Babbling

[Gaius_Sextus]

Santorum to Sick Kid: Don't Complain About $1 Million Drug Costs

Do any of these #### idiots think before they speak?

[Glodson]

No.

[MysticJhn]

You realize that tone deaf is only a musical reference, right?

[DoseOfLaughter]

Actually, what he said was: ""People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad," the candidate explained. "But paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with"


And then what he said to the woman was entirely true - companies do need incentives to make these products. That's how the market works.



The REAL problem you should have is when he said: "And if they didn’t think they could make money providing that drug, that drug wouldn’t be here."


And, that's because it's an entirely true statement, and a statement that he believes in.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

MysticJhn wrote:
You realize that tone deaf is only a musical reference, right?

---

No, it's not.

[Glodson]

But really, that's a moronic thing to say. To equate an iPad to medicine is just moronic. The drugs are not a luxury, and it cannot be said that any of this is the fault of the mother or the child. It just highlights a weakness in the system. If you believe that our system is okay, you can say that this represents a problem that can be fixed, or something. You can say that the expense of the drugs pays for, in part, research to develop new drugs, or just about anything else in the world. You can say that programs should be made available so families like this can afford these much needed drugs.

Telling the mother, however, that the price is justified by the market is moronic. It is a product that she has to have. There's no way around this. That makes it even more moronic, as this isn't the case of a drug that has real competition.

Of all the ones left, Santorum is, by far, the dumbest.

[MysticJhn]

Yes... it is.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

DoseOfLaughter wrote:
Actually, what he said was: ""People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad," the candidate explained. "But paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with"


And then what he said to the woman was entirely true - companies do need incentives to make these products. That's how the market works.



The REAL problem you should have is when he said: "And if they didn’t think they could make money providing that drug, that drug wouldn’t be here."


And, that's because it's an entirely true statement, and a statement that he believes in.

---

You are being an idiot now. Paying $900 once for one ipad is one thing, paying $900 a month for medicine is enirely another. Thsi act of yours is getting old, and it's starting to stink.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

MysticJhn wrote:
Yes... it is.

---

Nope.

[MysticJhn]

*shrugs*
If you'd like to keep using it wrong, go right ahead.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

Glodson wrote:
But really, that's a moronic thing to say. To equate an iPad to medicine is just moronic. The drugs are not a luxury, and it cannot be said that any of this is the fault of the mother or the child. It just highlights a weakness in the system. If you believe that our system is okay, you can say that this represents a problem that can be fixed, or something. You can say that the expense of the drugs pays for, in part, research to develop new drugs, or just about anything else in the world. You can say that programs should be made available so families like this can afford these much needed drugs.

Telling the mother, however, that the price is justified by the market is moronic. It is a product that she has to have. There's no way around this. That makes it even more moronic, as this isn't the case of a drug that has real competition.

Of all the ones left, Santorum is, by far, the dumbest.

---

And that's not saying much . . . . .

[farnsworth2]

lol tone deaf means they have no rythen

santorum simply spews the liquid of his namesake all over the place

and #### the gop loves getting coated in it

[DoseOfLaughter]

Try read the entire post before you call me an idiot.

I addressed the concept of the money at the bottom of my post.

"The REAL problem you should have is when he said: "And if they didn’t think they could make money providing that drug, that drug wouldn’t be here.""


Or, is that too hard of a concept for you understand? Are you special? Because if you cannot correlate my issue with the concept of "If it makes money, we save people's lives" to "I have a problem with a drug costing 900 dollars", then you truly are a blind fool.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

MysticJhn wrote:
*shrugs*
If you'd like to keep using it wrong, go right ahead.

---

http://maxkeiser.com/2012/01/27/what-stuns-me-is-how-every-time-s
omeone-from-the-mpaa-opens-their-mo...

http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/editorial/docum
ents/02704498.htm

https://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/01/10-8

http://www.bengals101.com/2011/12/23/mike-brown-still-tone-deaf-e
ven-as-his-team-improves-on-the-fie...

http://pointsandfigures.com/2011/12/04/clarence-page-is-tone-deaf
/

http://opiniojuris.org/2011/09/29/the-tone-deaf-icc-prosecutor/

http://historicus.hubpages.com/hub/sexualabuseallegations

[Gaius_Sextus]

I really don't give a ####. We all know what he means.

[DoseOfLaughter]

Just because you can provide examples of people using Tone Deafness wrongly, does not immediately make it right.

[DoseOfLaughter]

You clearly did give a sh­it. You took the time to call me an idiot before you even read my entire post, or for that matter, comprehended my entire post.


You're getting on Santorum for not thinking before he speaks - yet here you are, speaking before you think. Quite the hilarious concept, if I do say so myself

[farnsworth2]

dood

im just saying
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tone-deaf

we know what he means but still >_>

[scoobdog]

---

MysticJhn wrote:
Yes... it is.

---

"Tone deaf" is used in colloquial speech to indicate someone who doesn't understand the ramifications of his or her own words. 

[scoobdog]

Once again, these guys have no idea how to express a thought in a competent matter.  The reason Obama will win could solely be because he know how to say things without being unintentionally offensive.

[crapshot2]

a lot of cancer chemo doesn't make a profit.

actually the government subsidizes a lot of those kinds of drugs.

this guy has no idea what he is talking about

[railroadengine]

Republicans are incapable of thought.

[westpark]

This coming from the guy who's supposedly the most zealous of the 'pro-life' candidates....

[westpark]

---

Glodson wrote:
No.

---

A simple answer....that explains a lot.

[EmApathy]

If people don't think 900 dollars for life saving drugs isn't fair, they should just not pay it and die.

We can't pander to these weak individuals, it's a slippery #### y=mx+b. People require nourishment to be alive, so should we be required to provide sustenance to prevent people from starving? Should we provide shelter for those that are unable to get it themselves? Should we provide clean drinking water to prevent people from dying of dehydration? There's nothing in the constitution about people being entitled to life.

Then these asshats turn around and say that babies can't be aborted regardless if they're found to have terminal diseases that require expensive medication over a very short painful life.