ACA - A Hackers Wet Dream?

[Mike Murrell]

Not claiming to endorse this, but it is an interesting presentation, even if McAfee looks like he just sucked up a couple of grams of coke.

John McAfee On Obamacare: "This Is A Hacker's Wet Dream" | RealClearPolitics

To me, what's more interesting is Nancy Pelosi's latest brain fart:

Pelosi: "Let's Not Get Too Bogged Down In What Happens If They're Not Able To Fix It"

Does this rival her previous flatulence:

"We need to pass it so we can see what's in it"

?????

[Idle]

Another perspective.

Healthcare.gov privacy, security: No, Obamacare is not a "hacker's dream."

You should research the Pelosi comment concerning, "We must...", as it is incorrectly stated in your post.

[Mike Murrell]

Originally Posted by Idle

Another perspective.

Healthcare.gov privacy, security: No, Obamacare is not a "hacker's dream."

You should research the Pelosi comment concerning, "We must...", as it is incorrectly stated in your post.

From the URL you posted....

That’s because HealthCare.gov is mainly just there to provide people with information and direct them to the proper place, not to collect any sensitive data.

How is anything going to get started w/o the collection of "sensitive data"???


Yes...allow me to correct...funny...you end up with the same thing...see it on youtube:

Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out......

[Idle]

Originally Posted by Mike Murrell

From the URL you posted....

That’s because HealthCare.gov is mainly just there to provide people with information and direct them to the proper place, not to collect any sensitive data.

How is anything going to get started w/o the collection of "sensitive data"???


Yes...allow me to correct...funny...you end up with the same thing...see it on youtube:

Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out......

What you are seeing on YouTube is an edited and voiced over clip. It was placed there in order to fool those who wish to think it is the truth.

Apparently it is having some success.

There are also YouTube clips that display truthfully what she said, but without a context of the remarks they can be construed in several different ways.

And no, you do not end up with the same thing. You have a different meaning from start to finish. In the adulterated version it appears that she is quite the buffoon. In the actual version she is describing an action that must take place before the bill, the language of which was changing daily, would be known in its' final form.

Her actual comments are quite easy to locate.

Pelosi defends her infamous health care remark - PostPartisan - The Washington Post

[Idle]

I do not intend to engage in a debate involving the ACA. It will rise or fall without my input.

But constantly striving towards the truth is not taking a side.

The ACA will need to be managed as it goes forth. Until the day arrives that time stands still every business will live under the curse of constant change.

I have never embarked upon a venture that did not change. How those involved with the venture managed the change was always the hallmark of success and not if the venture was perfect from beginning to end.

[MTUpower]

Originally Posted by Idle

What you are seeing on YouTube is an edited and voiced over clip. It was placed there in order to fool those who wish to think it is the truth.

Apparently it is having some success.

There are also YouTube clips that display truthfully what she said, but without a context of the remarks they can be construed in several different ways.

And no, you do not end up with the same thing. You have a different meaning from start to finish. In the adulterated version it appears that she is quite the buffoon. In the actual version she is describing an action that must take place before the bill, the language of which was changing daily, would be known in its' final form.

Her actual comments are quite easy to locate.

Pelosi defends her infamous health care remark - PostPartisan - The Washington Post

All of your view (which is not yours alone) is based on the assumption that you can't read a document as it is at some point in time and "see what's in it". What difference will it make if the bill is passed? Only one: it will have been passed. After it's passed the alterations/amendments of it will slow down- as evidence show- the executive branch is now altering/amending parts of it. If the bill is 2700 pages then we truly will NEVER really know what's in it's totality- passed or not. So no matter which view you take Pelosi's comments are stupid.

[MTI]

McAfee. Is he still a suspect in a murder?

[Honus]

Originally Posted by Mike Murrell

...Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out......

You speak nonsense. The bill she was describing was a matter of public record for months before the House voted on it. Her comment refers to people like yourself who feel the need to mislead. Those people, which now include you, spread so much misinformation about the bill, it was difficult for the average person to know what was really in the law. She said, correctly, that the only way for the truth to come out would be for people to see the law in action.

[MTUpower]

Originally Posted by Honus

You speak nonsense. The bill she was describing was a matter of public record for months before the House voted on it. Her comment refers to people like yourself who feel the need to mislead. Those people, which now include you, spread so much misinformation about the bill, it was difficult for the average person to know what was really in the law. She said, correctly, that the only way for the truth to come out would be for people to see the law in action.

That logic is like saying the only way to "see" a forest fire is to get in the middle of one so you can understand what's in it.

[Jorn]

Originally Posted by MTUpower

That logic is like saying the only way to "see" a forest fire is to get in the middle of one so you can understand what's in it.

Is that not what Hotshots do?

[Idle]

Originally Posted by MTUpower

All of your view (which is not yours alone) is based on the assumption that you can't read a document as it is at some point in time and "see what's in it". What difference will it make if the bill is passed? Only one: it will have been passed. After it's passed the alterations/amendments of it will slow down- as evidence show- the executive branch is now altering/amending parts of it. If the bill is 2700 pages then we truly will NEVER really know what's in it's totality- passed or not. So no matter which view you take Pelosi's comments are stupid.

Pelosi made her comments in response to question from County Supervisors at a convention of such. They were asking what was in the bill. She responded with a few items, but that the bill was complicated, not final and in a state of debate.

They continued to ask what was in it. She continued to inform them of the debate process by which such bills are crafted.

They continued to ask what was in it. She informed that when it passed in its' final form they would all know.

It was then reported, incorrectly, that she had implied that she did not know what was in the bill she was supporting.

With this being information that fed into the bills opponents desire to stop the bill by any means necessary the statement became what Karl Rove described as an 'Anger Point'. Without anger points you cannot hope to defeat a bill that has no rational basis for defeat. Anger points are also clever devices to incite voters to vent their outrage at the polls.

A prime example of an anger point is Gay marriage.

[Honus]

Originally Posted by MTUpower

That logic is like saying the only way to "see" a forest fire is to get in the middle of one so you can understand what's in it.

That's a terrible analogy. Forest fires are bad and everyone knows it. Even Sean Hannity would have a hard time coming up with a line of BS to convince people otherwise. Pelosi's point, which is debatable, is that the ACA is beneficial but people are being told so many lies about it, they don't don't know what's in it. You can disagree with her conclusion, but there is nothing wrong with her logic.

[Mike Murrell]

Well....back to the McAfee video.

Seems to jump into it inflight. There are other such concerns online....google.

Yes MTI - I believe he's a suspect in a murder. Have not researched all of that. Not sure if being a murderer would necessarily void ones credentials.
I shot a guy and now all of a sudden I am no longer able to perform my life's work?

[Mike Murrell]

Originally Posted by MTUpower

So no matter which view you take Pelosi's comments are stupid.

I agree. Not sure which one I find more amusing, the one being hashed over here or the other one mentioned in my opening post.

[Honus]

Originally Posted by MTUpower

... What difference will it make if the bill is passed? Only one: it will have been passed...

That's so obviously wrong, it makes me wonder why you stick to your position on this.

There is a huge difference between a pending bill and one that is passed. Before the ACA was passed, people were told by ACA supporters that they would have access to affordable health care. Meanwhile, ACA critics told people that the ACA would made their situation worse, not better. Until the bill became a law, there was no way for the average person to know who was telling the truth. Now that the bill is a law, people can see for themselves. If the ACA provides affordable health care, then its beneficiaries will see that the critics were wrong. If the ACA fails, then they will see that Pelosi was wrong. Time will tell who was right, but there is nothing illogical or stupid about her statement.