I never said they were under obligation, but they are now under pressure.

Since doctors in the US are paid twice as much as in Europe, I’d say that’s a reasonable reimbursement. I have yet to hear of a Medicare patient denied treatment in this part of the country.

1.  Thanks for once again predictably avoiding the point – you’re good at that.  The point I made is that government is already heavily involved in the doctor-patient relationship contrary to your assertion that they’re not.

2. What rock have you been hiding under with respect to Medcare and denials?  According the AMA National Health Insurer Report Card, as recently as 2008, Medicare had the highest claim denial rate of all national insurers.  It’s come down a bit since then, but they’re still higher than most private insurers.

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/practice-management-center/health-insurer-payer-relations/national-health-insurer-report-card/past-report-cards/2008-nhirc.page

(The report you want to download is the one which says “Complete Metrics” next to the title.  The table on denials is on page 5.)

3. Many providers have stopped accepting new Medicare patients due to the low reimbursement rates.  For patients this means that they may have insurance, but they can’t find a provider who’ll accept it. They are thus effectively denied care.

WE ARE NOT EUROPE!  STOP ATTEMPTING TO MAKE US INTO THEM.

That has got to be the lamest cop out I have ever heard concerning ANY TOPIC.

I don’t give a flying rat’s ass what Europe does.  WE WILL DO AS WE PLEASE and Europe can roast for all I care.

The investigation is unfounded, would you acre to prove that, you know since it isn’t even complete? And they might be convinced, but then again they might not. Maybe they really don’t wanted wanted to be associated with baby murder.

Your OPINION on whether or not abortions is murder is noted, but also beside the point. 

You still cannot prove the investigation is unfounded.

But are you then for the government intervening in the reproductive cycle of women?

No we’re for protecting the right of a child to live.

That 3%/97% line is pure crap. They performed over 300K abortions while seeing over 3 million patients(men and women) in 2008. That’s fully 10% of their clients recieving abortions.

That’s their choice. And their right.

There are no such aspects.

Everyone is treated the same way.

First, as Reckless alluded to above, just because 97% of the services they offer are not abortion does not mean that most of the services they perform are not abortions.

No, dude. You are using his information. I didn’t say anything about “offer”. I said “provide”. 97% of the services they PROVIDE are unrelated to abortion. Get your facts straight.

 Second, it doesn’t matter how many other services they offer apart from abortion. If you contribute money to any organization, you are funding EVERYTHING that they do.

You must have never raised money for specific purposes in budgets. If you are a hospital and people give you money for a new cancer wing, you don’t have those funds to spend on ambulance services.
What Komen was funding was CANCER SCREENINGS. Not abortion. You can say they were funding Iran if you want, facts haven’t been your strong suit for a while.

You’re the one who brought it up, D-Vega, not me. You said that Komen did not fund abortions through PP. This is simply wrong. Komen DID fund abortions through PP. Everyone who contributes money to PP funds abortions.

Again, that is a lie. If they receive a dollar for screenings, they must use that dollar for screenings. And since 97% of what they provide isn’t abortion, it’s a simple matter of knowing math. You do know math, right?

 I never said this decision had anything to do with Komen’s views on abortion. I was merely pointing out your complete and utter wrongness on that point.

I am not wrong. You are simply lying. Just like you guys always do when it comes to abortion and gay marriage.

Not in the court of public opinion they’re not. And organizations like Komen have a vested interest in disassociating themselves from any organization that may compromise their public image. Cutting their ties with a group currently under federal investigation is a wise and prudent move for them.

No, it ain’t. Because they are denying women the very care they are supposed to support. Over a political witch hunt.

Actually I do know that, because Komen is a breast cancer charity. Funding organizations that screen, treat, and/or research breast cancer is what they do. What in the world do you think they’re going to do with the money they pulled from PP? Throw it on a bonfire?

First of all, you just said they fund abortion at PP. Now you are saying they fund screening and research. Try to keep up with your own bullshit.
Secondly, you have no proof or knowledge that the same women who would have gotten the care from PP will be able to get it, the same women in the same geography, from somewhere else.

Firstly, I love how you started this paragraph with the sentence “You don’t know that” and then end it with a statement that you yourself could not possibly know.

It’s no secret Republicans are on a lying, unfounded crusade against Planned Parenthood. They are obsessed with abortions. It’s why they’ve created more bills for it than any other issue.

 Secondly, let me see if I’ve got this straight here. Basically you’re saying that If an organization like PP violates the law in some way, Congress should refuse to investigate them on the off chance that it will cause one of their sponsors to withdraw financial support which might indirectly cause some women somewhere in the country to go without breast cancer screenings, because it will magically cause all hospitals and clinics in the area to disappear off the map?

I didn’t say that. I know you need to move goalposts and make up shit in order to keep up with the argument. I said the accusations are unfounded and don’t originate from any proof or evidence.

Do you even know what PP is being investigated for, D-Vega?

Sure, for this very reason. Conservatives claiming fed funds are paying for abortions. And it didn’t come from actual evidence. It came from where it always comes from. The right to life groups just demanding it. Just like Republicans like Darrell Issa said the Obama admin is the most corrupt in history, and he has yet to provide one single shred of proof.
It’s bogus and serves only to remove women’s care. Why do Republicans dislike women so much? Is it because they skew Democrat?

One word, Solyndra. There is your proof of corruption. Especially when you look at the displaced workers that were fired, or the fact that campaign contributions were made in advance of the horrible loans and grants that were made to that company AGAINST the advice of the administrations OWN finance regulators. When you play “The Chicago Way” corruption is always a component. If George W. Bush had did what he did, all of the media outlets would have been shouting for a Grand Jury inquiry.

IF their donors demand it. And that’s a big IF.

No, you should calm down.

Planned Parenthood has slightly less funding to work with than they did yesterday. Shit happens. There are other sources of funding.

On the other hand, Obama is blatantly violating the First Amendment. And apparently you’re fine with that. You think we should calm down about the President intentionally and pointlessly violating the literal Number 1 Rule of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Obama is acting like, at best, a petulant and shortsighted ideologue, and at worst like a tyrant. This is cause for concern.

You however are getting all butthurt over PP losing one of their sponsors.

I know it’s subtle, but there is a slight difference between those two situations.