Big Brother is here, and We are Him
“Character is what you do when you think that no one is looking.”
But here’s an interesting question: What happens to character when someone is always looking? How is the concept of character altered in a 24/7/365 world in which more and more of our lives are conducted in public and the sphere of privacy shrinks to the point that it threatens to implode upon itself like a black star?
We live in a world in which knowledge about what we buy, eat, drink, read, wear and watch is now bought and sold freely by corporate America. We are tracked in the virtual world as we travel from website to website; we are tracked in the actual world by the unblinking eye of video cameras recording us from the highway to the parking lot to the store to the bank to the restaurant and back home again.
If we rent a hotel room, board an airplane, make a cellphone call or fill our gas tank, someone somewhere knows it and records it.
And increasingly, such exposure is active rather than passive. It is something that we as a culture now seek. Millions broadcast the intricacies of our lives via Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and other social media, and every utterance and act of our political leaders, sports figures and entertainers become fodder for gossip, exaggeration and distortion.
Everybody is watching everybody. Big Brother is here, and We are Him. And even those who personally resist such trends must acknowledge the cultural futility of their protest.
Consider, for example, the ongoing scandal involving U.S. Secret Service agents in Colombia. A dispute with a prostitute over payment in a hotel room in far-off Cartagena becomes international knowledge in a matter of hours. They thought no one was looking, but in reality everyone was looking.
But here’s a little sidebar that I find even more telling:
It turns out that one of the Secret Service supervisors fired in the Colombia scandal had been assigned to protect Sarah Palin during the 2008 presidential campaign. On his Facebook page, David Chaney had posted photographs of himself eying Palin behind his sunglasses, bragging that “I was really checking her out, if you know what I mean.”
Palin has expressed outrage at the posting, and she has every right to feel that way. In a profession in which discretion would seem to be a primary virtue, Chaney thought that because everyone is looking, no one would be looking. And here’s the thing: Up to the moment that he got caught in that hooker scandal, he was right. Those photos had been posted more than three years ago, and nobody took notice. It’s as if being transparent means being invisible.
So … what happens to character in such a world? At first blush, it might seem logical that as more of our lives become open to inspection, and as the odds rise that any misbehavior on our part will become public, social pressure and concern for reputation would force people to live more cautiously and abide by social norms.
That’s certainly how George Orwell thought it would work out. In “1984,” his version of the ever-watchful Big Brother enforced a repressive, sterile conformity on everybody within his purview.
But that’s not how things are working out in reality. With the full range of human frailty increasingly on parade, who cares? When all are shamed, none is shamed. Exposure becomes something to be sought rather than something to be avoided, and for good or bad, the result is a liberation from rather than reinforcement of social codes and morality.
And character? Character becomes what you do when everyone is looking and no one cares.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
352 comments Add your comment
ty webb
April 20th, 2012
12:35 pm
getalife,
I don’t really care what you and your partner do in your mom’s basement.
JamVet
April 20th, 2012
12:37 pm
From the Rundgren song Fascist Christ…
Here come the sex police, they’re at your bedroom door
Movin’ in next door, searchin’ from floor to floor
You know what they’re lookin’ for
Someone’s always keepin’ score every time you dip the oar
Love isn’t fun no more
getalife
April 20th, 2012
12:38 pm
frog,
Yes.
ty,
Yes, you do.
JB
April 20th, 2012
12:39 pm
Uh ho………..Looks like another beer summit at the White House needed. Zimmerman was being beaten and fighting for his life when attacked by Trevon. Wonder who besides Al Sharpton and Zimmerman will be there ?
Doggone/GA
April 20th, 2012
12:41 pm
“but if marriage licensing is “regulating private conduct and relationships”, the government(local, state, and federal, run by members of both parties) have been doing that for years”
It isn’t. It is primarily regulating the proper transfer of property in case of the death of one of the partners (spouse)
Peadawg
April 20th, 2012
12:41 pm
“Wonder who besides Al Sharpton and Zimmerman will be there ?” – Probably the head of the secret service since Obama has so much confidence in him.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
12:41 pm
ty
““metaphor”? no…”
Interesting that you tell a person the metaphor they use is not a metaphor for what they want to say.
Cons have more control issues than just ‘in the bedroom’ behavior.
Government’s been regulating marriage. Cons want it to apply only to that which they deem socially acceptable. For years they regulated, not just homosexual conduct, but actual heterosexual sexual activity in bedrooms. Until the courts threw it out. Happened here in Texas. If you’re in Georgia, happened there, too.
As far as ‘blaming’ one side, you know full well people on both edges of the spectrum have views atypical of their end of the spectrum. But answer honestly: which political grouping imakes a litmus test issue with social values tests for candidates and representatives?
ty webb
April 20th, 2012
12:42 pm
“It isn’t. It is primarily regulating…”
nice qualifier you used there.
Fred ™
April 20th, 2012
12:42 pm
In today’s world, to too many people, honor means: Jump on ‘er and stay on ‘er
RHDII
April 20th, 2012
12:44 pm
One of the most powerful and insightful editorials I have read in the past year. Thank you.
barking frog
April 20th, 2012
12:44 pm
getalife
what is the government doing in your bedroom?
Paul
April 20th, 2012
12:44 pm
“nice qualifier you used there.”
Nuance and specificity. It’s what’s for breakfast.
ty webb
April 20th, 2012
12:44 pm
“which political grouping imakes a litmus test issue with social values tests for candidates and representatives?”
easy answer, republicans…yet, that’s not what you said.
ragnar danneskjold
April 20th, 2012
12:44 pm
Bravo. Well argued.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
12:46 pm
barking frog
Google is your friend.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0478_0186_ZD1.html
Lots of legislators are voyeurs.
paulo 977
April 20th, 2012
12:48 pm
marty …and wear a hoodie!!!!!!!!!
______________________________
Do so at your peril !
Paul
April 20th, 2012
12:48 pm
ty webb
You are correct. It’s not what I said. It’s what you said.
Paul: ““So why are conservatives so fixated on telling me what I can do in my bedroom?”
ty webb: “they’re not.”
ty webb
April 20th, 2012
12:50 pm
“Nuance and specificity. It’s what’s for breakfast.”
yeah, adding “primarily” to describe degree of intent to which government regulates marriage is hardly specific nor nuanced with regard to my( and yours at 12:41) statement that government regulates marriage.
carlosgvv
April 20th, 2012
12:51 pm
Oblama – 12:01
Once again you post and once again, as usual, you’re wrong. Big Brother was an actual person in 1984, even though he had no dialogue. Winston Smith asked his interrogator if there really was a Big Brother. The answer was yes. If you’re going to reference a book, it would be helpful to have actually read it first.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
12:52 pm
ty
Oh, I think Doggone/GA does a pretty good job of zeroing in on exceptions to broad-brush statements.
ty webb
April 20th, 2012
12:52 pm
“You are correct.”
thanks.
barking frog
April 20th, 2012
12:52 pm
Paul
no one in that link was
in getalife’s bedroom.
google better please.
weetamoe
April 20th, 2012
12:53 pm
Would one of the Palin haters give an example of trailer trash talk? Is it anything like that whole buncha bringin a knife to tha fight thug talk from the White House?
So Jimmy Carter believes in the *old stand your ground* rule, as in protect the birdies in your backyard from the neighbor’s kitty cat and shoot the sucker dead.
I think your main assertion is *we are he.*
Michael
April 20th, 2012
12:54 pm
During the cold war we had to assume that any hooker in Moscow, or Eastern Europe, worked for the KGB. Any fraternization was compromising. In these days we must assume that any hooker in Latin America is working for a drug cartel, since drugs and prostitution go hand in hand. Seeing a hooker in Columbia is one of the dumbest and most compromising acts a US agent could do.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
12:59 pm
ty webb
You’re welcome.
Now maybe you’ll know how to differentiate between what you posted and what someone else posted.
You can always refer back to the names at the top of the posts for help.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
12:59 pm
Paul
Are you trying to create a new vortex? R&D hasn’t given approval of the new gravity defying outfit yet. The boots and suit passed, but they’re still having problems with the seal on the helmet. Be careful my friend.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
1:00 pm
getalife
barking frog’s not going to be satisfied until he sees a court case with the cite “State of Louisiana vs getalife” in the heading.
I think he didn’t like getting caught peeking.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
1:02 pm
Brosephus
Sometimes I miss the old days -
That, and it’s lunch time and my blood sugar’s dropped so my sense of humor and entertainment gets even weirder than usual.
Jeff
April 20th, 2012
1:02 pm
..”and we are he” no?
ty webb
April 20th, 2012
1:08 pm
Paul,
not sure what you’re talking about…perhaps you should go back and reread my comments.
getalife
April 20th, 2012
1:09 pm
frog,
Creeepy.
Mick
April 20th, 2012
1:10 pm
oblama
You miss the point entirely. The secret service needs to respond to all threats against the president, casual or not. Goofball nugent was not really the problem, but a deranged fan of his could take him for his words and seek out a mission. That is not out of the realm of possibility. When you play with fire, someone can get burned…
Jimmy62
April 20th, 2012
1:10 pm
I seem to remember the Democrats looking in to putting tracking programs in cars so they can tax people based on the miles they drive. Democrats support far more Big Brother type programs than conservatives. It’s all about extracting taxes for everything everyone ever does.
barking frog
April 20th, 2012
1:10 pm
getalife
paul has resorted to personal attack , what
do blog intellectuals call
that when no argument
exists?
ralph
April 20th, 2012
1:14 pm
not the Secret Service, but Sexual Service. There is a reason they call themselves “Secret LOL
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
1:14 pm
That, and it’s lunch time and my blood sugar’s dropped so my sense of humor and entertainment gets even weirder than usual.
I am not one to stand in the way of a man’s entertainment… Have fun!!!
Mick
April 20th, 2012
1:15 pm
brosephus
Is your name really trademarked? If yes, how much does it cost?
getalife
April 20th, 2012
1:16 pm
frog,
Owned.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
1:16 pm
SS agent has a Facebook page: Stoopid IMO
if SS regs permit personal Facebook pages: Stoopid IMO (does anyone know the regs on that?)
SS agent surreptitiously checking out Sarah Palin: Hey, if you can do it without being noticed, go ahead
SS agent admits to surreptitiously checking out Sarah Palin: Stoopid IMO
Sarah Palin indignant at SS agent’s admission of surreptitiously checking her out: Completely understandable IMO
Final Score:
Sarah Palin 1
SS Agent 1
Stoopid 3
Normal, plain and simple
April 20th, 2012
1:17 pm
If big brother is watching…give ‘em the moon.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
1:17 pm
ty
It all began with the assertion conservatives seem overly concerned about regulating personal, social behavior. You said they aren’t and took it into the marriage sphere.
I think it’s pretty clear from the history of court cases that the cases dealing with regulating personal, private conduct have originated with conservatives. If that’s their thing, that’s fine. But to say they aren’t concerned about such matters strikes me as divorced from reality.
Mick
April 20th, 2012
1:18 pm
**divorced from reality**
A loaded phrase if I ever read one…
Normal Free, plain and simple
April 20th, 2012
1:19 pm
BTW, I’ve been thinking of a new nom de blog.
<– What do you think?
barking frog
April 20th, 2012
1:19 pm
getalife
thanks. now you should
leave your bedroom before
the government touches
you inappropriately.
JamVet
April 20th, 2012
1:20 pm
Democrats support far more Big Brother type programs than conservatives.
HUH????
Notwithstanding the plethora of compelling evidence you provided to support that bizarre claim, I don’t believe you…
Paul
April 20th, 2012
1:20 pm
barking frog
Your saying ‘no one in that link was in getalife’s bedroom” and my observation you won’t be satisfied until getalife’s name is in a court case is not a personal attack.
It’s an answer to silliness.
Jack
April 20th, 2012
1:21 pm
The outrage concerning this hooker episode is hypocrisy taken to a higher lever. Service men/women and hookers is an old old story. We were always told that discretion was the better part of valor.
Jefferson
April 20th, 2012
1:21 pm
A lot of these so called “convience” deals these days just makes it EASIER to steal, due to the lack of checks and balances.
Jack
April 20th, 2012
1:21 pm
level
getalife
April 20th, 2012
1:22 pm
frog,
Yes and lets leave the Secret Service’s bedrooms too.
They have done a great job protecting our President.
Robert
April 20th, 2012
1:22 pm
Ok.
First of all, all government employees are allowed to have social media accounts, including Facebooks. They are also allowed to blog. The only thing they can’t do is is talk about their jobs. This guy would have been clear if he had simply had a facebook where he talked about his non work life. But when he started talking about his work for the secret service, he may have violated national security laws. For the record, this is the same policy that the US military has for its personnel and the State Department also has the same policy.
If you work for an agency of the government that requires any kind of secrecy, you cannot talk about your job whether in real life or on the web. The former agent named in the article violated this law.
It’s matter of national security, that is why people who work for these agencies are not allowed to talk about their jobs. Chaney was working for the Secret Service, not for Taco Bell or Microsoft. He had no right to talk about the specifics of his job and when he did so, he violated US laws.
As for whether he should have paid the prostitutes. You must obey the laws in what ever country you happen to be in. In Columbia, they apparently have a law that says you must pay an escort for all services she provides you.
In the US it is different. In most states the services provided by the Colombian escort are considered prostitution and hence illegal. Under US contract laws, you have to pay for any good or service that you have verbally or otherwise agreed to pay for unless those goods or services are illegal in the United States which prostitution is in most communities. As a result, in the United States, the agent would not be required to pay the escort for the sexual services she provided because those types of commercial activities are illegal. Hence, what we have here was a conflict resulting in a difference between American and Colombian laws, mores, and cultures.
Did you know that you have can pick up a prostitute, have sex with her and then not pay her. Simply tell her and her pimp that you will report them to the police. Of course, on the other hand, the police will take in an interest in the fact that you were walking around offering money to people to participate in an illegal commercial sex activity which is also illegal in most US communities.
You can go to jail simply for offering a woman $5 to flash her breasts, (unless you are in the french quarter during mardi gras apparently).
Paul
April 20th, 2012
1:23 pm
Brocephus
Thank, but I appreciate the “VORTEX ALERT” warnings.
But I’m getting headachy so I’d better get some food.
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
1:23 pm
“Democrats support far more Big Brother type programs than conservatives.”
Progressives who champion big government ideas, whether they have an R or a D beside their names, are the ones who support the idea of a Big Brother.
Paul
April 20th, 2012
1:24 pm
Normal
I think ‘AbNormal” doesn’t do enough to separate you from the rest of the bloggers.
JamVet
April 20th, 2012
1:25 pm
Progressives who champion big government ideas, whether they have an R or a D beside their names, are the ones who support the idea of a Big Brother..
Hysterical.
The Bush neocons were progressives…
Robert
April 20th, 2012
1:27 pm
Deception?
I actually know a guy who was kicked out of the Republican party for telling the truth.
barking frog
April 20th, 2012
1:28 pm
Paul
April 20th, 2012
1:00 pm
getalife
barking frog’s not going to be
satisfied until he sees a court
case with the cite “State of
Louisiana vs getalife” in the
heading.
I think he didn’t like getting
caught peeking.
———-
peeking paul is more likely
JamVet
April 20th, 2012
1:29 pm
Perhaps the funniest part about the SS and the Colombian sluts and prostitutes is that they all got popped because they were cheap-ass schmucks.
That’s it.
Rush wouldn’t have dicked around (get it?!) over $47.
Hell, he would have paid that much for the video…
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
1:30 pm
Robert — Thanks for the clarification on the Facebook question. I kind of figured that was the case, but I felt sure that we’d have somene on the blog who could comment knowledgeably on it.
I do have a question about this, though:
“In the US it is different. In most states the services provided by the Colombian escort are considered prostitution and hence illegal. Under US contract laws, you have to pay for any good or service that you have verbally or otherwise agreed to pay for unless those goods or services are illegal in the United States which prostitution is in most communities. As a result, in the United States, the agent would not be required to pay the escort for the sexual services she provided because those types of commercial activities are illegal. Hence, what we have here was a conflict resulting in a difference between American and Colombian laws, mores, and cultures.”
Prostitution is legal in most of Nevada, so couldn’t an agent (in his off-duty time, of course) patronize a Nevada prostitute without breaking the law?
If so, then I’m fuzzy on why he couldn’t patronize a Colombian prostitute, particularly if he did so in a legal way, within the bounds of local and federal laws down there. Wouldn’t it be the same sort of situation as going to see a hooker in Desertville, NV?
Who's choice?
April 20th, 2012
1:30 pm
Anyone who puts all their stupid stuff out on Facebook or any other social site, tells everyone when they are running to the can for a potty, etc. on Twitter, doesn’t care about their privacy. So how they act and think (as they are advertising it) is open for all to see. That’s not Big Brother, that’s small brain.
Don't Forget
April 20th, 2012
1:32 pm
Big Brother
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngbFjmVfJOs
Mick
April 20th, 2012
1:32 pm
One positive comment about big brother; now that they all have these red light photo camera’s with video, I drive more cautiously. I got nailed by one and sure enough, it wasn’t even close, I ran it – $158. Now, I make it a point to know where everyone of the dern things are located at and drive accordingly…
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
1:32 pm
“The Bush neocons were progressives…”
Congratulations, are you just now figuring that one out? Could have told you that one back 2003.
barking frog
April 20th, 2012
1:33 pm
getalife
SS is the government.
our President is angry.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
1:33 pm
Mick
Nah, I just put that on here to scare namejackers.
I actually swiped that name from another blog story that I found to be funny as hell.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
1:35 pm
Congratulations, are you just now figuring that one out? Could have told you that one back 2003.
Yet the conservative machine backed him in full force in 2004. So what does that say about conservatives?
Don't Forget
April 20th, 2012
1:37 pm
ok I really shouldn’t have posted that without the chant of the ever circling skeletal family
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EOlZyD26T4&feature=related
Peadawg
April 20th, 2012
1:37 pm
I don’t care for McCain but this is pretty funny – ” Good pic of my son Jimmy’s bulldog, Apollo – I’m sorry Mr. President, he’s not on the menu!”
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
1:37 pm
“Yet the conservative machine backed him in full force in 2004. So what does that say about conservatives?”
The alternative was another Progressive, Kerry. So what does that say about our country? In 2008 we had to choose between a left wing progressive and a right wing progressive. Looks like we’re getting the same menu for 2012.
Penny Pincher
April 20th, 2012
1:37 pm
“Progressives who champion big government ideas, whether they have an R or a D beside their names, are the ones who support the idea of a Big Brother.”
very true, great post
That Black Guy on Android
April 20th, 2012
1:38 pm
Jay, another good article. How long before some kneejerkatron turns this party neutral story into a crap flinging exercise?
Peadawg
April 20th, 2012
1:38 pm
“So what does that say about conservatives?” – Most of them see the ‘R’ and just go with it.
Mary Elizabeth
April 20th, 2012
1:38 pm
“Progressives who champion big government ideas, whether they have an R or a D beside their names, are the ones who support the idea of a Big Brother.”
===========================================
Social Security, Medicare, nor Obamacare would not cause the government to spy upon your privacy. You have made an intellectual leap, based on stereotypical thinking and assumptions. I suspect that your correlation of “big brother” to “progressive thought” is based upon your political leanings.
The government can serve its citizens through social programs and still be controlled, just as the private sector can be controlled or regulated, by the will of the people, themselves, as reflected in its laws.
Mick
April 20th, 2012
1:39 pm
brosephus
Well, it is a very clever name so I thought maybe you did trademark. I did look into once and believe it’s not that expensive, less than a couple of hundred dollars. It could be lucrative if you could tag it to something and it goes viral – that would be the american effin way!!
Mary Elizabeth
April 20th, 2012
1:40 pm
Correction: “or,” not “nor,” placed before “Obamacare”
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
1:41 pm
“Social Security, Medicare, nor Obamacare would not cause the government to spy upon your privacy.”
Disagree completely. Under ‘Obamacare’ ‘advisory’ boards are created that will determine whether a procedure is deemed necessary. In order for them to make such a decision, wouldn’t they need to know your medical history, age, sex, etc?
Mick
April 20th, 2012
1:42 pm
mary
I’m tempted to make corrections but then I figure people will get the gist of it and not think any less of the comment. Bottom line, this ain’t no graded essay writin’…
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
1:43 pm
T. Head — “Under ‘Obamacare’ ‘advisory’ boards are created that will determine whether a procedure is deemed necessary. In order for them to make such a decision, wouldn’t they need to know your medical history, age, sex, etc?”
Without knowing your actual identity.
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
1:43 pm
“So what does that say about conservatives?” – Most of them see the ‘R’ and just go with it.
Yep. Same with ‘D’. I think people are easily mislead to support a big government program in the ruse that its good for our country, while they unknowingly give up their freedoms.
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
1:45 pm
“T. Head — “Under ‘Obamacare’ ‘advisory’ boards are created that will determine whether a procedure is deemed necessary. In order for them to make such a decision, wouldn’t they need to know your medical history, age, sex, etc?”
Without knowing your actual identity.”
Under the Accountable Care Organization model that ObamaCare mandates Medicare patients join, their identity is known by Medicare since you must be apart of an ACO.
JamVet
April 20th, 2012
1:47 pm
Head, did you figure out back in 2003 that none of you Republicans were conservatives?
And still aren’t?
LOL.
You boys killed conservatism.
As in murdered, asphyxiated, massacred, drowned, slayed, eradicated, executed, obliterated, wiped out, rubbed out dead.
And you sure as hell aren’t the gang that will bring it back to life…
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
1:47 pm
The alternative was another Progressive, Kerry. So what does that say about our country? In 2008 we had to choose between a left wing progressive and a right wing progressive. Looks like we’re getting the same menu for 2012.
At what point does the general public begin to acknowledge that doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results is insanity? The GOP had the prime opportunity to break that mold this year. Yet, they dropped the ball. THAT can’t be blamed on Obama or Democrats…
—————————–
Peadawg
I’d say there’s a bit of truth to that statement.
—————————
Mick
Damn, now you’ve got me curious. I’ll have to do some research to check on trademarks and such.
Mary Elizabeth
April 20th, 2012
1:49 pm
Talking Head,
You give up (what many perceive as) privacy in many life situations for convenience in order to improve the quality of your life. Just because Obamacare is passed, does not mean individuals would have to give up their private health insurance, if they do not care to.
Jay
April 20th, 2012
1:49 pm
Disagree completely. Under ‘Obamacare’ ‘advisory’ boards are created that will determine whether a procedure is deemed necessary. In order for them to make such a decision, wouldn’t they need to know your medical history, age, sex, etc?
Absolutely and totally incorrect. No such panels are mentioned anywhere in the legislation. The Independent Payment Advisory Board will have nothing to say about individual cases. Its purpose is to make recommendations about which procedures, medicines, etc. are most effective so taxpayer dollars can be used as efficiently as possible.
That’s something else that conservatives have championed until Obama agreed, at which point it became an insidious government plot.
Thomas
April 20th, 2012
1:50 pm
If I were one of the worthless SS agents I would say the President himself said he was advance scouting vacation spots- ergo not official business.
That Black Guy on Android
April 20th, 2012
1:50 pm
Mick April 20th, 2012 11:12 am
Link Report this comment
jay
Introspection is a good thing, someone else’s perspective helps too. Those are ways to guauge our own perception of reality outside of our common experiences. Hats off to you and this blog, there is no shortage of diversity or strange thinking – in all it’s warped glory…
I think that’s the theme of the 2 articles Jay wrote.
Where are we as a society?
How did we get here?
How do we feel about it?
How do we change it?
This is about AMERICANS.
Not left or right, dem or repubs.
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
1:52 pm
A little beauty in an ugly world:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3jCFeCtSjk
Jm
April 20th, 2012
1:54 pm
Rhd2 12:44
Apparently he doesn’t read much
Doggone/GA
April 20th, 2012
1:54 pm
“Disagree completely. Under ‘Obamacare’ ‘advisory’ boards are created that will determine whether a procedure is deemed necessary. In order for them to make such a decision, wouldn’t they need to know your medical history, age, sex, etc”
No, they wouldn’t. They would not be determining if a procedure was neccessary for YOU. They would be determining if a procedure was cost effect over all, especially if there are alternative procedures that exist that are less expensive and just as, or more, effective.
Mick
April 20th, 2012
1:54 pm
brosephus
Just think of all the untold riches if you get get kim kardashian to wear your trademarked brosephus hat and tee shirt?
That’s the way you do it, money for nothing and your chicks for free…
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
1:55 pm
TBGoA
Can’t argue with that. Until others open their eyes to that fact, we’re gonna continue to chase our collective tails…
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
1:55 pm
T. Head — “Under the Accountable Care Organization model that ObamaCare mandates Medicare patients join, their identity is known by Medicare since you must be apart of an ACO.”
Are you saying that the *board* knows their identity? I didn’t read it that way.
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
1:56 pm
Some more Nick Drake:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRmHdEq_2i0&feature=related
Jm
April 20th, 2012
1:56 pm
Jay 1:49 must surely get tired of the same argument
MrLiberty
April 20th, 2012
1:57 pm
It is not Big Brother, as always it is BIG GOVERNMENT. It is not delightful to find out that a business is collecting data, and many are making opting out more available, but ultimately EVERY PIECE OF INFORMATION collected by these businesses is being gathered and assembled by GOVERNMENT under one auspice or another. Government wants back doors into internet providers, cell providers, etc. The Patriot Act and other illegal and unconstitutional acts have allowed the government to write their own search warrents and are basically spying on EVERYONE in this country without warrant or probable cause.
As always blame government and both the democrats and republicans for they are both in favor of this horror. Is it any wonder why Ron Paul (who despite being a republican has always stood up for the constitution and person liberties) has so much support among the younger generation???
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
1:58 pm
“Head, did you figure out back in 2003 that none of you Republicans were conservatives?
And still aren’t?
LOL.
You boys killed conservatism.
As in murdered, asphyxiated, massacred, drowned, slayed, eradicated, executed, obliterated, wiped out, rubbed out dead.
And you sure as hell aren’t the gang that will bring it back to life…”
I agree. The current Republican party is nothing reflective of true conservatism. More Ron Paul’s are needed for that to take place. What’s even worse is that current Democrat party is being hijacked by Progressives. If there is no paradigm shift in our political arena, the American experiment may come to an end.
Mick
April 20th, 2012
2:01 pm
**the American experiment may come to an end.**
Doomsday prophecy, we’ve been through much worse, yet over 200 years later, here we still are…
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
2:02 pm
Well, it is a very clever name so I thought maybe you did trademark. I did look into once and believe it’s not that expensive, less than a couple of hundred dollars. It could be lucrative if you could tag it to something and it goes viral – that would be the american effin way!!
So what image should we attach to the name?? Hank Jr. in blackface??
I’m voting for the ABM line of merchandise. Get Puffy on board, and you’ll make a million.
Talking Head
April 20th, 2012
2:03 pm
“You give up (what many perceive as) privacy in many life situations for convenience in order to improve the quality of your life. Just because Obamacare is passed, does not mean individuals would have to give up their private health insurance, if they do not care to.”
Ok, that’s not even anything I addressed.
“Just because Obamacare is passed, does not mean individuals would have to give up their private health insurance, if they do not care to.”
Maybe, more likely a person will lose their employer sponsered health insurance and will then have to choose a plan from the ‘exchange’ which nobody really knows what will be included or excluded.
Mary Elizabeth
April 20th, 2012
2:03 pm
“mary
I’m tempted to make corrections but then I figure people will get the gist of it and not think any less of the comment. Bottom line, this ain’t no graded essay writin’ ”
==============================================
Mick, your biases are showing with that comment.
The erroneous “double negative” that I typed could effect the meaning of what I wrote in some minds. I did not assume that my incorrectly stated sentence would be understandable, as it stood. Thus, I corrected it not simply for grammatical purity. I well know that “this ain’t no graded essay writin’…” You misjudge me with your assumption.
Focus, please, on the content of what I said. I believe many erroneously believe that “progressive thought” relative to “big government social programs” would directly foster “spying” by the government on citizens’ privacy. I want to emphasize that that is stereotypical and easy thought. Those elements do not have to correlate. I certainly would not condone their correlation. I remain committed to social programs. I, also, value my privacy.