Former Health Insurance PR Man: How corporate America works

Post Reply New Topic

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6aZPPSsryw&feature=ob4[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QwX_soZ1GI[/youtube]

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 17 Dec 2010, 2:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

two pertinent quotes about americans and america-

"freedom and ignorance cannot coexist." [thomas jefferson]
"nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the american public." [h.l. mencken]

the fire under the pan is making the water progressively hotter, but it happens so slowly that the soaking frog doesn't notice. the frog is the american public, as "echelons beyond reality" [hidden corporate interests] usurp more and more public resources from clueless and unconcerned american citizens distracted to death by the mundane facts of their lives. banana republic, here we come.

don't believe me? read a sample issue of Mother Jones or The Nation. our american representative democracy IS on the eve of destruction, attacked not from without but from within- a true inside job, on the part of distracted american working class voters who cannot be disenthralled from their chaos long enough to vote to save their lives. stick a fork in us, we're done [for].

CNN’s Rick Sanchez joined two of his colleagues in omitting the left-wing affiliation of Wendell Potter, a senior fellow at the Center for Media and Democracy. In fact, Sanchez went so far as to deny Potter’s alignment with liberals: “Is he [Potter] some crazy lefty? Is he Ralph Nader? Is he Dennis Kucinich? No. In fact, he’s a former player in the health insurance world.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-ba ... are-player

sarcasm: Yeah he's a whistleblower all right.... This is like asking Michael Moore to be a star witness condemning Rush Limbaugh for something.

Did you do any research into this guy before you posted this video?

Jesus Christ, you really don't reflect for any period of time before producing this forum vommit you consider thought, do you? The dishonourable, unethical, and hypocritical extent of your posting (most recently you're unsubstantiated claims of Orwell lying) never ceases to amaze me.

Newsflash, if you're going to accuse somebody's affiliation with a well-researched, rigorous, yet centre-left organization, don't use a trash rightwing blog to posion the well. Not that you're point is relevant at all (as it's another instance of your frequent use of textbook rightwing talking point even when it doesn't fit the situation), as I never claimed his was "non-ideological". All I claimed was the TRUE fact that he worked with the Health Insurance Industry (as his role as Vice-President of corporate communications for CIGNA) and hence has an insider's perspective of how the Health Insurance Industry operates. The fact that the disgracefulness of his first-hand experience with corproate America's practices drove him (quite rationally) to the left doesn't refute any claim I made.

@ Master_Pedant

It was substanciated but it looks like a moderator deleted the posts. He had claimed that the Republicans had submitted no ideas in the healthcare debate then he admitted when I pressed him on it that the Republicans had submitted an entire alternate bill. That is contradicting oneself.

You want to accuse me of stuff, fine I really don't have a high opinion of your posts either. Additionally, I could care less what you think of me. You want to tell me that this Wendell Porter doesn't work at where this right wing site says he works, then prove it wrong and I will find additional sources.

http://www.mrc.org/TimesWatch/Articles/ ... 25740.aspx

Cause right now, it looks like the right wing sites had a field day picking apart this guy's credibility.

Furthermore, isn't PBS supposed to be apolitical and now you just admit they have a left-wing bias? Why are they getting taxpayer money then?

Anyways a lot of places have had a field day picking apart the CPB's left-wing bias, I'm actually not even seriously trying to pick apart your sources. I'm just going with what I can remember off the top of my head, and then finding sources that confirm what I remember.

Orwell claimed Republicans hadn't offered any specific proposals, he never criticized that they didn't have a superficial, hollow, overgeneralized "plan" on how to deal with healthcare. Furthermore, I was speaking of your deplorable attacks on Orwell's academic credentials.



Did you even read me post? It's not the fact that Wendel Potter is currently associated with Public Interest groups that lean-left that I'm dismissing, it's that that very fact is irrelevant to my post. He was a VP of corporate communications for a major Health Insurance Conglomerate, he knows what they do.



I don't trust your ability to internalize information in any reliable way whatsoever.

@ Master_Pedant

You're trying to split hairs, to justify at best a misleading statement.

"Health Insurance PR Man: This is how corporate America works"

The only "misleading" part of that statement was that I forgot to specify "former".

Referring to your defense of Orwell's statements not the title of your post.

Okay, let's apply your logic here:

Me: "Fix healthcare reform, ensure the insurance industry, consumers, and overall community's interests are in harmony. Work cooperatively with each party".

(Hypothetical) Orwell: Master_Pedant hasn't proposed a bill!

(Hypothetical) Inuyasha: Yes he did, it's right there! YOU LIE!

And there, in your own words, is the admission of your intellectual dishonesty.

You don't make any open minded effort to research. You don't try to learn anything new. You simply recall your pre-conceived notions and then you go looking for something--anything--to reinforce your prejudices.

I can find sources for my "recollection" that extra-terrstrials built the pyramids, that dinosaurs and early humans coexisted and that 9/11 was an inside job. But no number of spurious sources are going to make those "recollections" true. Repeating a lie makes it no less a lie.

You are a simpleton in thrall to people unworthy of your respect.

Preconceived notions? Wow you're assuming that what he knows off the top of his head isn't a product of research and critical thought. Hows it intellectual dishonesty if he has sources to back it up? No one's gonna be OCD about having sources on tab to back up every little thing they say. Plus there are some ideas that people ponder on their own based on their sources, experience in life, what they believe to be rational, etc. so the best thing they can do is find sources backing up what they pondered on.

A-ha good suh my knee jerk reaction towards your lack of sophistication fails to appeal to my pathological narcissism!

No, it's not an assumption. Rather it is a conclusion reached after looking at what I believe to be a statistically significant sample of his posts. What he appears to know off the top of his head are the sound bites and pre-packaged material fed to him by political commentators whose views he fancies match his own.



Because the quality of sources is just as important as the quantity. Quoting editorial content from media sites is not a primary source of information. A capable researcher will exercise a challenge function to test the reliability of analysis undertaken by secondary or tertiary sources. Any capable researcher will go beyond the secondary or tertiary source, and seek out primary sources, preferably from multiple sources.

I have no objection to the statement, "in my view..." or, "based on my experience..." where that statement demonstrates a reasoned path from observation to conclusion. But when people uncritically seek out support for their opinions with no consideration of opposing points of view, then there is no intellectual exercise, on the reinforcement of prejudice.



I am trying to parse that sentence. Treating, "towards your lack of sophistication," as a subordinate clause, I am left with, "my knee jerk reaction fails to appeal to my pathological narcissism." Not quite sure what to make of that.

Stop it with the Saul Alinski style attacks. Right back at ya.