View Single Post
Old 09-25-2007, 04:08 PM   #74 (permalink)
Observer
Block Captain
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 400
Points: 3,390, Level: 36
Points: 3,390, Level: 36 Points: 3,390, Level: 36 Points: 3,390, Level: 36
Level up: 27%, 110 Points needed
Level up: 27% Level up: 27% Level up: 27%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Observer is offline
Reply With Quote
 
fixashun said:
Quote:
"He used the word euthanasia. But his point was that the plan might dump those who the plan doesn't deem "worth" treating."
CrazyFlamingo said:
Quote:
I had to take the time to read the plan before responding to this ridiculous claim. It is only 16 pages long so it didn't take long.

Just as I suspected, your above statement is a bald-faced lie. No mention of euthanasia whatsoever.
How do you interpret "the plan might dump those who the plan doesn't deem worth treating"??

Say you smoked for 35 years of your life and you're 70 years old. Your doctor finds a "spot" on your lung that needs to be removed. It will cost 75,000 dollars for the surgery and Hillary's plan says "no". Is that not a form a euthanasia? What else would you call it?

To my reasoning, her plan says, "This person isn't worth saving. Even if he/she hadn't smoked, he/she is too old to waste that kind of money on. Sorry. Operation denied."