• RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
funksands On January - 9 - 2017

 

mcconnell-and-schumer

WASHINGTON — Top Republicans said Sunday they’re still concerned about how to create the new health care law, but say they are confident that they’ll come up with something to replace President Barack Obama’s version.

Questions surrounding the future GOP plan have unnerved key parts of the health care industry, including hospitals and insurers that have warned Congress against uncertainty.

The 2010 health law, which passed without Republican votes, became a lightning rod in U.S. politics. President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to repeal it. Congressional Republicans are in agreement it should be replaced. But they’re at odds over how to do it, particularly over how to pay for popular provisions, including coverage for preexisting conditions and the ability for parents to keep children on their plans until age 26.

A plan spearheaded by a bi-partisan group of Representatives and Senators is beginning to gain steam as self-imposed deadlines for repeal loom.

Anonymous staffers have leaked the blueprints of this plan, called “The Extremely Repealed Amazing Replacement for the Freedom-Crushing Obamacare that Everyone Hates”.

Key components of this plan initially seem to include:

1) Immediate repeal of ObamaCare
2) Replacement of ObamaCare with FreedomCare
3) FreedomCare will contain the following provisions:

– Children may stay on their parents plan until age 26
– No insurer may deny anyone care based on a pre-existing condition
– People up to 400% of the poverty level will qualify for federal subsidies
– Generous Medicaid expansion
– Mandatory enrollment unless covered by employer
– Basic preventative health screenings checkups included
– Free FreedomCare car magnet
– Free* sample of Ivanka Trump miracle anti-wrinkle and blemish smoothing kit
– 6 month subscription to TrumpSteaks and TrumpVodka Club**

4) A press conference will be held trumpeting the new era of FreedomCare
5) Democrats will hold a press conference where they will look sad and discouraged
6) GOP supporters will celebrate the end of our long national nightmare
7) Trump will get several weeks of victory tweets
8) And nothing will change for the millions of Americans that have gotten coverage already

Anonymous supporters of this bill on the Hill see this as the only viable solution to an intractable political dilemma.

Stay tuned….

(thanks to the Washington Post for their generous aid in the preparation of this satirical piece)

*Free after redemption of mail-in rebate
**Totally not affiliated in any way with Donald Trump or his family businesses, which are in the blindest trust ever created

Written by funksands

There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say there are things that, we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know. Additionally there is bacon.

54 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. seehowtheyrun says:

    Thank You ! That made me laugh. And I needed to laugh.

  2. Kalima says:

    Hi funk. Have been invading your post since yesterday without letting you know how much I really enjoyed it. Without laughter we are doomed, so thanks for providing it here for us.

  3. Fuzzy Dunlop says:

    I want my Freedomcare car magnet, with a side of Freedom Fries! Please!
    No Commie Fries for me, thank you very much!

  4. pinkpantheroz says:

    Funk, I think you forgot to mention the amazing rehab feature of the new care package. Those needing physical therapy will be encouraged to head South and assist in the construction of The Wall

  5. kesmarn says:

    So funny and so true that it hurts, funk! Just wonderful.

    And — just between you and me — anyone who thinks that “The Extremely Repealed Amazing Replacement for the Freedom-Crushing Obamacare that Everyone Hates” is the title of an actual bill and that its announcement is real news rather than satire needs to have his/her funny bone checked for a possible fracture.

    I think that might be covered under Trumpcare…

  6. AdLib says:

    Well done, Funk!

    The Repubs seem to have really identified the main problem with Obamacare. It was passed by Democrats and Obama. Just by changing the name and voting for it themselves while removing most of the financing for it will surely make Trumpcare far better than Obamacare.

    Looks like Repubs may not get to do Repeal and Delay afterall:

    Paul, Trump upend GOP’s Obamacare repeal plans

    After Rand Paul spent the last week urging the GOP not to repeal Obamacare without having a replacement plan ready, his phone rang on Friday night with a call from a new supporter: Donald Trump.

    “He called after seeing an interview that I had done [talking about] that we should vote on Obamacare replacement at the same time,” Paul said in an interview on Monday. “He said he was in complete agreement with that.”

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/obamacare-repeal-trump-rand-paul-233351

    • funksands says:

      Ad, in all honesty, this is how it could turn out. Announce that ObamaCare is repealed, replace it with nearly identical GOPCare, take a victory lap

      Everyone wins.

      The other scenario is that like the Medicare “doc fix” the deadline for repeal simply gets moved onto next year’s budget every year when the deadline looms.

      • AdLib says:

        Funk, good point, I could absolutely see them turn the ACA into an annually approved program too use for extortion but wouldn’t insurance companies bail on the ACA rather than be under annual threat of having it killed?

        The dog caught the car and doesn’t know what to do now!

        • funksands says:

          Ad, that’s a good point about insurance co’s but uncertainty around the “doc fix” hasn’t driven physicians out of the industry. Not that the two entities are similar enough for credible comparison.

    • funksands says:

      Thank you Ad. Must be hard to figure out how to replace your own idea with something that either doesn’t work or is somehow will be tainted as too socialist.

      Poor babies

      • AdLib says:

        Funk, especially when the only idea you have is to make the wealthy wealthier, not an ideal mindset for figuring out a system that supports the majority who need the wisdom of a compassionate goovernment.

        What we have seen especially from McConnell and Ryan is that they have no shame in claiming that something they condemned under Obama is a fantastic thing now that they’re in power. So I wouldn’t doubt at all that they could just repackage the ACA with extra Repub goodies and claim victory. But in the end, it would damage them anyway because it would affirm what frauds they are.

  7. LightningJoe says:

    POV: One has NO idea if this is an accurate article or not, beyond a couple of small details from the article. Some of the provisions spelled out sound (seriously) too Trumpian to credit, such as the inclusion of the steaks (no longer produced) and the special sample of Trumpian skin cream.

    Might I remind you that ACCURATE INFORMATION is the NECESSITY for a culture that values and tries to produce a functional democracy for its citizens. Most citizens are NOT intellectually equipped to sort out the sort of fantasy you bring to the game. One is forced to conclude that the JOKE of putting out false information and laughing at those who accept it as fact, is the real reason you are posting it, not the desire to spread real, accurate, and necessary information.

    Fake News is a PLAGUE for the culture and the body politic, and should be ELIMINATED from the conversation. If planetpov continues putting it out, I will take my views and clicks elsewhere.

    • Harleigh says:

      Lightning Joe your name belies your slow brain. For real news go checkout Onion.com.

    • pinkpantheroz says:

      Ah, I see it, Joe. You’re being even more satirical. Very Humorous!
      Well, it’s either that or you are under the misapprehension that PlanetPOV is a news media outlet. Well, it isn’t. It is a place where people who have alternate views of MSM have the opportunity to have fun at its expense, and those to whom they toady up.
      I agree that Fake News is anathema to normal people, but here, we let our imagination fly to the absurd. If you are incapable of recognizing absurdity, please continue to watch Fox, listen to Hannity and their ilk and maybe it would be better if you did take your views and clicks elsewhere, which would be a bit of a pity. Maybe you, like the president-elect, should heed VP Joe Biden’s advise and GROW UP.

      • LightningJoe says:

        No, I’m NOT being “even more satirical.” I’m being what you might not be looking for: serious about communication.

        Communication has a role quite other than just letting individuals spout off. It has a critical CULTURAL role as well, and that is where the levels of ACCURACY and TRUTH matter a lot.

        No, I’m NOT supposed to be here, if this site is all about satire.

        Trouble is, there is nothing ON the site about it being all about satire. It presents as if it is a site where events are dealt with responsibly.

        Now that may be just part of the satire, but it’s a sad day if it is…

        • AdLib says:

          LightningJoe, I would think that the reason that some folks here don’t understand your rabid opposition to satire and free expression is because among Progressives, your views are very rare and contradictory.

          Progressives value and believe in the 1st Amendment and protecting free expression. Progressives see satire as a valuable tool to expose and attack those who would use their position of power to take away the rights of others.

          Your position against people expressing themselves as they wish is not a Progressive view, in fact, it is actually in line with what Trump advocates.

          Trump has attacked SNL for satirizing him and thinks the show should be cancelled because of it. You’re similarly advocating the silencing of satire against Trump, you just have a different (and questionable) reason for insisting on it but your ultimate goal matches Trump’s, stopping the satirization of Trump.

          It’s difficult to understand your proposition, that the way for America to deal with malicious forces such as Putin’s Russia and the Alt Right abusing our freedom of speech in this country with spreading fake news, is to convince people to stop exercising their own free expression.

          Isn’t it obvious that anyone desiring to suppress the freedom of expression of Americans, especially when it comes to political views, is in direct conflict with the 1st Amendment and the core rights that this country is about?

          In fact, the 1st Amendment is primarily aimed at protecting the political speech of Americans. Standing in opposition to the 1st Amendment isn’t going to attract applause at any Progressive site.

          This all comes across as pretzel logic, Americans opposing Trump should only write with Trump voters in mind as their readers so in the unlikely case that a Trump voter ever read what they wrote, it won’t be misunderstood by them and satire wouldn’t be spread as truth.

          Do you really think that Progressives silencing themselves will somehow stop Trump supporters here and in Russia from spreading fake news? I don’t see any connection.

          For the most part, Trump cultists only write to and read from each other. The election was proof of that, they’re in their own little bubble, immune to reality and facts, they don’t read anything outside of their bubble and not from sites that don’t affirm their emotional (and often bigoted) beliefs.

          It’s pointless to ask Progressives to dumb themselves down to the level of those who are too ignorant to recognize obvious humor and are too dumb to understand expressly written statements in satirical posts that state that they are in fact satirical posts.

          Scapegoating those here who express the same common sense on this doesn’t accomplish anything, you would be just as hard pressed to find anyone at any site (other than pro-Trump sites), agreeing with your call for people to censor themselves to cater to ignorant Trump supporters.

          The irony is that you are the only one here actually supporting Trump and his supporters (who are the ones who support and promote fake news), on their calls for censorship of Progressive voices and silencing satire of Trump.

          To be clear, satire is not fake news, they are nowhere near the same. Satire is constructive political speech, important and valuable and has been proven so throughout our political history.

          Advocating censorship has always been rejected by those who believe in The Constitution and the 1st Amendment. Folks here and at any legit Progressive site do support them. The only kind of site I can think of where you’d find others supporting your call for censorship would be populated by Trump voters.

          Ironic indeed, in the pursuit of opposing Trump, you’ve adopted one of his policies and criticize Progressives for opposing it.

          As they said in Airplane 2 (a satirical movie), “Sometimes irony can be pretty ironic.”

          • LightningJoe says:

            But my “position against satire” exists only in your mind, Adlib.

            First off, my concerted attempts to notify you of your nascent problem with the RWNJs should not be taken as an attack on the First Amendment, as you have grandly styled it.

            There is literally NO WAY I’d recommend you ending your free expression… ONLY your presentation of it (it needs a LABEL).

            I LOVE satire, but NOT at the expense of what’s good for the culture, I’m afraid. To my mind, “expressing yourself” should in times like these take second fiddle to ACCURATE AND TRUE information. And again, YOU are the ones who should be making that distinction, and making sure that WE get it as well.

            I’m not saying that you are doing a bad thing here, but it is sadly misplaced, when one considers the cumulative effect, and the current cultural focus on Fake News being a problem (it is, and this looks a LOT like another example of it, to anyone finding your site by “accident”).

            But I STILL wouldn’t be posting what I am, if the Fact of Satire were adequately posted somewhere on these pages (and no, I’m NOT talking about in the so-called guidelines that no one reads!).

            I’m talking about the real-world consequences of putting up clever (yes) LIES (as the Reich Wing will see it), and calling that a fun thing to do, while the poor RW Droids run around screaming at how Liberals LIE all the time, and put out Fake News themselves (and point to sites like yours as their justification).

            In other words, by preserving the marks of Ivory Tower Satire (no overt clues, seeming solidity of content and treatment, a VERY few internal clues in the documents, to give us cognoscenti the satire clues that the rabble will never understand), you aid misunderstanding for no better gain than your own little “better than them” meritocratic superiority.

            If that is an adequate payback for you, have at it. You have my gracious permission to do so (that’s satire, duh).

            In the old days when each article of satire got days and weeks of exposure to its audience, every piece would (at least eventually) be seen for the clever (or not) commentary it was. (No, Virginia, Jonathan Swift WASN’T really advising us to eat the Poor!) But put up for a total of two minutes’ “contemplation,” before the Next Thing marches into our brains and erases it, the meaning and focus of a piece must be clear from the start, not hidden away in the wrinkles of a hard-to-perceive (for RWNJs) exercise in mental self-pleasuring. Yes, I do realize that such notification steals away some of the pleasure to be found in finding it out for oneself, but remember that pleasure rests on the fact of having that time to waste. We DON’T have the time to waste anymore, is the source of my complaint.

            These days, SO many outright INSANE policies are being SERIOUSLY proposed, that one no longer even knows if a proposal is serious or satire, without wading completely through one of them, spending tons of time that could be better spent weeding through real proposals.

            Spending our precious time and attention on self-pleasuring satire is not indicated just now. If we spend our time wondering if they really mean a particular outrage, it steals away our very necessary response time to the real outrages.

            Here’s what I would advise you to do — with of course no “obligation” laid on you to do so:

            Make up a little communication box especially for the RWD’s, that explains in exhaustive depth (at the bottom) the nature of satire, and that your site IS a site where satire is welcomed, and that NO article on the site should be taken literally without close examination. Have that box POP-UP at rare intervals, to get around the “no one reads it” syndrome that user “agreements” have fallen into, or make it a header. I seriously think we need to rub the difference in their faces, or they WON’T get the satire, any more than they get irony.

            After all, I myself have fallen into the trap I describe here, though I am in no way Reich Wing (or (duh) a Trumpian). Time after time, I open up a mail, see a seemingly serious bit of news (and note, that the ones just “a bit off,” for the purposes of satire, are enough off to make a person wanting to keep up click on them). So time after time, I click through, only to find that the “bit off” came from someone’s fevered imagination, and has little to do with the actual state of things. IOW, I’ve been blindsided, my time has been claimed, by false-flag attacks on my personal mental database, that repeatedly send me scrambling to find out if Trump REALLY wants Medicade For All, or whatever the Next Joke is…

            Result: five to ten minutes I wish I had back. Time after time after time. And all because no notice was given, that I shouldn’t seek REAL information on your site.

            Result Two: the final realization that NOTHING on Planet POV is worth my time, because I can’t count on ANY of it actually being true, despite that it’s being presented as if it were (Fake News!). I just no longer see any net benefit to telling clever lies that take time and attention to sort out from reality. There is enough reality out there already, that has to be dealt with. RUNNING AWAY FROM IT THROUGH SATIRE is a preoccupation that I can’t see the benefit of, beyond telling ourselves how clever we are.

            So enjoy your satire, but don’t expect me back. I’ve got better things to spend my time on, now that I’ve TRIED to enlighten you as to your problem.

            I mean, WHY are you here? If it’s only to laugh, then kindly let the more serious thinkers among us know that from the start.

            • AdLib says:

              LJ, as many here have repeated to you, there was and is a statement at the bottom of this post that plainly and explicitly states that it is satire.

              You missed it, you made a mistake and because you did, launched on this whole misguided criticism. The post did just as you described it should have done and yet you still don’t seem to recognize this reality.

              The first step in confronting fake news is to be grounded in reality and arguing that posts should contain statements they already do isn’t a great start in that direction.

              You now appear to be proposing that satirists aren’t serious thinkers. Following one mistake with another is just digging a deeper hole.

              Jonathan Swift, Mark Twain, Will Rogers, George Carlin, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, etc., have been far more serious and influential thinkers than the majority of “serious thinkers” you could list.

              If you think political satire is only about laughing, you have a big gap in your education when it comes to political history and the influence of satirists throughout the years.

              Why am I here? Because this is a site where everyone can freely express themselves with confidence, where ideas and concepts can be presented to smart and knowledgeable people for critique and contribution and where many who are witty gather to share incisive and clever humor to skewer and deflate the powerful and yes,to hopefully encourage a smile as we go through difficult political times.

              I can’t imagine any site you could go to where you would find many in agreement with the propositions you’re making here, they fly in the face of what progress is all about. The majority of Americans oppose Trump and want things to get better and improve, they don’t want the country dragged down to cater to the ignorance of the poorly educated.

              People should not be advised not to write intelligently because someone who’s not intelligent may not understand them. It would not make our society better to pull down those who are more able just because those less able can’t keep up with them.

              This election drew a line between the educated and uneducated, the majority of the uneducated backed Trump and their candidate prevailed. He’s not even president yet and he’s already enlarged the political swamp in DC he lied about draining, claims American taxpayers will now pay for the wall and is backing off a day one repeal of the ACA.

              Who believed all his obvious lies and con job? Not bright people and not people who rational people should ever allow to dictate their thoughts and manner of free expression.

              The reason I said that people who don’t understand satire are people I’d like to satirize is because like most Americans out there, we’re not backing down or giving into the ignorant. We’re not conceding that we have to pander to them or be afraid of them.

              They are the ones who need to become enlightened and step up to the level of the majority of Americans who have the ability of critical thinking and are better educated…meaning, less vulnerable to being conned by a blatant fraud like Trump.

              These people don’t need to be attacked for the social failures (mainly due to Repubs) that have led to their poor educations, they need first to recognize the mistakes they’ve made by voting with their emotions instead of their reason and Trump will teach them that lesson very painfully.

              Then they need to recognize the value of truth, voting in their own interests and employing critical thinking.

              The people you’re urging others to cater to are the ones who need to smarten up, we don’t need to dumb things down to accommodate those who are lacking insight. We need to help them climb the ladder to rise up from ignorance and emotions overpowering reason, as it’s being used by the powerful and wealthy to manipulate them.

              The worst thing we could do is buy into and validate ignorance. Ignorance should be called out and shunned, it leads to poverty and disempowerment.

              Did you know that most Trump voters heavily rely on the subsidies of the ACA for healthcare? And yet they voted for the candidate and party that vowed to rip it away from them on day one. Some of them could literally be an accomplice in their own premature death. Those are not people whose ignorance should be affirmed and accomodated.

              Those who are co-dependent share the responsibility for the damage to our democracy and society that stems from ignorance. By accommodating ignorance, one is surrendering to it.

              And as I said, it is very unlikely that educated and enlightened people out there would be sympathetic to your call for accommodating ignorance by self-censoring oneself or always explaining jokes in case they’re read by those who aren’t bright enough to get them.

              Dumbing down is not something most Americans would support, certainly not journalists or those who write well considered thoughts about what matters in our world.

              We’ll leave that to the Alt Right sites, they’re happy to dumb things down and cater to and encourage ignorance.

              You are right about one thing though, that isn’t going to happen on this Planet.

            • funksands says:

              So, the disclaimer that the article was satire should be at the bottom. Got it.

              Thanks Joe.

        • Fuzzy Dunlop says:

          You’re tilting at windmills Joe. Very quixotic, but misapplied.
          Nobody is forced to read anything on this site, or any other for that matter.
          This article is about as harmful to our culture as the mosquito bite I received last summer.

    • VegasBabe says:

      ” Most citizens are NOT intellectually equipped to sort out the fantasy you bring to the game”. Ah … I think you might be addressing me here, LOL! On more than one occasion I’ve had to read and then re-read posts to clarify its intent, especially from AdLib :) but that just makes things interesting around here. Chill out, stick around for a minute, perhaps render a submission of your own. Many here I believe need a little humor, a little satire to survive these apocalyptic times. God knows I do! But I feel ya!

    • Kalima says:

      You should maybe review our FAQ, About Us and Categories to understand that anyone is welcome to write about anything they choose to write about whether humorous, satire, and personal opinions on past or current issues (The POV after Planet stands for Point of View) so any subject the members want to write about.

      We are not a news site and have never claimed to be, there are many of those out there to choose from. We are about discussions, and this article certainly does lend itself to discussion. How on earth is this “Fake News?”

      This is a Progressiv site and the people you claim would not understand it or would not know the difference between truth and parody or satire do not come to read here.

      Instead of insulting our site and the author who took time to write this for us, either write something yourself or by all means find somewhere more satisfactory for your clicks. The last thing we need is to be dictated to on how to run our site and what we can or cannot publish. It goes against everything that The Planet stands for and why we started it.

      • LightningJoe says:

        “(The POV after Planet stands for Point of View)”

        Well, duh…

        “How on earth is this “Fake News?””

        How on Earth is news news? It is news because of WHO it is read by. To someone who already knows the issues, news may not BE news, but rather “old news,” a different thing entirely, to the person reading it.

        So with fake news; it also depends on who’s reading it.

        “The last thing we need it to be dictated to on how to run our site and what we can or cannot publish.”

        Did I tell you not to publish? Did I tell you not to satirize?

        Actually I’ve felt this way a long time, but when you guys “banned” me not long ago, and for doing (literally) NOTHING at all (NO posts, mind you), well it did stick in my craw a bit, so this time I’m letting you know how I felt about that, before I get run off again for no reason… well at least this time you’ve got something you can tell yourself is a reason.

        • Kalima says:

          Just to clear a few things up. I cannot come to grips with the fact that you keep insisting that satire, an art of ridicule mostly aimed at politicians and bad leaders dating back to the ancient Greeks and the Roman Empire, is fake news. That was what my sentence about “How on earth….” actually meant.

          Secondly, if you did not receive an email from Admin telling you that you were banned, then you were not banned. Once banned you would never have been able to login again. So your problem was most likely a technical glitch, and we would appreciate if you refrained from suggesting it was anything else. We don’t censor members. We censor or remove trolls who disturb conversations and post fake news.

          Stating that The Planet is all about satire only confirms that the only place on this site that you have ever visited, is our Home Page. That is the sad thing here because you have missed some great and insightful conversations from passionate people who care about others both at home and abroad.

          Being as you can’t stop yourself from further insults about this site and our members. Bon Voyage!

          • LightningJoe says:

            And I’m talking about the perception of the RWNJ’s ending up here with no notification that satire is within six leagues of the page… To THEM, it will most assuredly BE Fake News, and will feed into the disjoint between the two sides of our culture.

            Don’t change a thing, though. Most of all, don’t notify your readers directly (PLEASE no clicking buttons here, gimme a HEADER on the page) that satire is a real risk, when reading the site.

            As to what parts of the site I visit, I’ve ONLY connected to your site through article links, never to the homepage. YOU send me the links, I assume you mean them to be used.

            “Insults?”

            SHOW me an insult I’ve tendered, beyond saying that I want a label on my satire… If you can’t, then stop saying it. At least THIS time, you’ll have an EXCUSE for banning me…

            As for my banning, I received lots of links to articles, that took me instead to a page saying I’d been banned from commenting (reading too, apparently), and detailing a procedure for getting myself Unbanned… a procedure that never took me anywhere near a place to make my case.

            So, is “banning” a detailed upfront memo from the mods… or is it the fact that I’m kept from logging in, while any effort to get back into your good graces is flouted? If the first, then I guess I’m “not” banned, despite the evidence of the second…

            Is that more of your “satire?”

            • Kalima says:

              Right at the bottom of funksands’s article there is this, his disclaimer, and if I who only has viable sight in my right eye can see it, why can’t anyone else with reading comprehension?

              A label on satirical pieces for non-existent trump voters who would rather scratch out their own eyes than to gain enough interest to come to our site out of millions on the Internet, seems about as far fetched as trump keeping a promise to the people who voted for him.

              Your concern would be better served for the people who didn’t vote for him but will suffer greatly because of it, and not only with those who enabled it out of stupidity and anger.

              (thanks to the Washington Post for their generous aid in the preparation of this satirical piece)
              *Free after redemption of mail-in rebate
              **Totally not affiliated in any way with Donald Trump or his family businesses, which are in the blindest trust ever created

              With this I end this discussion as there seems nothing more to say when a member who said he was leaving, continues to tell us how we should run our site and for whom we should change it after 7 years. Sorry. Not going to happen. We choose freedom of expression over blind conformity any day.

              Instead of criticising The Planet, you need to vent at the real sources of fake news, lies and deliberate disinformation. Namely repubs in Congress who regularly pass out disinformation, lies and fake news. Then rant over at Fox News, Hannity and the liars out there who no longer care about the truth so spend their days making up vicious bullshit. Could be a more constructive way to spend your busy days while we huddle in a corner to pat each other on the back for being so clever and laugh hysterically because unlike you, we have nothing better to do with our time than to spend it on writing articles just to confuse RWingers who don’t come to read here. The Planet is a think tank, not a daycare center. No, not more satire, that’s just a dose of old-fashioned sarcasm.

    • funksands says:

      Joe, would it help if I moved the disclaimer “This is satire” from the bottom of the article to the top?

      I certainly understand and respect your pov on fake news and agree with it.

      However, what a cold and sterile world we would live in if satire is eliminated from public discourse.

      • LightningJoe says:

        How many RWNJ’s would even get to the bottom of the article?

        I read the whole thing through, but didn’t see that disclaimer right away either. Someone who bailed at the medical “plan” wouldn’t have, but would have judged the whole article (and possibly the website) as being Fake News.

        • Kalima says:

          That’s not our problem. If people continue with the HP formula of ranting after only reading the header, that’s their problem too.

          Your point about them not reading to the end is in total conflict with the premise that you have been trying to make. If they don’t read it to the end, how are they absorbing satire as fake news?

          Hope you find a more compliant site soon. Good luck!

    • gyp46 says:

      If One has difficulty determining truth from satire one might possibly reread said article over and over until laughter commences!

      • LightningJoe says:

        What, with SO many sources competing for our eyeballs? We spend as little time as possible on every source we come to; how are we going to justify taking the TIME to reread a source; a source that will not reveal its “clever” nature until we do that homework?

        Satire is (yes) a time-honored practice, and when it works, it works quite well.

        I submit that in THIS political environment, it simply does not serve its purpose. What we need now is ACCURATE and TRUE information; not a merry-go-round of more lies, well meant or not.

        (in case you haven’t noticed, when one does not comprehend the satirical nature of a piece of writing, one usually takes it for the truth-as-perceived-by-the-writer)

        • gyp46 says:

          If in doubt I have found asking helps. As for trumpites catching on to the satirical nature of a post I have my doubts, yet providing links to truth also seems of little value to the one providing those links since most trumpites refuse to believe anything but the ‘Tweeter Twits’ tweets!Believe me when I say that because over the last year having posted hundreds of fact checked items to said trumpites I have come to the conclusion they either are to dumb or to blind, take your pick!

      • LightningJoe says:

        It’s not the “difficulty” a sane, smart person has telling one from the other that bothers me. It is the effect on the culture, of having so many sources of information that CATER ONLY TO THE SMART, and leave the lower-scoring proles to their own devices, to tell what is truth and what is lies.

        When that distinction is purposely obstructed, as it is in much satire, it sells out those less well endowed with smarts… and ushers them into the arms of the liars…

        Sure, I get a minor rush from being able to tell the difference, but that rush is not worth knowing that TONS of Trumpians are going to read it differently, as reflecting the truth.

        The ego boost of knowing it is satire while others do not, is simply not worth the blow to our culture from that hit.

        • Fuzzy Dunlop says:

          For one thing, Trumpians do not frequent this site. Another thing is that educating someone is not well served by lowering the intelligence level in an article to the level of those who need to be educated.

          Your take on this reminds me of George Carlin’s response to the minister who complained to the FCC about his 7 Dirty Words You Can’t Say On Television. Mr. Carlin reminded the rev that a car radio has two knobs on it……One that turns it on and off, and another that allows you to…get this…CHANGE THE STATION! In this case, however, you have a mouse, a cursor and the freedom to click or not click on any article you choose that is available.

          • LightningJoe says:

            Your argument, however, looks like an exercise in how to put together an echo chamber!

            When I protest at the worse aspects of catering to the smart — at the EXPENSE (shall we say) of the LESS-smart, you tell me to move along and leave you to the enjoyment of your fun meritocracy… NEWS: just because the less-smart are not so smart, it DOESN’T mean they have no power. Just look at who is President now…

            And I never said I’d stick around anyway. I really have little use for self-reflecting “information” that is only useful for getting a glow on.

            I also have little faith in POV in the first place. A while ago, despite my NEVER having posted a comment here in the past, I found they’d banned me for doing something or other (had to have been for LOOKING at them wrong, I guess). Sure, a mistake, I thought; there must be a mechanism for notifying the mods, eh? Not so, the “advice” for handling the situation was nonsensical to the point of uselessness. I guess they must have recovered from that now, but they haven’t become any more of a voice to rely on. Not by far. Laugh at? Sure.

            So what AM I doing here right now? I’m letting POV know that what they are doing is not likely to help at all, and runs the hazard of adding to our level of misinformation. Which we do not need at all.

            Increasing the level of misinformation adds to the effectiveness of Propaganda. When REAL information becomes hard to find, people will believe Propaganda. POV is helping that process along. Harsh words, I know, but I’m tired of it.

            But it looks as though my perspective is not welcome here. Enough said. I’m outa here.

            • Fuzzy Dunlop says:

              You begin from a false premise. You assume that the purpose of the piece is to make people feel bad about their lack of knowledge or nuance.
              I don’t see it that way at all. The article is satire and is meant to provide a few laughs while poking the monster. The monster being our congress critters.
              This is not fake news or an attempt to make anyone feel bad.
              You have a reasonable argument against fake news and it’s dangers, but it is misapplied here. Very much so.
              I never told you to “move along.” I simply suggested that if you were so opposed to such an article, don’t click on it and upset yourself so.
              If this piece is at anyone’s expense, it is the people in Congress who want to take away access to proper healthcare for over 12 million Americans. Many of whom will die as a result. But you’re worried about upsetting some people who just might read it and be offended. Wow.

    • AdLib says:

      LightningJoe, this article is satirical. I know that in this Trump Era, the line between satire and reality is a bit blurred but have no concern that fake news is echoed here at PlanetPOV.

      Your concern over fake news is appreciated. It needs to be rejected outright while we affirm the importance of being able to ridicule those in power, using satire and humor in general to bring them down from the pedestals they climb on top of.

      • gyp46 says:

        Lightning Joe does have one succinct point it seems to me, Trumpies do not have much of a sense of the funnyness of their guy. He is absurd in so many ways, take his 3am tweets about Ms. Streep,s remarks today. Trump nor his followers seem to realize just how childish and inappropriate he is on most all things.

      • LightningJoe says:

        I’m afraid that your “distinction” between satire and fake “news” goes far over the heads of those believing Reich Wing Lies. If the enjoyment that satire gives the more intelligent among us were UNIFORM across the culture it would be different, but the current focus on fake news is TERRIBLE for those who habitually never read the whole article, NOR think about it, and are thus highly UNlikely to see the signs of it being satire.

        In other words, in this clime, and for those readers, satire and fake news are one and the same.

        You should consider the price of your enjoyment, when evaluating the utility of satire.

        • AdLib says:

          LightningJoe, this past election did seem to illustrate that Trump voters lack self-awareness, the ability of critical thinking, principles, acting in their own best interests and a decent sense of humor.

          I think it would be handing them, the Russians and Trump a victory in suppressing free speech if we voluntarily decided to self-censor ourselves because of their lack of comprehension. If they don’t understand satire, my instinct is to satirize that.

          Ridicule is one of the most powerful tools in weakening support for horrible government officials and it’s not one we should voluntarily disarm ourselves from using.

          Fake news isn’t funny, it is actually easier to discern from satire because there is nothing funny about it and it usually contains powerfully denigrating claims about Democrats or glowing falsehoods about how wonderful one or more Republicans are.

          When people voluntarily give up rights as a response to those exploiting those rights (as happened right after 9/11), the damage is exponential and long term. Not only will those abusing the freedoms of a society continue their abuse, the rights that people give up may be difficult to reassert.

          Lastly, nothing expressed by anyone other than a RW extremist will penetrate the closed and narrow minds of Trump loyalists and if they run with satire as if it’s the truth to the public, they will be humiliated for doing so very shortly.

          The more others abuse our 1st Amendment, the more we need to exercise it to combat them.

          • LightningJoe says:

            “If they don’t understand satire, my instinct is to satirize that.”

            Echo Chamber Alert! (sirens and lights)

            We need to discourage echo chambers, not cater to them.

            • LightningJoe says:

              Can’t reply to the correct comment, so here I am…

              WHO ever “called you” an echo chamber? One begins to suspect you are drawing unwarranted conclusions. I only ever pointed to an echo chamber as the sad result of the silo-ing of RW commentary on one hand (they don’t get satire or irony), and the smarter Lib/Prog commentary on the other.

              Unmarked satire only adds to that effect.

            • AdLib says:

              LJ, you don’t seem to know the difference between an echo chamber and someone disagreeing with you.

              What I wrote was a disagreement with your crusade to wipe out satire. It’s wrongheaded and is a Trump policy, very surprising that you would embrace a policy of Trump’s while expressing you oppose him.

              I disagree that a society should dumb itself down to the lowest mentalities.

              If it’s helpful, here is how “echo chamber” is defined by Wikipedia:

              An echo chamber is a metaphorical description of a situation in which information, ideas, or beliefs are amplified or reinforced by communication and repetition inside a defined system.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echo_chamber_(media)

              And here is how “disagreement” is defined by Merriam Webster:

              a difference of opinion : an argument caused by people having different opinions about something

              https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disagreement

              A person can’t be an echo chamber, when I disagree with you, your calling me an echo chamber is a misunderstanding of what it means.

              I disagree with you, some here didn’t respond to you in disagreement and were only complimentary of the points you made that they did agree with.

              I’ve disagreed with virtually everyone here at one time or another, though many here share Progressive values, they have their own unique views and are as free to express them here as you have been.

              That doesn’t happen in an echo chamber. What does happen at Progressive blogs though is that someone may propose something that is on principle, objectionable to many.

              As I’ve mentioned above, advocating censorship will never get wide approval from Dems or Progressives. Calling those who oppose censorship an echo chamber is just avoiding facing the reality of your proposition and the views of most Dems and Progressives.

              Anyone here advocating against any other core Constitutional rights here would likely meet the same objections.

              But you weren’t censored, your comments and POV remains here as part of the conversations and available for everyone to view and assess for themselves.

              That doesn’t happen in an echo chamber.

            • Fuzzy Dunlop says:

              What is an echo chamber Joe? In your view, of course? How many differing opinions do you expect concerning a thing that is pretty obvious to most?


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories
Features