Favorite Moments of the Gruber Hearing?

ValuJet

Moderator
Sep 28, 2000
22,620
19
0
For me, the best was multiple uses of the word "glib" in describing his flippant phrases over and over, and then claiming he didn't remember saying those things.

So here we have a supposed healthcare expert, an MIT PhD in economics, invited to speak at healthcare conferences, and at least seven times at seven different events he referred to the stupidity of the voters and/or the lack of transparency as necessary to get the law passed, and he doesn't remember?

Is anyone buying that?

What a clown.....
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
37,640
34,291
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I was particularly fond of his groveling statement to the effect that it was just so mean spirited of him to use his intelligence to belittle others. Talk about falling on the proverbial sword.

What is ironic about the whole thing is he was telling the truth before, and he perjured himself yesterday in the hearings.
 

Gr8hope

All-American
Nov 10, 2010
3,408
1
60
What is the point of the hearings other than a show to appease voters? Will there be a change to the bill or repercussions to Gruber or anyone connected to the harm they are doing to our health care system? No.
 

Displaced Bama Fan

Hall of Fame
Jun 5, 2000
23,343
39
167
Shiner, TX
I was particularly fond of his groveling statement to the effect that it was just so mean spirited of him to use his intelligence to belittle others. Talk about falling on the proverbial sword.

What is ironic about the whole thing is he was telling the truth before, and he perjured himself yesterday in the hearings.
Perjury does not apply to the so-called ruling elite.
 
Last edited:

uafan4life

Hall of Fame
Mar 30, 2001
16,298
8,453
287
44
Florence, AL
Maybe we need to be more selective about who we allow to vote.
I've long been at least a closet-fan of knowledge-based voting. Perhaps something like putting five true/false questions underneath each candidate's name regarding specific statements they've made and/or tenets of their platform. If you get four out of five right then your vote counts as five votes, otherwise it just counts as one. That way, everyone's vote counts but stupid people's and/or mindless, uninformed sheep's votes count less.
 

Displaced Bama Fan

Hall of Fame
Jun 5, 2000
23,343
39
167
Shiner, TX
Maybe we need to be more selective about who we allow to vote.
Let's start with:

1) Have you paid taxes for the last three years, are you a citizen of the United States and do you have a picture ID issued by your state of residence?

Yes. congratulations qualified voter.
No. You are not qualified to vote.
 
Last edited:

uafan4life

Hall of Fame
Mar 30, 2001
16,298
8,453
287
44
Florence, AL
Let's start with:

1) Have you paid taxes for the last three years, are a citizen of the United States and have a picture ID issued by your state of residence?

Yes. congratulations qualified voter.
No. You are not qualified to vote.
That's not too bad of an idea, actually.


I had to alter my original, theoretical idea for voter restriction a while back. I used to half-jokingly espouse IQ-based voter restrictions, until I got around to joining MENSA and started attending a few member functions. There are a surprising number of idiots with high IQs - most of which seem to be in academia, for some odd reason.

For an organization that one would think to be cliquish enough based solely upon its lone membership requirement (an IQ score that puts you in the top 2% of the population), there are a few, very well defined cliques that form around certain events or conversations. The starkest contrast doesn't show up in general political conversation, as you might assume, but rather in business discussions - especially in regards to pay scales and regulation - and it is between what a few of us refer to as the "theorists" and the "practicals", i.e. the academics who theorize about business and the people who actually work in business.

I helped a fellow MENSA member in the Huntsville area develop a simulation "game" for his company to use to help identify, among other things, potential and growing management talent among his employees and prospective hires. As a bit of an inside joke, he asked a number of other members to help "test" the software - even though we knew it worked and had been in use for almost a year. All but one of the theorists who participated failed miserably, killing their companies, while the practicals all rated at least as having significant management potential.

There was a lot of interesting feedback from the theorists regarding "deficiencies" and "bugs" in the simulation software. :)
 
|

Latest threads