trots, I don't excuse such things because of the "greater good" or "good intentions" or somesuch other ideological sophistry.

[Adam]

'The usual tosh we come to expect here is the bitter whining of an old Trot who refuses to accept the atrocities under Communism were an inevitable consequence of the ruthless equality ideology to which he continues to adhere.'

What about the atrocities carried out by the anti-communists?

[HuwOS]

"By definition, a suicide bomber must be a credulous person"

Why is that KayTie,
Surely even you cannot be of the opinion that suicide bombers do these things because of their religion?
Surely you are not yet another who think that beleaguered and oppressed Palestinians, occupied and tortured Iraqis, Afghans who have had their families, friends and colleagues slaughtered and those who identify with them, do so because they believe in paradise.
Is the concept that they are just desperate and in all other senses utterly powerless in the face of the violence, humiliation and destruction used against them or those they identify with, on a daily basis, so difficult to understand.

That they might comfort themselves and seek succour in their religion as the time of their action approaches is unsurprising.
It is, surely even you must understand, no more than other soldiers praying and reminding themselves that good little christians go to heaven comfort seeking rather than their primary motivation.

A suicide bomber might well be a nervous person, but one thing is certain anyone of normal intellect who decides for themselves to commit an action like that is desperate and despairing not credulous.
Nerves might give them away if they believe they are being scanned, but that would not justify people being allowed to sell "explosive detecting" coathangers for thousands of pounds.

Do you have some financial connection KayTie with the scam artists selling this fake explosive detecting kit that you are so robustly defending them.
Or is it just your ideology conquering common sense yet again, perhaps you believe that in a truly free market even pretend bomb detecting equipment must be allowed to compete, again just like creationists arguing for their intelligent design nonsense to be taught alongside evolution in the classroom as an equally valid theory.
Does your lunacy have any boundaries?

[Kay Tie]

"A voodoo explosive detecting device was sold at a cost of £50 million to Iraq. It's useless. It has no means of detecting anything. It's all a matter of faith. It was just an outrageous scam the details of which was published months ago. Why was nothing nothing done to stop its use?"

Interesting. The same argument applies to Boots selling homoeopathic water to people who might give up proper treatments for (say) cancer. Should Boots be prosecuted? Apparently the Iraqis are completely convinced by this rubbish, just like those who take water remedies. I suspect that the placebo effect holds: if the bombers think that it works, they betray themselves by their body language. By definition, a suicide bomber must be a credulous person.

I'm pretty happy to have people jailed for making fraudulent claims. But we must at least apply this consistently: the New Age New Labour people shouldn't be making exceptions for the ludicrous remedies they credulously buy (Labour must have the most balanced chakras of any party by now).

[HuwOS]

KayTie I do not need to Google the words "medicare" and "medicaid".
It is not that the government's fingers are all over it that is the problem, the guiding light of the US is right wing freemarket capitalism and is that which corrupts, undermines, renders inefficient and delivers massive profits to corporations from both medicare and medicaid and it is that ideology that has its grubby sticky fat fingers all over it.

Neither your ideology nor you yourself could give a toss about most people and how they are treated, you simply use flaws or failures against a system in the same way that creationists attack evolution, you don't have a better answer, you don't even have a real answer you just don't like the answer that there is and are much happier expending time and effort to destroy it than lifting one finger or spending one more pound to improve it.

We have had 27 years of right wing government and yet you still wail and caterwaul about socialism.
You are words devoid of meaning and you hope through your shrieking, shouting, wailing and your ludicrous attacks and accusations against anyone and everyone to drown out rationality, practicality and sense.
You may well succeed, it has worked in the states for a long time but it serves only the super rich and no country benefits from pandering to the squawking of the pampered and the spoilt.

[Kay Tie]

"Sane people however recognise it as an extremely good base to build on, one that would not exist if the kind of free market practices you espouse held sway here."

No, it's a rubbish system upon which to build anything: it's politically-steered chaotic lumbering dinosaur consisting of millions of employees labouring according to ever-changing rules set by flighty conflicted ministers. It is sheer madness to think that it could be anything other than dysfunctional. In fact, it is a testament to the hard work of the staff that it hasn't completely collapsed.

"The US system is what you get when your principles are followed"

The US system is what you get when the US political system operates. If you think that the US healthcare system is a total free-for-all market-driven system then you need to Google the words "medicare" and "medicaid". The US Governments sticky corrupt fingers are all over it.

I think the US system is rubbish because it fails on all counts. There are plenty of other examples that are much more successful and don't result in brutal treatment of ill poor people (or people who weren't poor until they became ill). All of these examples avoid the need for a huge monolithic system for delivering healthcare. If you truly wish to learn HuwOS (something I doubt very much) then look at how the healthcare operates in Switzerland or Singapore. When you understand that, come back here and make a proper argument for the NHS rather than recycle witterings from politicians of the 1950s.

"making it the valid comparison, when answering your usual tosh."

The usual tosh we come to expect here is the bitter whining of an old Trot who refuses to accept the atrocities under Communism were an inevitable consequence of the ruthless equality ideology to which he continues to adhere.

[HuwOS]

The french system is considered to be very good indeed.
It is not free at the point of delivery, which is one of the very very good things about the nhs. I am sure you will say that better care is more important than being free at the point of delivery, that very much depends on whether you can pay, if you can't not being free could mean you don't go for treatment, early, when its cheaper to treat.

Aside from that, one of the major advantages the french system has is they get more funding, they pay now and have for many years 11% of GDP, it is the second best funded health system in the world,
the US has the best funded one at a cost of 16% of GDP and of course, it very much is not available to all.

Under the tories, our healthcare was getting 5% of GDP.
In fact here are some notable figures for the money paid into our healthcare system since 1980.
1980 5% appx of gdp on healthcare
1990 5% appx of gdp on healthcare
1997 5% appx of gdp on healthcare
2000 5% appx of gdp on healthcare
2005 7% appx of gdp on healthcare
2010 9% appx of gdp on healthcare
So the funding has been going up, but most of the real increases are recent and getting within yelling distance of what another country pays and has been paying for theirs for years is hardly going to vault us ahead of them.
On top of the higher level of funding, the french healthcare system has a much larger deficit than we do, theirs had a 4.4 billion euro deficit in 2008 and they are estimating that will be a 10 billion euro deficit in 2010.
In the UK after a particularly large deficit in 2006 of £547 million pounds, note million not billion, they then turned around and delivered apparent surpluses in 2007 and 2008 of £515 million and £1.67 billion respectively. An enormous pity as that money might well have saved lives.

In short, we are paying less and therefore getting less.
There is little doubt that the nhs are relatively efficient with the money they get, they need more for adequate staffing and other necessities, if they are given it, the nhs could once again genuinely deliver the best health care service in the world.

But to idealogues like KayTie, the problems that occur as a result of underfunding are the fault of the system not the fault of the funding, despite happily turning around and comparing the system unfavourably to a system that has much better funding.
All this ignoring the fact that the french system has its own problems with funding issues too, the simple fact of the matter the foundation of a world class health service is funding.
The US pays more than any other country for healthcare as a percentage of GDP but many many people don't really have access to healthcare at all and even those lucky to have insurance often find that it does not pay for the treatments they need.
The NHS needs more funding, more nurses, more beds, more doctors, fewer managers and a hell of a lot less interference and sniping from the right wing who abhor it far more for its success than any deficiencies it has.

[HuwOS]

No one thinks that the NHS is the epitome of a perfect healthcare system.
Sane people however recognise it as an extremely good base to build on, one that would not exist if the kind of free market practices you espouse held sway here.
The US system is what you get when your principles are followed, making it the valid comparison, when answering your usual tosh.

[Kay Tie]

"At least our citizens do not end up bankrupt because their health care bills."

Just because the system in the US is rubbish it doesn't follow that the NHS is either the best or indeed the envy of the world. If it were so great why does virtually every other country not adopt the NHS model? Even France, a leftie's wet dream, has a private hospitals with a national co-payment system.

It's funny how in decades past, the left represented the progressive intellectual force. Now it's just a collection of bitter old Trots and inexperienced adolescents spouting hackneyed views. At least try to think about things for yourself rather than taking the groupthink from your tribe, Chris.

[Kay Tie]

"However you wouldn't know how hard NHS staff work in reality"

I'm sure it's a great comfort to know that staff are working hard as people die through neglect and institutional incompetence. Like all lefties you confuse intentions with outcome (just as Gordon Brown boasts of how much spent on the NHS, inviting us to conclude that this means the NHS is getting better).

[Patrick]

"Regular contributor Kay Tie has sent this spoof of the much-mocked Cameron Poster. Are there any better ones?"

A better one would be with Kay-Tie arm in arm with Dave with a handful of fresh £50 notes looking into the distance with the words....

Love corporates , banks , and tax evasion?
Here's the good news, there's a nasty stench coming!

Vote for Dave

[Chris Carter]

At least our citizens do not end up bankrupt because their health care bills. People starve to death or end up malnourished around the world in hospitals only because of the most neglectful members of the health service, it is not a British problem alone. However you wouldn't know how hard NHS staff work in reality, which is unusual as you seem to regularly know all the facts Kay Tie.

[Kay Tie]

"Michael Moore's take on the NHS shows how envious other nations are of our health service"

Funny how he never interviewed people who had relatives starve to death in hospital, or those who left with malnutrition. But it's OK, your good intentions for the NHS make it all better.

[Chris Carter]

Michael Moore's take on the NHS shows how envious other nations are of our health service, and how ungrateful many cynics are of the standard of care we in fact receive.

Then again it's difficult for us to show the world the benefits of our health service when Daniel Hannan flies out to America and completely misrepresents the views of our nation towards the health service.

[HuwOS]

"Obama is not that powerful in the grand scheme of things, or you would have to criticise him Paul."

Paul should be criticising him, there is much to criticise.
Not being Bush does not make him a good or decent leader of a superpower.
Okay I agree, its nice that you can listen to the US president speak now without your brain beginning to bleed but its not really enough.

[Jolly Roger]

Testiwch, testiwch, 1,2,3.
Can I beat the Spam Block? Let's see.

[Adam]

I don't rate Micheal Moore, he is a pointless showman. Very boring and not in the least informative.

'It's good luck that we have the only President for a generation who is tough and intelligent enough to take on the special interests. '

'Beleaguered' Obama. The most powerful man in the world. You might not like what he does but it could be worse?

Obama is not that powerful in the grand scheme of things, or you would have to criticise him Paul.

[Kay Tie]

Michael Moore. Yeah. Watch "Sicko" and see his take on the NHS. Then tell us he's worth listening to. Quite frankly, the competition where he was out-farted by Peter Griffin told us everything we need to know about Michael Moore.

[Chris Carter]

If you want to see the real corporate America I suggest you watch Capitalism: A Love Story by Michael Moore, he shows how lobbysim and corporate greed destroyed his home town and is bringing untold misery to ordinary, hard working Americans. He actually finds a report between 2 of America's largest banks which refer to America as a "Plutonomy" where those with the most money have absolute power and company owners have become the "new" aristocracy.

As you've quite rightly said Paul, America's government could soon have a corporate structure itself, and is on a slippery slope, unless Obama's infinite determination can defeat the lobbyists infinite wealth. We'll soon see who can win such a stand off.