If you unfairly, wrongly and very publicly attack someone, shouldn't you apologize?

[fried eggs]

For example, if on Tuesday I wrongly blamed another person for a situation I was in, and I called that person a piece of shit, I would apologize after learning I was wrong. That is the right thing to do, it seems, especially if one wants to be taken seriously in the future...?

[arthritisR_US]

1. Absolutely. nt

[NCTraveler]

2. Anything specific? Just a general thought? nt.

[fried eggs]

4. Just thinking out loud.

[question everything]

286. Just a hunch

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024685964

[Yo_Mama]

3. Out of at least self-respect, yes.

We're human beings - we're all wrong sometimes.

As well, there may actually be some benefit to the attackee, because many people will remember the attack and one doesn't want to leave others with the wrong impression that it was justified.

[joeybee12]

5. Gee, I have no idea who you're talking about! I certainly wouldn't call this thread a call-out

of another DU member.

[fried eggs]

9. Who have I called out? Did someone here do that?

[Sheldon Cooper]

78. ...

You are fooling exactly no one, but do go carry on with your denials.

[Aerows]

122. You've got that right n/t

[laundry_queen]

300. HAHA, bingo! nt

[SammyWinstonJack]

282. Oh come on now.

[pnwmom]

21. It wasn't a call-out. It was a philosophical question. n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

219. Chuck a rock ...

the dog that yelps, be the dog done got hit.

[Lars39]

6. Meta went that away.

[MindMover]

7. Once a fried egg always a fried egg ...

sometimes it just happens ... and later in life you realize spilled milk is just milk on the floor ...

[Cirque du So-What]

8. Yes, one should apologize

unless, of course, one is a sanctimonious poltroon, that is.

[oldhippie]

52. Poltroon? Wow!

I haven't heard that term since my old Harry Flashman series days.

I really liked that series.

[Logical]

10. Why don't you just say the shit you want to say and stop with the stupid analogy? nt

[NCTraveler]

13. This. nt.

[fried eggs]

17. I think I did. There are no analogies in my OP.

Nobody is perfect. We all make mistakes. But vicious, unfair attacks should be followed by an apology. You don't get to walk away like nothing happened, or... even worse.... pretend to still be confused.

[Logical]

20. Are you smart enough to realize the drug company solved the issue, not the insurance company?? n-t

[pnwmom]

31. Are you smart enough to realize

that the problem had nothing to do with the ACA, that formularies have been used for decades -- by Medicare, Medicaid, and other nations' single-payer systems as well?

That the real problem is the exorbitant cost of some drugs, so the drug company in this case is anything but a white knight?

[Yo_Mama]

138. You are so totally, totally wrong - here's the proof.

Because he's mandated to buy an ACA plan, he doesn't have choices in his area, so he can't get an ACA plan that covers the drug, and ACA coverage is leaving his wife uninsured for this purpose. There's a lot of counties in the US in which your ACA choices are pretty much one company, or sometimes two. More than half, to be precise. Here's an NYT article over the issue:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/24/business/health-law-fails-to-keep-prices-low-in-rural-areas.html?_r=0

That's a hell of a situation to be in, and instead of us all trying to pretend his wife isn't in this situation, we should be working to change it.

He's not the only one, and this problem has been pretty widely discussed.

The cutest part is that the insurers are trying to block programs such as the one William Pitt's wife is now using:
http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/express-scripts-stops-covering-key-big-pharma-drugs-cost-effectiveness-grou/2013-10-10

Here's the proof that you are wrong:
Where I live, this is the BC/BS formulary, and there is no other company selling ACA plans (in much of rural GA). So this is what we get if we are forced to buy ACA insurance.
http://www.bcbsga.com/GAExchangedruglist4.pdf

MS drugs with no coverage at all include Aubagio, Avonex, Betaseron, Copaxone, Gilenya, Novantrone, Tecfidera.

Here's a WebMD list of MS drugs:
http://www.webmd.com/multiple-sclerosis/guide/ms-drug-treatments

The only drug available for ACA MS sufferers in GA is Rebif (Tier 4, prior authorization required, meaning they'll try to avoid paying for it, and you might not get it, hahahahah this means they demand multiple MRIs, which you have to pay for, and if you can't pay for them no luck, sucker) and Tysabri, which you can get on Tier 4. There are no orals. Tysabri is administered IV only. Rebif would be the "common" usage drug, and it's laughable that they'd put that on PA. It's really just a way of denying coverage.

A lot of MS patients are shit out of luck with ACA, and it is much worse than it is now on most policies, because under ACA, if the drug is not on the formulary it doesn't count toward your deductible or OOP. So you are just flat uninsured.

That people are chopping up this poor guy because he's desperate to help his wife is sick. Just sick.

[Oilwellian]

145. Excellent post n/t

[1000words]

166. Nicely done.

And you are correct: Those judging and attacking the guy are despicable.

Agendas are showing ...

[brush]

211. He called the President a "piece of shit"

Just disgusting — talking about agendas showing.

He's the President wrongly before — after the State of the Union speech.

He's the one with the agenda.

I feel for his wife but he's needs to reign in his attacks to a civil level of discourse. And he's supposed to be a writer. Writers you expect to be able to express themselves without calling a sitting DEMOCRATIC president a "piece of shit" on a progressive DEMOCRATIC site.

He should definitely apologize.

And before I'm attacked about not caring about his wife, my prayers and thoughts go out to her in battle with her disease.

[1000words]

227. Once, I told my mother I hated her.

I was really angry. It wasn't true, and she knew it. And she never held it against me.

Every community is a family.

[brush]

231. There's a big difference

The president is not his or your mother, and you didn't do it publicly before millions and were proven publicly to be wrong.

[1000words]

234. I think you overestimate DU's audience ...

and importance.

Doubly, for Will's.

[brush]

273. Maybe so, but DU is online and potentially available to whoever is online nt

[fried eggs]

233. I really hope you apologized

Everyone has a limit.

[G_j]

168. +1000

[pnwmom]

230. He hadn't even bothered to check the 9 other insurers because he said it would be a waste of time.

But not, according to him, because he was required to purchase on the exchange. He said it was because his "friend" told him that insurance companies outside of exchanges would reject people for having preexisting conditions. But his friend was either ignorant or lying. (Insurers outside of the exchange also can no longer charge higher rates for preexisting conditions.)

Will's post is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4686037

"There are ten different health insurance companies in NH. According to the independent (family friend, ally) insurance adjuster I spoke to at length this afternoon, pursuing coverage with any of them would be a waste of time. Why? Because - according to dude - the whole "You cannot deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions" thing only applies to insurance companies within the ACA network. You heard all that shit about "Grandfathering." Well, this is that, and all of them will turn us down because they still can.

"I am in the process of running down the facts of the matter, but family friend and ally was confident enough to basically tell us not to bother. "

_____________________________________


The ACA requires that every insurer offer a formulary that list drugs in each class; they can't decide, for example, to deny all drugs for M.S. that do the same thing. But different insurers negotiate different prices and don't all have the same drugs on their formularies, so it is definitely worthwhile for anyone buying insurance to call the insurer and see if any expensive drug they need is covered on that formulary, just as they would want to check if their doctor was on the list.

Also, the ACA -- for the first time -- gives customers both an inside and an outside appeal process, that is designed to take days, not weeks or months. And there is a process for a doctor asking for an exception to the formulary for a medication a patient needs. Will didn't seem to be aware of any of this, no thanks to his "friend" the insurance broker.

And finally, nothing you posted "proves" that I am wrong about the real problem being price-gouging by the drug companies, rather than the existence of formularies of drugs whose prices have been by the insurers, whether they be private, state, or the federal government -- ie. Medicare and Medicaid, which also use formularies. Should every insurer or government entity have to approve the cost of every medication, no matter what price the drug company decides to set? I read about a cystic fibrosis drug that the company decided to market at more than $300K a year. Should all the formularies instantly cover it? Or should we be fighting the price gouging of these hugely profitable drug companies?

[Yo_Mama]

243. You are wrong on several counts.

First, if anyone here can name me an ACA Silver plan that's not Anthem in NH, please do. I could only find Anthem plans offered under the "Silver" category (subsidized). The subsidy is based on the Silver plans, so if you have to be on ACA, what other option do you have? So are you guys blaming Will because he supported ACA by buying one of their policies? Because if so, I do not see the logic.

Second, what you are ignoring is that these companies have set up "special" formularies for ACA plans. Aubagio is on the non-ACA formulary, which you can find here:
https://www.anthem.com/health-insurance/nsecurepdf/pharmacy_ABCBS_Anthem_Natl_DL_tiered

Mind you, when people were initially trying to buy plans most of them couldn't even get this information. You had to go to other websites to get it. So the theory that this was just pure laziness on his part is a little odd.

Will is upset because he just realized that he supported something that is going to deny an awful lot of people needed care. You are all trying to blame him for something that the rules of ACA allow and even encourage.

I do think there is a place within ACA to get stuff like this corrected, but people here are trying to claim it's not a problem when it is. As political advocacy this is totally ineffective, and of course what we should be doing is advocating so that the "special" insurance beneficiaries get the benefits other people get. Because, you know, otherwise an awful lot of people are going to be getting nasty surprises and thinking that ACA is a piece of shit, and that those who boast about it are either ignorant, or pieces of shit who just don't care about what happens to some very vulnerable people.

Drugs like this are EXCLUDED from the ACA formulary, which is "special", which you can find here:
http://www.anthem.com/Exchangedruglist4.pdf

Let's suppose that this couple can buy "non-special" coverage. Is that supposed to make this man LESS upset about the plight of all those who have no other option? Is DUs honest, real answer to this sort of thing just WTF, they're just poor people who should be thankful to have insurance at all even though it doesn't cover their needed medications? Is that progressive?

I don't think the president is a piece of shit, but I do think a lot of people are going to discover their ACA policies are pieces of shit. ACA supporters SHOULD be working to correct the real problems, instead of trying to claim they do not exist. Regulatory action will be needed.

ACA was never sold to the public as being this "special".

The point is not what the drug companies charge, but that ACA allows insurance companies to provide crappy coverage.

[MindMover]

244. I have said before that the word insurance and health does not compute ....

only in the pockets of carpetbaggers and tonic salesmen ... a throwback to days past ....


"but that ACA allows insurance companies to provide crappy coverage.

[pnwmom]

255. Should the ACA allow drug companies to price gouge?

Should the ACA allow drug companies to set any price they wish -- like $300,000 for a year's worth of pills for cystic fibrosis -- and then force every insurer to pay for it?

Or maybe, just maybe, we should start doing something about the root causes of the high costs of health care -- like profiteering, price-gouging drug companies that, in developing their patented medications, piggyback on government funded research done in academic and government labs.

[MindMover]

256. Single payer, drugs purchased thru government run pharmacies ....

the government authorizes drug manufacture ... why not sales .... ?

[pnwmom]

258. Maybe so. There has to be something better than the current system

where drug companies charge "whatever the market will bear" in the U.S and then sell at discounts everywhere else.

[pnwmom]

253. No, you're wrong. Will did NOT say he was limited to a silver ACA plan in NH.

He said that his friend told him it would be a waste of time to look at look at plans for his wife outside the exchange because they wouldn't accept her due to her preexisting condition. Which was a lie.

And I wasn't blaming Will for buying whatever policy he chose. I was saying that his friend the agent was feeding him false information. As you know from googling, the drug he needed is on the non-ACA formulary. His agent lied and said the non-ACA insurer wouldn't accept his wife as a customer.

I think maybe we're talking about different OP's. Maybe you missed that first OP of his, where he was cursing out Obama because his wife was denied her medication. The whole post was about his wife and her not being able to get her medication, not about any larger group of vulnerable patients. He made that argument in a different OP on the next day.

But with regard to the larger group of patients, yes, it is a problem that must be addressed. But the whole reason formularies exist is because drug companies price- gouge and drug companies put some drugs on the market that either don't work very well or are simply more costly variations of drugs that work. So it's stupid to focus completely on the insurers and ignore the drug companies that do things like charge $300K a year for a lifesaving C.F. prescription.

[Bobbie Jo]

265. Excellent post. nt

[bvar22]

249. Well Done.

Concise & To the Point.

[SammyWinstonJack]

283. Just sick! Their motives for chopping are even more sickening!

[Cha]

278. Evidently not.

[sabrina 1]

68. People should apologize for vicious attacks on others, but the fact that they engage in vicious

attacks to begin with, whether right or wrong, indicates they will not apologize, whether proven to have been wrong or not.

I never expect apologies from people who engage in that kind of behavior, so I'm never disappointed.

[Yo_Mama]

162. Which is why, IMO, a lot of people here owe the person we are not mentioning an apology.

See my other post in response to PNWMom about exactly what He Whose Name May Not Be Spoken is facing, and by extension, a whole bunch of other MS sufferers.

Bottom line, they aren't insured under ACA, although they are required to buy the policy. And the ins cos are banding together to sue to stop the very patient assistance programs that this guy's wife now depends on.

And the whole thing is vicious and unfair, and then this man gets abused when he tries to tell the truth about what is happening.

Insurance cos are using the formularies to exclude certain patients from insurance, IMO.

[pnwmom]

257. I didn't abuse him. Look at his first OP. Even though he was spreading the lie

that non-exchange insurers don't accept people with preexisting conditions, I understood he was in a vulnerable position because of his wife's terrible illness. So I didn't chew him out about that.

I just told him that his friend the agent was giving him false information. And suggested he look into all the formularies, both in and outside the exchange (since he had already mentioned looking outside the exchange, and reported that his friend said that would be a waste of time -- not that he couldn't afford it.) And I told him how there was an inside appeal and an outside appeal, and a process for having a doctor request an exception to the formulary.

Under the ACA, no insurance company, on or off the exchange, can exclude all of a class of drugs. This is an improvement on the law that existed until now. It's also an improvement that there is a fast way to appeal, both inside and outside the insurer, and to have your doctor request an exception for your medication if necessary.

We still have a long way to go. Yes, we do. And one thing we have to look at is price-gouging by the drug companies. They are not charging based on development costs. Their whole price philosophy, in a nutshell is this: WHAT THE MARKET WILL BEAR. So they charge simply based on what similar products are charging, and what they can get insurers to pay for. Does that really make sense to you?

[applegrove]

261. Were you directly involved? I was called

"confused" by a psychopath who had been messing with my life for 8 years before I began to figure him out. Are you aware you are using the euphamism a psychopath would use to describe somebody they had just tried to kill, gasslighted, purposely traumatized, criminally stalked and harrassed, persecuted and assaulted? They would also demand an apology for being called out on their actual actions. They would imply something had been recanted by someone when that had not happened. I'm just saying you fit a pattern here and are you sure you know what is up?

[Cha]

281. They don't want to be reminded that the one who used the Prez as his personal whipping post..

won't apologize for being wrong..they don't apologize. EVER. End of story.

[cheapdate]

279. There is absolutely nothing wrong with generalizing a problem or a question

to more fully explore the consequences or implications or to look for universal truths. Logicians and philosophers do it all the time. It's a thing.

[jsr]

11. Yeah, a very public apology is in order

Here is a template:

Therefore, wishing to remove from the minds of your Eminences and all faithful _____ this vehement suspicion reasonably conceived against me, I abjure with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith these errors and heresies, and I curse and detest them as well as any other error, heresy or sect contrary to the _____ . And I swear that for the future I shall neither say nor assert orally or in writing such things as may bring upon me similar suspicions; and if I know any heretic, or one suspected of heresy, I will denounce him to this _____ Office, or to the Inquisitor or Ordinary of the place in which I may be.

[progressoid]

62. !

[Sheepshank]

141. How about a simple....

"My mistake.....given this situation, I was blamed the wrong people."

Or more likely "I don't care what the real situation is, I stand by my hate filled rant...I just found excuse to use it"

your over the top BS is dumb and unnecessary

[hollysmom]

232. I once told a guy who worked for me he was wrong, that it was a stupid idea until I found out he

was right, then I called all the same people together so I could apologize to him. His feelings were very hurt, he trusted me, so I had to do something. I had to let everyone know he was right all along and that I would treat them the same way. I was a lousy manager, so I needed people to trust me and do their hardest work for me, then the group makes you look like a good manager and you can suck at your job.

[Cha]

294. No. There will be no apology. that's not

who a person is that writes ignorant shit like that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4686372

[Autumn]

12. Yes, just as soon as Obama signs up on DU Will should definitely apologize.

If one want to be taken seriously in the future they really should not demand someone give them an apology that is owed to another person. Because no one owes any of you an apology. You are not Obama, you are not his wife, you are nothing to Obama. If he passed you on the street he wouldn't know you from an oil stain on the sidewalk. No one owes you an apology, no one. Get over it, You. Are. Not. Obama. Obama does not know you, if he did I seriously doubt he would even like you.

[Logical]

15. +1000! n-t

[fried eggs]

23. Don't know what you're talking about

but doing the right thing shouldn't be dependent on who is watching or listening. It's called integrity.

[Feral Child]

90. You Go, Girl!

[Whisp]

116. That she did!

[sheshe2]

288. ~

sad that...

[morningfog]

270. What was your other DU name?

[cui bono]

304. You speak of integrity.... that's a laugh.

You wouldn't know integrity if it broke your yolk.

You can't even admit this thread is a call out of another DUer. And you pretend to be clueless and act innocent when people point that out. Integrity. Right. Go fry some bacon.

[Mojorabbit]

61. + a gazillion. nt

[Rex]

87. Sounds like some pretzel logic to me.

If ya know what I mean.

[Le Taz Hot]

111. I was wondering . . .

Yep. Complete with breathless outrage. Good call!

[Oilwellian]

150. You were reading my mind

I was going to ask if fried eggs and pretzels go together. LOL

[cui bono]

305. If you leave them out a few days and let them harden

they sometimes can be used as a somewhat functioning cog.

[morningfog]

271. Definitely a sock.

Could be that one.

[Capt. Obvious]

117. Amazing your post got hidden

Yet OP stands.

[fried eggs]

182. Why is that amazing?

Do you understand the concept of attack vs. general question?

[Cha]

295. Oh I think President Obama would like fried eggs just Fine. He's a good guy.. they both are.

As for the stupid ignorant Crap Pitt shit all over.. Well, I think Obama would empathize and try to help him fix his problem.. just like many DUers did.

I don't expect or want Pitt to apologize for being wrong about the Prez.. I know that's not who he is.

[FSogol]

14. Yes, but remember, it takes character to admit when you are wrong.

Some agendas don't allow that.

[Logical]

18. How was he wrong when the Drug company solved the issue, not the insurance company??? nt

[JoePhilly]

32. Did the ACA create the situation ... or did the ACA not resolve

a health care issue that already existed?

I mean, while the ACA does improve many things, there are still many other things it has not addressed.

Should one blame the ACA for not resolving every issue that existed prior to its passage?

The National MS Society includes information to help people engage the federal and state exchanges. Provides info to help people select a plan that will work for them.

Odd no one mentioned them.

[Lars39]

39. If the ACA can institute a way to appeal, it can sure as hell tinker with the sacred Formulary™,

and its pricing.

[JoePhilly]

50. Probably will at some point.

Point remains. The ACA is not to blame for problems that existed before it past that still remain.

[Lars39]

55. Single payer with price controls on meds would have done wonders for his situation.

Standardizing the formulary across the board would have helped, too. So, yes, there is anger out there that things like this weren't fixed and probably won't be at all now that Single Payer and Public Option were skuttled before the get-go.

[JoePhilly]

97. Nonsense.

Your first sentence, while accurate, is moot. Those were never going to pass back in 2009.

And ... with the ACA, those can be added by the states. So the idea that we now can't get there is wrong.

And at some point, the federal exchanges will add a PO. The GOP will try to block this, but its coming. The red states, ironically, might get the federal version first because they decided to not do state exchanges, dopes.

We can sit in a corner and whine about not getting everything we wanted all at once, or we can get busy using the ACA as a foundation, and pushing forward.

I already know how some on DU will act going forward.

[Lars39]

102. But meanwhile, hush up about anything that negatively affects your medical care.

Gotta identify the problems before you can fix them.

[JoePhilly]

103. Except I didn't say that.

Tell me, when you are trying to help GOTV for 2014, will you (a) tell people why the ACA sucks, or (b) explain to them how we, if we win back congress, can expand it further?

Well?

[Lars39]

109. Yes, I am telling people that.

But that doesn't negate the intense push back from those who don't want to hear the real-life problems people are facing and expecting those problems to be fixed. You can't fix problems if you refuse to even acknowledge them.

[JoePhilly]

127. I acknowledged the ACA has problems above.

And I don't know of a single DU member who claims it is perfect.

I do encounter many who claim it SUCKS, the President is an evil bastard for getting it passed.

What you claimed there is a strawman that isn't true.

[Lars39]

131. Really?

I've been zoned out for a few months, checked back in and started paying attention. Started noticing patterns. Not hard to see at all.
Just about any personal anecdote is prime target.

[JoePhilly]

135. Can you show me a post where some one claims the ACA has no issues?

[Lars39]

139. It's not the claim...it's the noise trying to drown out and invalidate the poster's information.

[Oilwellian]

153. It's a typical response with these people

Kill the messenger.

[VanillaRhapsody]

180. You mean the messenger that used "piece of shit" to describe the person who

passed the greatest Achievement for Women since Roe V Wade?

[VanillaRhapsody]

179. when does asking for help begin with calling someone a "piece of shit"?

[Lars39]

187. And once again, the actual plight of his situation is glossed over.

He wasn't asking for help, although he received it from kindly and knowledgeable DUers.

He was ranting about the fucking injustice of his family's situation.

Caring more about his angry words and your hurt feelings than you do about his wife's illness and the economic devastation his family is facing in trying to obtain health care and medication for her is not the hallmark of empathy.

[VanillaRhapsody]

192. the plight was not President Obama's fault...yet HE is called

a piece of shit....bizarrely to anger his supporters...

DO NOT claim that wasn't the case!

[Lars39]

195. And once again, zip about the actual substance of his post, which was his wife's health.

[Raine1967]

212. This is where I disagree.

HE laid blame -- on Obama.

His anger was more important than his wife's health in that particular post.

I read the post. I got the substance. I read it loud and fucking clearly. The post never asked for help or advice. You see substance that wasn't there.

I understand that Mr. Pitt is a writer. He did a terrible job expressing the very substance of which you speak.

[Lars39]

214. Writers aren't infallible when it comes to their loved ones' health and well being.

Fear and terror can propel a person to say horrible things. Should he have stepped back and rethought before clicking 'Post my Reply"?
Sure. Shouldn't we all? Hurt feelings over what someone said about a national figure, *even* the President of the United States, does not even come close to equaling his wife's health.

[Raine1967]

224. I personally feel that thread was over the top.

I don't want to get into it, but I do believe it was far less about a spouse than an agenda.

A lot of us have health problems and/or have spouses and partners with serious issues. Blaming the president is an easy way to get an emotional response when it really isn't needed.

I think there is conflation here. As I said, I like Mr. Pitt's writing. It's generally thought provoking.

The post we are speaking of was not meant to be thought provoking. It was about blame. To be honest, his loved ones are no more or less important than any one else who is a member of DU.

I have a mother in poverty, she can't get medicaid because she receives $400 too much. She can get food stamps and she is eligible for HEAP. Is my mother less important than the DU'rs wife?

My mother has SHAME about needing this help, you know why?

She thinks that help is for people who really need it. It's deranged. We have people on the left who blame the president for the ACA and people like my mother who bought the BS line that she doesn't deserve a safety net.

I have no problem calling out our elected officials when needed. That OP was a load of poop. It wasn't fear and terror. I believe Will is not driven to post out of fear and terror... unless he is.

if that is the case, well, I have misunderstood him over many a year.

[Rex]

228. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt since it involves his wife.

I too thought it was over the top.

[Lars39]

236. I have been unable to afford anti-cancer drugs.

The terror that invokes is deep in the gut, not something a person can always be rational about. I firmly believe that every one of us is important to one another, family to family, stranger to stranger. I am sorry about your mother. So many people are hurting in this country. Caring people who try to give to family members and friends to help soon realize that it's like a drop in the ocean when the help needed is systemic. Doesn't mean to stop trying though.
The upside to WillPitt's rant was the resulting information in that thread that could possibly help someone else in his situation.

[Raine1967]

241. Agreed, Lars.

I do believe in my heart that when pointed out the error of ones way, it is a noble thing to acknowledge it.

I've posted here and other places of having health insurance I could literally not afford if I used it (prior to the ACA). I went without medication for a long time. The meds and the Dr. visit's covered nothing to a certain extent. (in other words, I would have been better off having a catastrophic car accident than getting routine care; I;m sure you know what I speak of)


Sometimes, people place anger in the wrong place. It's noble to acknowledge that when pointed out by other people. I myself have learned that lesson in my life.

I hope you are able to get the medications you need. I also hope that people here on DU can help find a solution to what is going on.

Knowing that my mom is going to get food stamps and HEAP gives me comfort. I wish she could allow herself to be comforted by this as well. She has bought into the BS crap put forth by the RW. Now she needs that help to literally survive. I think in the end my point is that we should ALL be wary of buying a/the meme of the day week/year. I believe Mr. Pitt is is perfectly entitled to his anger. I also believe it was misplaced. It was made on a message board; people are going to have opinions.


The ACA is a step forward. It's not the end, it is the beginning -- much like all the other countries that have national health care it didn't happen overnight. (Canada's system began nearly a century ago -- in one territory.)

I would VERY much like to see it address every issue, but I really believe every journey begins with a step forward.

I know I am rambling, but regarding the very recent discussions about the ACA and a National health care system I always like to post this article from 2009: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/01/26/090126fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all

(thank you very much for a nice response. Lately I am very reticent about posting in threads that are such hot button topics.)

Raine

[Lars39]

250. I have hope, but fret about the time involved.

Way too many people will die or be maimed for the rest of their shortened life in the twenty or so years it could take to get to that point. I was fortunate with my medicine in that it went generic 4 months after I ran out of the samples I was given. I've been thru one bankruptcy due to medical bills. No joy in that.

Good article! Thanks for posting it!

[bvar22]

252. Jars39... you absolutely NAILED IT!

[font size=3]"Caring more about his angry words and your hurt feelings than you do about his wife's illness and the economic devastation his family is facing in trying to obtain health care and medication for her is not the hallmark of empathy."[/font]

[laundry_queen]

301. That last sentence is exactly right. nt

[Thinkingabout]

158. There should be similar prices charged in other countries.

The story I heard was the US does not negotiate prices so the drug companies charge as much as the market will allow. Kinda crappy to me but members of Congress Is lining their pockets with big f
pharma money from lobbyists.

[Lars39]

163. Yep, pricing disparity exists.

Infuriating for this country's citizens to be seen as a cash cow by every predatory market out there.

[pnwmom]

35. The drug company CAUSED the problem in the first place,

with their exorbitant prices. Now that they're giving him a break, they don't suddenly turn into the white knight.

[Logical]

37. So you love insurance companies?? n-t

[pnwmom]

38. I fail to follow your logic. Are you suggesting

that all insurance companies and Medicaid and Medicare and state governments that insure their employees should pay whatever price any price-gouging drug company demands?

And that we should applaud the drug company as a hero when it backs off a bit on its demands?

http://healthcareforamericanow.org/2013/04/08/pharma-711-billion-profits-price-gouging-seniors/

Washington, DC – The 11 largest drug companies took $711.4 billion in profits over the 10 years ending in 2012, according to an analysis of corporate filings by Health Care for America Now (HCAN). The global pharmaceutical industry derived much of that profit from price-gouging the Medicare Part D prescription drug program for seniors and people with disabilities. Americans pay significantly more than any other country for the exact same drugs. In 2012 alone, the drug companies’ profits reached $83.9 billion, 62 percent higher than in 2003.

“The drug industry’s profits are excessive as a result of overcharging American consumers and taxpayers,” said Ethan Rome, HCAN’s executive director. “During this period, as millions of Americans struggled to afford their medicines, Republicans in Congress have threatened to cut seniors’ benefits while refusing to consider commonsense measures to get a better deal from drug companies.”

HCAN reviewed the last decade’s financial filings from 11 prescription drug giants: Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Merck, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott Laboratories, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Click here for detailed annual earnings.

Bolstered by its formidable prescription-drug marketing machine, Big Pharma’s already huge profits surged to new heights in 2006, the first year of Medicare’s Part D prescription drug program – and they’ve stayed high ever since.

SNIP

[JoePhilly]

53. +1

[Yo_Mama]

59. I don't think he is wrong to be angry.

I think he has the right to care deeply about his wife, and to say that a program that leaves his wife and others like her in the situation she is in is messed up.

[VanillaRhapsody]

183. and then now that it turns out he was wrong....shouldn't he say so and

apologize for being over the top hyperbolic?

[Yo_Mama]

259. He wasn't wrong - she is uninsured for this treatment

The only reason she is getting the meds is that she's using the drug company program. Which the ins cos are suing to stop, btw.

I think he's wrong about the prez being a piece of shit, but geeze.

[Raine1967]

225. Problem is, that wasn't said. eom.

[lumpy]

126. Pitt tried to lay the blame on Obama ultimatly.

[Raine1967]

152. I believe he called Obama a used car salesman.

He blamed Obama for his problem.

I read that thread. He did not blame an insurance company. Hecalled the president a used car salesman.

I like Will's postings --- that one, not so much.

He was justified in his anger, however, imo, wrong in where he placed the blame. It wasn't the ACA doing wrong or Obama.

I'm happy he found a solution. Actually, I am happy for his wife more than anything else. She is more important than anything else.

I wish he's done this before a very unfortunate thread was posted. he was given advice on DU and on his FB page. This entire messy affair, along with all of these messy OP's in response could have been avoided.

---

[VanillaRhapsody]

184. excuse me...he called him a "piece of shit car salesman" to be correct.

[Cha]

297. Yes, there was the OP and this post that got hidden..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4686372

"I wish he's done this before a very unfortunate thread was posted. he was given advice on DU and on his FB page. This entire messy affair, along with all of these messy OP's in response could have been avoided."

It would have been so nice, Raine.

[polichick]

16. Really? The morality police?

[jsr]

29. In relentless pursuit of thoughtcrime

and unapproved expressions

[quinnox]

19. No, this is getting silly. This is just a message board, folks. Too much melodrama!

[Whisp]

34. you got that right, too much melodrama.

you'd think people would catch on by now.

[quinnox]

40. Why thank you. It took me a little bit of time to find the exact right image

Google images came through for me once again, its my little secret.

[Agschmid]

48. It worked for sure.

[Oilwellian]

159. LOL

[deutsey]

314. I was just thinking this as your post scrolled by.

Some DUers are way too consumed by this outrage du jour.

[Lars39]

22. I would rather read a shit-stirring rant written in fear and anger than to read all this cutesy

passive-aggressive crap.

[laundry_queen]

302. Truth. nt

[el_bryanto]

24. In real life you totally should - on the internet - Never!

To apologize would be to show weakness.

Bryant

[lumpy]

143. I guess Pit shoudn't have to appologize for revealing what he really thinks of Obama.

[el_bryanto]

144. And you shouldn't have to apologize for calling him out - remember, apology is weakness. nt

[1000words]

25. This is a call out. It's not clever.

Own up to it.

[tkmorris]

26. Yes, probably. So when are you going to do so?

[Whisp]

27. Not gonna happen. It was about the attention fix

and that's all that matters.

Apparently something worked on for months was miraculously solved in one day at DU.

yah sure.

[NCTraveler]

28. The eggs seem to be scrambled.

If I was to make a call-out thread thinking I am smart enough to not have anyone notice it was a call-out thread, and then find out everyone did notice, should I tell the world I thought I was smart but have now realized I am an idiot?

Not asking that because it is related to anything. Just a random thought.

[bvar22]

248. LOL....Thanks.

You were able to glean a glimmer of humor from a rancid cess pool.

[woo me with science]

30. Not this authoritarian garbage again.

This absurd talking point is nothing if not persistent. Persistent and transparent. I will give you the same answer I gave MineralMan when he tried a variation on this nonsense. He actually had the gall to suggest not only that Will owed an apology, but that the community together should extend "forbearance" ...

[font size=2]....for the sin of expressing anger at a (D) politician in the United States of America. [/font size]

Demanded contrition, in a political discussion community, for expressing anger at a politician in the United States of America. Yes, that is how twisted and authoritarian the Third Way messaging has become.

10. What arrogant, authoritarian garbage.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4690227


Citizens have a right to express anger toward politicians. Understanding that is a part of being an adult in the United States of America.

That you would deign to absolve Will or suggest to the community that he needs to apologize or that anyone else needs to offer "forbearance" to him for directing anger at the president is perhaps the creepiest little performance I have ever seen from you here.

This persistent, transparent effort by the propaganda brigade to suggest new rules for political expression, to suggest that those who express political anger are transgressing somehow, to transform a public servant into a King...is creepy and pathetic.

Criticize the President? We should not even be having serious conversations about this.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022666913

[fried eggs]

42. If you think common decency and integrity is authoritarian, maybe you should

join the teabaggers? And you are extremely off topic. Of course people should be able to express anger towards politicians or anyone else. If I go on a hate filled tirade against someone and learn that I had my facts wrong, I would apologize. We'll have to agree to disagree: In your world, perhaps it's OK to attack someone with lies. In my world, that's a sleezy thing to do.

[polichick]

46. And calling out somebody like this is not "sleezy?"

[fried eggs]

51. I didn't call anyone out, but if the shoe happens to fit then

fucking wear it.

[Lars39]

58. It is a call-out because every one in this thread knows *exactly* to whom you are referring.

[fried eggs]

64. If there are posters here who did what my OP describes,

then it follows that more than a few readers felt discouraged or upset as a result of those rants, which means an apology is probably in order. But again, that requires integrity. If someone did that and doesn't apologize, it's probably because the slander was intentional.

[Lars39]

67. Now where have I seen this strategy before?

[fried eggs]

75. I don't know. I don't live on DU

so I have no idea what you're talking about. Why don't you tell me?

And what exactly is it that you're arguing for? MORE lack of decorum?

[Lars39]

77. It is a right wing strategy.

Act the victim then demand an apology.

[fried eggs]

82. Oh, I see

Or maybe I'm just tired of silently watching on as one person after another takes a shit all over everyone then leave the scene as if nothing happened. Fuck that.

[Lars39]

86. Ah, so you do remember who the OP is about.

[fried eggs]

89. The OP is a general question, which you have yet to answer

If I wanted to hear untrue, hate-filled tirades all day, I'd watch Fox News. To distinguish oneself from the Hannitys of the world, you have to be able to acknowledge when you're wrong. Now which side do YOU fall on?

[Lars39]

91. No, the OP was about WillPitt.

Stop denying that. I fall on the side of compassion.

[Capt. Obvious]

100. It can't be about Will Pitt

as he was never named.

[Rex]

104. I guessed this was about our last epic loser troll - Pretzel Warrior.

I agree with the OP and demand one of his socks come forth to apologize for all the bullshit attacks on DUers.

[fried eggs]

113. As I keep trying to explain to your friend, it's general

Like they say, "hit dogs will holler!"

[Capt. Obvious]

125. I wonder how many socks PW had

are they still around and posting do you think?

[Rex]

129. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say yes.

I know, I know...I shouldn't be speculating, but geez...just something in the air makes be believe so. Maybe it is the stench. A combo of sulfur and old dried up farts.

[Union Scribe]

272. And, the really fucked up thing is

that he create(d/s) them before hand, because he knew his trolling bullshit would get him banned and he'd need more profiles to fall back on. That level of premeditation is both pathetic and creepy.

[Lars39]

105. So obvious I overlooked it.

Thanks, Capt. Obvious!

[Rex]

121. Its a good thing we have Capt. Obvious around!

SOMEONE has to explain to us this form of pretzel logic.

[1000words]

142. Come out to play ...

[Rex]

147. LOL!

[tkmorris]

175. You are lying.

Lying. Telling a deliberate falsehood, with full knowledge thereof.

The OP is a potshot at one individual, and everyone here knows it. Your claims that it's not are just flat untruths, and you know it.

I find the tactic despicable, and the oh so cute "Whatever do you mean? I'm just speaking GENERALLY here" nonsense is even worse. It needs to be exposed for exactly what it is, a lie, and I do hope the inevitable jury will at least consider the circumstances here. To wit: the argument being made by the poster cannot be countered except to call it what it is. Absolute, unadultered, unfiltered, 100% USDA Choice balderdash.

[fried eggs]

194. It's really amusing to see what offends you vs. what doesn't

I didn't call anyone a piece of shit in my OP. I feel my questions were respectful and straight to the point.

[tkmorris]

213. Who's offended?

Certainly not I.

Of course, nothing you said has anything whatever to do with what I said. Your OP was about a single individual and a single post and you know it. Now you are simply trying to deflect the discussion away from that point by ignoring it and responding to... I dunno what exactly. Someone else? The voices in your head? Either way, no points for you.

[1000words]

79. Yup ... very telling.

same passive-agressive BS

[Whisp]

132. Funny you should say that. We have all seen this before

from the same unapologetica on many different subjects. Get the troops riled with nonsense then sit back and watch the fallout.

It's disgraceful and disruptive and childish.

[Capt. Obvious]

136. "It's disgraceful and disruptive and childish."

You should never hurl that accusation at anyone.

[Lars39]

140. Personal experience like that should be recompensed.

[lumpy]

154. I think the 'slander' was intentional. You would think he would regret his words and apologize

if he really liked or respected the President.

[VanillaRhapsody]

189. but but but....

they are the REAL "good progressives and DU'ers"

[brush]

223. So you agree that Will Pitt should continue calling the President a "piece of shit"?

Nobody seems to want to mention his name, so there it is.

People get frustrated and angry but a writer, especially a writer, should be able to express anger without wrongly calling a sitting DEMOCRATIC president a "piece of shit" on a progressive DEMOCRATIC site. It was disgusting and he should be faulted for it.

He's done this kind of thing before, and I for one done like it that whenever he wants to attack Obama he comes on here with a disgusting over-the-top rant. This is the second wrongly targeted rant of his that i've read recently directed at the President. There may be more that I've missed. Seems he's got anger issues and a hate-Obama agenda.

And btw, my prayers and best wishes go out to his wife.

[Lars39]

226. I have no control of WillPitt, nor do I expect everyone to conform.

Most people honed in on the important part of his rant....the health and well-being of his wife, not the angry frustrated words of a worried husband.

[brush]

229. That's seems like a cop out

No one asked if you had control of him. Do you agree that it's okay for him to call a sitting DEMOCRATIC president, a "piece of shit" on a progressive DEMOCRATIC site?

[Lars39]

239. Never been a fan of blind reverence.

I don't think I would have personally done it, but then I'm not in his predicament right now either,watching a loved one go without needed medication, while the insurance company gives him the go-around.
I have been in a somewhat similar situation, though, where I could not afford my own anti-cancer medication. Sheer terror hits you in the gut. Different people have different reactions. Anger and lashing out can be a symptom of grief. I know. Been there, done that.

Chronic illnesses that flair up after going into a remission seem doubly cruel at times.

[brush]

274. Sorry you've had to deal with a similar situation . . .

and glad to know you handled it differently than Pitt.

Don't know about the blind "reverence" comment though. To me it's a matter of respect for not just the president but for DU.

We don't need Freerperville-style negativity here. That's where that kind of stuff belongs and Pitt should be ashamed of himself.

I doubt that he is though — haters like to hate.

[Lars39]

275. Good gawd a mighty, they'd have had you for lunch here a decade ago.

[brush]

287. Meaning what? nt

[Lars39]

291. Let me get on the edge of my rocker...

People did not used to put up with nonsense like blind loyalty and would have sliced and diced the mere concept with an erudition that would leave you breathless. People discussed things more calmly. There was snark, but it was more clever and funny than vicious one-liners.
Or at least I remember some of that happening.

[brush]

306. I like that

So you're saying the old days, "piece of shit" was considered funny, calm erudition?

[cui bono]

299. You fucking wear it. Your feigned innocence isn't very becoming.

Your OP is about integrity (sort of) and yet you can't even muster up enough of it to admit what you are doing.

You absolutely called someone out and you damn well know it.

[Cali_Democrat]

43. LOL. Your sig line absolutely cracks me up...

...when you make appearances in ACA threads.

Bernie supports the ACA and voted for it.

You crack me up!!!

[jsr]

45. No shit.

[jeff47]

56. Let's say I wrote a lengthy rant about how terrible Sanders was for voting for the Iraq war.

A nice, cus-filled rant talking about how terrible a person he is for voting that way. A huge pile of "expressing anger".

And then you point out he voted against war. In both 1991 and 2002.

Shouldn't I at least say "oops"? Possibly even "sorry"?

[woo me with science]

65. I find it quite creepy that you expect that I would demand an apology

for YOUR political rant.

Do we still live in America?

[jeff47]

71. So a rant based on error is just fine?

Shouldn't I do something when I learn my rant is based on an error?

[woo me with science]

148. This is not that difficult, Jeff.

You are the boss of your own political speech. You are free to reaffirm, apologize for, or retract anything you said, anytime you choose. However, suggesting to an entire community that someone *else* owes an apology because of a political rant you didn't like is what authoritarians do.

So a rant based on error is just fine?

Whether you perceive error or not is irrelevant. Yes, political expression is just fine.

[joshcryer]

161. Even if it's lies?

Holy fucking shit. I'm seriously incapable of having this conversation. No wonder you never admit you're wrong with your absurd idiotic predictions and smears.

It's just "political expression."

[jeff47]

217. So I should lie with impunity then.

You don't quite see where this goes, do you?

You are endorsing Fox News and their constant stream of bullshit. So what if their money and access means they can spread their lies faster and wider than any corrections.

Koch brothers lying their asses off? Just fine. So what if their fortune means they can spread their lies far faster and wider than any corrections.

You are saying "he who can spend the most money should win". Because you're upset that someone would ask for a correction.

[woo me with science]

238. So now the apology demanders have escalated to accusing Will of "indecent behavior"

Last edited Thu Mar 20, 2014, 07:27 PM - Edit history (1)

*and* lying? This is how this goes?

Interestingly, the community hid a post by geektragedy earlier today for trying to smear Will with accustions of lying: insinuating that he fabicated an "Obamacare horror story":

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4696371

I agree with the comment in joshcryer's post below, that some do seem to be struggling with this conversation and the concept of political speech. It is reassuring that the *community* understands the distinction between smearing another community member and ranting about a politician on a political board. And I will continue with a comment to Josh here, since I'm in a hurry to leave and already wrote this (and mixed up whom I was replying to for a moment...)

"Indecent behavior." I will be shuddering from that one all day. I don't think I could ever have made my point about the creepiness of these authoritarian callouts on DU (always starring the same little group that defends outrageous authoritarian behavior by government), as effectively and disturbingly as you have done with your own arguments and word choices right here.

"Indecent behavior." For a political rant. That's some absurd, chilling authoritarian language right there.

_______________________________________

UK government wants power to censor not just illegal, but "unsavoury" content
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-03/15/government-web-censorship

[jeff47]

276. No, that's only in your mind.

You are demanding that no one ever correct their lies.

That leads to entities like Fox News and the Kochs never correcting their lies. Is that OK with you?

And as for accuracy, asking for a correction is not demanding a correction.

I agree with the comment in joshcryer's post below, that some do seem to be struggling with this conversation and the concept of political speech.

Political speech should be built on truth and opinion.

Will's rant is not built on truth.

The ACA did not introduce formularies. They've been present in insurance for decades.

The ACA did not make his drug company charge $4k/mo for their drug, thus causing it to be not in most formularies.

The ACA did not make Will not bother to find out how to get the drug covered despite not being in the formulary.

Instead he decided to attack the ACA. For something the ACA did not do.

Political speech should be built on truth and opinion.

[joshcryer]

80. This is Ann Coulter logic.

[woo me with science]

155. Well, that was smeary but cryptic. nt

[joshcryer]

76. Discussing human decency = authoritarian garbage.

No wonder we're fucked.

[woo me with science]

134. Equating a lack of human decency

with a political rant, directed at a politician, on a political message board, in the United States of America

...is exceedingly creepy and authoritarian, not to mention pathetic.

[joshcryer]

156. Are you using Ann Coulter quotes to fuck with me now?

I swear I'm in the twilight zone.

I'm not fucking equating a political rant to ones lack of human decency.

I'm saying that refusing to apologize for indecent behavior suggests a lack of human decency.

[woo me with science]

177. Once again, labeling anger expressed at a politician,

on a political discussion board, in the United States of America, as

[font size=4]indecent behavior[/font size]

That's creepy as hell.






.



___________________________________________

UK government wants power to censor not just illegal, but "unsavoury" content
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-03/15/government-web-censorship

[joshcryer]

197. Calling out indecency is not "creepy."

Disguising indecency as "political rants" and likening any criticism to censorship is rather bizarre and absurd. Especially when the person in question was banned once for threatening to kill someone. I'm sure that was all just political ranting in the United States as well.

All we're saying is if one doesn't apologize for their falsehoods, then it is an indication of their character. They don't have to apologize. But if they don't I can reserve the right to think they're indecent. Make sense?

[Whisp]

216. Well, let's see here:

Fuck you, insurance industry.

Fuck you, Bernie Sanders, you piece of shit used-car salesman.

From my heart and soul, fuck you.

=============
watch the fur fly now! some political rants are more equal than other political rants...
(and I don't mean it as a rage against Sanders at all, just making a point)

[woo me with science]

247. It's cute

how the cult of personality *always* assumes that everybody else is in a cult of personality, too.

[VanillaRhapsody]

208. not "JUST a politician" is it....its the "politician" that got him healthcare that wasn't

Cobra!

Cobra would cost him probably ten times as much!

He should be thanking him today!

[Bluenorthwest]

33. Hilarious. If that was the case, we'd need about a week of non stop apology from

various Straight folks who have, over the years attacked LGBT people for seeking basic human rights. Poutrage and fabulous pink ponies!
A DUer who said 'gays have plenty of rights' is still here. Another who says 'gay marriage is unthinkable to me' is also still here.
Fuckers who attacked me in the name of Putin for daring to object to anti gay policies are still here.
You know what is not still here? Meta forum, where this sort of rot once had a home.

[William769]

44. +1.

[Kurovski]

47. ...and also the supporters of the folks who openly scorned and insulted LGBT folks.

some are even upheld as mini paragons of some-such. "Some-such" being the operative...

But now I've gone and hijacked the thread.

I also miss Meta, btw

[QC]

49. Thank you. n/t

[Capt. Obvious]

72. "A DUer who said 'gays have plenty of rights' is still here"

This came up in another thread though not the full quote.

Now it makes sense. I hope people never stop barking up that tree over that.

[Rex]

107. I'm still curious as to who got to make a sock puppet yet when caught got to stay.

I wonder who it is?

[Capt. Obvious]

115. Whoever it is must be bold

and a better boor than PW was.
They can't be the big bastard that he was.

[truebrit71]

41. No, Will Pitt does NOT owe President Obama an apology.

His criticism was neither unfair, nor wrong.

Although thanks to this OP it is clear that YOUR posts shouldn't be taken seriously now, or in the future...

[Capt. Obvious]

146. Who said anything about Will Pitt?

This thread is about some guy the OP knows.

[truebrit71]

172. Oh....

Thanks Capt. Obvious!!

[lumpy]

167. The only thing I have got out of this is that Pitt hates Obama. Period. Don't need an apology

from a person expressing his true feelings.

[cherokeeprogressive]

54. Yawn...

[greytdemocrat]

57. Please...

[steve2470]

60. this is not necessary at all, sorry

If people want to apologize, they will. If not, no biggie.

I would apologize if I said something uncouth, but that's me.

Again, this is....divisive in the extreme.

[uppityperson]

63. It is difficult to do so. I have done so and find it quite difficult to do but yes, is the right thi

is the right thing to do.

[Capt. Obvious]

66. It's okay fried

I forgive you.

[steve2470]

69. btw, with all due respect, posting the dog raping thread in GD....

wasn't exactly...what I wanted to see. Go post that shit in Weird News.

[QC]

70. If one person is denied the medicine necessary to keep her alive,

and another person speaks ill of a political figure on a message board, and someone thinks the latter situation is a greater outrage than the former, shouldn't that person try to step back, breathe, and get some perspective?

[Capt. Obvious]

74. Now, now

the OP never mentioned what you described so this thread is obviously not about that.

[joshcryer]

81. I don't see where that follows. It is illogical.

They have nothing to do with one another. In fact many DUers were very supportive and helpful in educating the poster about their error.

[G_j]

95. makes sense...

[JI7]

73. didn't this person also threaten Bobbolink ? did they ever apologize for that ?

[uppityperson]

88. If you mean WP, yes and yes

[Cha]

293. I would imagine he had to apologize to get back into DU.. since his attack

on her got him kicked off.

[Solly Mack]

83. The internet version of "loud talking".

[LanternWaste]

84. If that is indeed the ultimate goal...

"especially if one wants to be taken seriously in the future...?


If that is indeed the ultimate goal, then I would imagine the first thing to do about would be avoid passive-aggressive call-outs via the mechanism of insincere questions designed to point fingers and assuage one's own validation.

[fried eggs]

94. My name is "fried eggs." Nobody takes me seriously here

I'm a nobody who, ultimately, can no longer keep quiet when it comes to bullying and unfair attacks.

[1000words]

101. Your name ...

has nothing to do with why I don't take you seriously.

[LanternWaste]

207. That's one of many ways to rationalize petulant behavior...

"can no longer keep quiet when it comes to bullying and unfair attacks..."

That's one of many ways to rationalize petulant behavior...

[Rex]

85. Yes Pretzel Warrior should apologize to the community for making a sockpuppet

but he was banned from the website. So whatcha gonna do?

[QC]

92. Our friend Pretzi never even apologized for calling LGBT equality

"a fabulous pink pony."

[Rex]

98. I've read about that, is that what he did?

I've just read people say something about a pink pony, thank you for telling me - he was a horrible troll. He should make one of his socks apologize for being a horses ass imo.

[QC]

128. That's what finally got him his first tombstone,

coming after a couple of years of being a pluperfect horse's ass to LGBT people here, back when DU was a rough place for us, in the days of:

* It's only a two-minute prayer!
* He's only going to sing one song!
* You just want a pony!
* Don't ruin this for the rest of us!

etc.

[Rex]

151. Thanks for the elaboration, I knew he got shit canned at DU2

for being obnoxious just had no idea over what.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

292. But apparently keeps coming back like the no life having psychotic douche nozzle

that he is. What's with all the food anyway?

[pintobean]

93. Maybe you took the wrong person seriously.

[greatauntoftriplets]

96. Yes.

[Vashta Nerada]

99. Blatant call out. This thread should be hidden.

[fried eggs]

106. No, but do you know what the word blatant means?

Because I don't think you do. Oh well. Alert if you must. You can even call me a piece of shit while you're at it! What a lovely atmosphere! People are actually arguing in favor of treating others like shit!

[Vashta Nerada]

110. I do.

Everyone and their neighbors knows this is a call out to Will Pitt.

This OP is as transparent as a pane of glass.

[JoePhilly]

108. I think tantrums are rarely effective.

[Whisp]

112. jury results:

Finally, a flawless victory for a jury. Been a long time. HA!
------------------------------

On Thu Mar 20, 2014, 02:36 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

If you unfairly, wrongly and very publicly attack someone, shouldn't you apologize?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024697471

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Call out, griping about DU, meta, etc.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Mar 20, 2014, 02:40 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: what a waste of Jury good-will and time
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter. Fail, fail, and fail once again. I don't know what your problem is here.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[fried eggs]

119. Pleasantly surprised. Thanks for posting

[Squinch]

114. Well, now. This seems quite childish. On another subject, and much more importantly,

does this mean that Will's wife gets the drug she needs? That would be worth reading about.

Beyond that, this squabbling is silly.

[Lars39]

118. Yes, but through the pharmaceutical company, not the insurance company.

Hopefully enough of a supply that will last until the appeal is successful.

[Squinch]

130. I'm so glad to hear that. I hope it works out for her. Thanks for telling me.

[Lars39]

133. You're welcome!

Hope it's resolved soon for them. Stress like that is gut-wrenching.

[Bluenorthwest]

120. These Pretzels are making me thristy.

nt

[fried eggs]

149. I get it now. I didn't at first.

Really? Is there anything else that makes you think I'm that poster besides timing? I don't get the comparison.

[cali]

264. if you call out another DUer in a sneaky way should you eat

crow?

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

123. take it from me, you've just passed the point of no return

I'll never learn that lesson, but it's true. Actually, in my case, I'm a name caller when I'm right. People don't care anymore what you have to say when you name call.

I count on people living by the rule: listen to the message, not the messenger. But they don't. Even knowing this doesn't help. There's a lot of things about relationships that fit that: even understanding your behavior doesn't help when you redline.

[Bobbie Jo]

124. Happens here all the time...

Last edited Thu Mar 20, 2014, 04:30 PM - Edit history (1)

Someone spews a flat out lie, and then goes on to ignore that they were caught in it.

I have no use for people who do this, major character flaw in my book.

ETA: my comment is NOT about Will Pitt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

137. Your dishonesty about your motivation for this thread kills your credibility

There's no one here who didn't understand from the title alone that you're talking about Will Pitt. The fact that you've been dishonest over and over in this thread claiming you're not talking about anyone in particular hasn't done you any favors. Whether or not Will Pitt should apologize to this person or that person is arguable (my argument: he owes no one an apology), but in your case, you're hoping to get him banned or at least taken down a few notches, and it's not going to work.

Your serial denials of the obvious indicate that you are not to be taken at your word.

[fried eggs]

160. Nothing in the question posed in my OP requires credibility; the answer, however, does

It's a very simple question that reveals how one thinks about right and wrong. And it's not about me.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

165. Your OP is ABOUT Will Ptt...we've established this.

The responses, in large part, are about your credibility or lack thereof, since you won't admit what everyone knows.

And remember, the public library's external IP probably won't change much, if at all.

[Rex]

170. I'm just glad the OP is posting here again!

Dunno why they quit posting in 2011...but welcome back right?! All these old names coming back after years and years to post again...so nice to have them back.

[fried eggs]

178. You have no clue of what you're talking about

I've been gone since 2011? How do you figure? A simple glance at my profile reveals otherwise. Maybe I should start accusing you of being someone else. But that would be dumb. Anything to deflect from answering the question, I guess.

[Rex]

190. Oh I see, you just don't post a lot.

Your question would have served you better if you would have had the integrity of calling out the person you are referring to. Obviously you don't care enough about that one point.

Your 'puzzlement' at everyone calling YOU out is amusing to say the least.

[Vashta Nerada]

218. Agreed.

[ScreamingMeemie]

157. I truly wish you cared about your fellow DUers as much as you appear to care about a man

who has yet to be informed of your existence.

[BuelahWitch]

198. THIS ^^

[ScreamingMeemie]

263. Buelah! How are you?!

[BuelahWitch]

267. I'm doing well, Screaming!

Good to see you around!

[Cha]

285. OH Guess What? He does..and so do I. But, that doesn't give mr..

"I can rage on the President and call him ugly vile names and get the natives excited anytime I damn please.. and when I'm wrong not bloody apologize because that's not who I am.".. A Pass.

[ScreamingMeemie]

307. Yes it does. Because I've been there.

I've been where I've felt so helpless, sick, and scared.

My wish is that no one ever feels like that. Yes, he gets a pass.

[Cha]

309. No, doubling down and not admitting you were wrong is

a nasty tactic better left to the asshole teabaggers.

[Bluenorthwest]

315. I've been there too.

Your wish is also my wish, and I also hand out passes freely in such situations.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

164. Sometimes I don't get it.

Outrage/public outrage counts for something,always has.

Is there a nice way to express outrage ?

I did notice a certain somebody got some relief ,that counts too as does the good advice that came his way as a result of his expressed outrage.

But his expression of outrage wasn't all about him was it?
He was sacred and he was worried for his wife.

Outrage is a fact of life,deal with it. That's my opinion.

Do you think sware and cuss is out there so people can express themselves is nice kind of way ?

Good advice came a certain persons way because some people have the ability to look at it through higher understanding. Get some because it ain't bad.

It ain't bad at all.

Clearly a certain persons frustrations were expressed in the right place because as a result of it,he managed to get some relief -for his wife first than his own frustration.

And that is best of the democratic underground.In fact it doesn't get any better than that. People helping people ,care and concern.

This is the democratic underground, and everything isn't always nicey nice is it ?

Sometimes people say bad things, yep they do. It's not so easy sometimes to take all back.
Some people understand that,others either cannot or will not.

[steve2470]

169. you going to apologize for the dog rape thread ? nt

[Rex]

171. What's all this then?

nt.

[steve2470]

173. he's calling out Will Pitt for his ACA thread nt

[Rex]

174. No, sorry, I mean the dog raping thread?

The OP started a thread about raping dogs? Confused I am.

[steve2470]

176. ok here you go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024614313

I think putting this in GD was horrible. Weird News, ok, but NOT GD. YMMV.

[Rex]

181. Ah yes that one! I didn't pay any attention to who the OP was!

Yes I agree and could not believe it got a stay in GD!

[Lars39]

191. I have the insatiable urge to read everything written on DU, but that one got quickly hidden.

[steve2470]

193. you're a better man than I

Slowing down to look at the accident scene, that described me. Ugh.

[Lars39]

199. I think some OPs are presented to keep us busy from

actual brainstorming. Plus, I'm squeamish.

[steve2470]

200. yea that one served no higher societal or moral good IMHO

Weird news, you expect to see stuff like that.

[Lars39]

205. That one was way past weird news.

[fried eggs]

185. Did I smear someone? Was the article untrue?

If so, I'll gladly apologize.

[steve2470]

186. who wants to read about some mentally ill man raping a dog in GD ?

I sure as fuck don't.

[fried eggs]

188. And then there are others who don't like to read unfair, hateful rants

I guess we each have our pet peeves. At least my OP was based on a sourced article as opposed to slander.

[Lars39]

203. And others ignore the gist of the rant, which was his wife's health predicament.

[MisterP]

196. A supports organization B's blocking person C from company D

C bypasses B and contacts D directly, which fears a stink and gives C access

A is NOT the wronged party

[valerief]

201. It's the Internet! Get over it.

Snap out of it.

[Orsino]

251. Journalists issue corrections.

Apologies don't matter much to me, and aren't usually convincing.

Admitting one was wrong is a minimum requirement for a journalist--but journalists get to be people sometimes, too, especially in such stressful circumstances as were described.

[TNNurse]

202. I believe that you already knew the answer.

Yes.

[Warren DeMontague]

204. I'm gonna need some time to come up with an answer.

Like, 24 business hours or so.

[meanit]

206. Just let it go

WP was pissed when he wrote that OP. He's concerned for his wife's well being.
People say all kinds of stuff when they are upset.

ACA has a lot of loopholes and the insurance companies are going to double down on taking advantage of them. It's absurd to think that the designers of ACA did not foresee stuff like this coming down the road, so it's not really all that strange when people get angry and think the reason ACA is not working is because of a "bi-partisan bargain" or just general capitulation to the GOP. Again.

ACA is certainly a great thing for millions of people, but by design. the insurance companies run it, and they will milk it for whatever they can.

It's what they do.

[Democracyinkind]

209. I think one should always pay beer and travel money if it is due. nt

[Oakenshield]

210. You should indeed.

Unless you're Fox News, in which case you grunt something that sounds closer to an excuse that anything that might be considered an apology. What is this thread about? A workplace confrontation?

[humbled_opinion]

215. Sorry but if this is in regard to William Pitt OP

then no he shouldn't appologize and the attack is not unfair. If you want to debate the issue of the ACA and how millions are being screwed over by insurance companies let's debate that. The ACA is a screwed up mess sure it helps some but it also hurts many too you cannot just think about one side and how it effects once segment. Whoever thought that mandating citizens be required to purchase insurance through a 100 percent for profit capitalist entity like an insurance company wasn't thinking straight to begin with, granted we were told to sit down and shut up and this was the first leg to single payer and now all the problems being realized with the roll out and implementation of the ACA is giving fodder to those that will use it to defeat any attempt at a universal healthcare exchange.

[fleabiscuit]

220. Seriously?

If it's your sister, probably.

If it's a politician who cares? If someone is that thin-skinned you're going to endure a lot of heartburn.

[In_The_Wind]

221. Yes.

[dilby]

222. Only if you were wrong but some say he was right.

So there are two sides and neither side is 100% correct.

[countryjake]

235. Apologize to a politician in order to be taken seriously? Are you joking?

There are many many people out there who are finding themselves in difficult situations, facing even more hardship, due to laws our leaders have enacted. When I hear those politicians apologize and finally begin to take the issues of those folk seriously, then I might begin to believe that maybe we're being represented adequately. But apologize for feeling fucked over? Nope.

Do you assume that it's only Rethugs who are finding fault with the ACA, that members of our own party couldn't possibly be dreading the fast-approaching deadline that mandates the purchase of insurance policies?

[fried eggs]

240. If I walk into a room and slap someone...

Yes, I'd owe the person I slapped an apology, but also all the people who were forced to witness my unwarranted attack.

Hateful lies are hurtful to more than just the subject of the rant. Everyone who hears it is affected. I can't believe I have to explain this, and I'm surprised that this question is controversial.

I thought kindness was a liberal/progressive trait. Are those who endorse nasty behavior former conservatives?

[countryjake]

245. You've only been here a few yrs, so it's understandable...

that you might wonder why some would listen to a justified rant from a respected member of our community and not be disgusted or outraged by some of the words he used. However, going even further to suggest that you suspect "former conservatives" are the ones who support him, is, in my opinion, uncalled for.

Nobody was "slapped" and nobody witnessed any physical assault.

Heated discussion of government policies is the "liberal/progressive trait" that you appear to be ignoring. If you are affected so deeply by such discussion, if you are hurt by mere words on a message board, then I would suggest that it's not the person you're demanding an apology from who needs to take a step back to reconsider their feelings, thoughts, or words on the subject.

As I said in my original reply to your thread, it is not just right-wingnuts and rethugs who are finding fault with the ACA, that members of our own party (staunch liberals/progressives, longtime members of the Democratic Party, I might add) may also be dreading the fast-approaching deadline that mandates the purchase of insurance policies.

[Rex]

246. 'I thought kindness was a liberal/progressive trait.'

So is forgiveness, but don't worry you are on a ROLL!

[BuelahWitch]

269. Horrible analogy

If Will (or anyone) had been close enough to the President to slap him, he'd been sitting in jail right now.

"Hateful lies are hurtful to more than just the subject of the rant. Everyone who hears it is affected. I can't believe I have to explain this, and I'm surprised that this question is controversial."

Sorry, this is just downright immature thinking. I really like and respect Howard Dean. If someone called him a used car salesman (which is actually a pretty mild epithet), I might call that person an asshole, but I wouldn't get upset about it.

Yes, kindness is supposed to be a liberal trait. Why don't you practice some?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

237. I don't like apologies. They're like saying: "Oh come on, stop treating me badly for what I did"

Apologies don't really say: "The reason I did this was because ________________________, and I will never do that again."

I don't want an apology. I want explanations and a guarantee that the act/comment/what have you, will not be repeated.

See what I mean?

[crimeariver1225]

277. it depends upon the manner apology is given. but I agree with you

too often an apology is not a sincere recognition of what someone did that might have been wrong in the eyes of others.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

280. Yes. Often an apology is only a get-out-of-jail-free card for the "wrongdoer" and nothing more.

Better to explain WHY the thing was done, and then guarantee it won't happen again. Or simply do not apologize. Apologies kinda leave me cold. They explain nothing.

[Whisp]

290. I see what you mean. It's like

when those crazy Rightwingers say shit like women's bodies can shut down and then apologize by saying:

I apologize if I offended anyone - not that they said the stupid thing to begin with, but sorry the offended took issue. argh.

[Le Taz Hot]

242. I'm smelling pizza again.

Anyone else smelling pizza again?

[QC]

254. A very special pizza.

[Sheldon Cooper]

311. Will Pitt seems to have completely unhinged this guy.

It looks like this is his second sock thread about the recent rant.

[Spider Jerusalem]

260. I think people should probably get over their sanctimony

one can understand the frustration involved; the ACA is a pretty bad deal in reality; the fact that it's better than nothing doesn't mean a lot of people aren't getting screwed over one way or another just as badly as they were under the previous private insurance regime. The ACA was the result of a lot of political dealing and the law as it stands is the creation of Congress and (in part) the insurance company lobbyists who did their damnedest to make sure that nothing approaching a serious public option was considered, but Obama has to own some of the responsibility there; if he's going to take the credit for the successes of the ACA that means he has to own responsibility for the failures as well. (And sorry, but "used car salesman" may be harsh, but not inaccurate when things went from "any bill I sign must include a public option" to "the public option isn't that important".)

[Cha]

284. Yeah, "sanctimony" doesn't do it for me. "fuck you Obama from my heart and soul".. that

didn't either. And, the heart and soul full of hate was wrong about why he wrote it in the 1st place so yeah, he should apologize.. but, he won't. I'm just really glad that I'm one of those people who does apologize when I'm wrong.

[UTUSN]

262. R#24 & K n/t

[penultimate]

266. I always try to admit when I'm wrong... I also try to avoid calling people pieces of shit too

I find that overly hostile individuals tend to be the least likely to admit they were wrong.

[Liberal Veteran]

268. Hypothetically speaking, I would lose a lot of respect for someone who didn't apologize.

Anger and frustration makes people do stupid shit, but people who have character will admit when they lashed out in anger at the wrong target.

Just sayin'.

[Marr]

289. Here's another conundrum: if a sock puppet poses a question on etiquette...

...is one justified in assuming that person is usually abusive and rude in their remarks?

This is a purely philosophical question.

[grasswire]

303. lol nt

[badtoworse]

312. Brilliant!

[defacto7]

296. This reminds me of a line in the first Popeye movie...

"You owe me and apology!"... "You owe me and apology!"...

I need a smiley here ---> X _ that's throwing a tub of pop corn in a trash can and slamming the lid on.

[Capt. Obvious]

313. The sequel was better

[hobbit709]

308. And sometimes it's better to just drop it and move on.

And I never take poutrage seriously.

[Dorian Gray]

310. Seriously?

Who cares?

Oh... hundreds of people who responded to this thread.

Whoa.

Should he apologize? Probably. But dude is frustrated. i get it.