I couldn't agree more. How many times did you shake your head during the speech and say the same thing? I have to admit shortly after Joe yelled out I tried to log onto his website, not to criticize, but to donate to his campaign. This morning it bothers me to see him apologizing for this. I wish more Republicans would start calling Obama on the carpet for his lies. The country needs leadership now more than ever.

Excellent points, Mr. Hawkins. I'd also add in the fact that, Pres. Obama used a speech to a joint session of Congress to accuse Chappaquiddickcare's opponents of lying hardly qualifies as decorus behavior. He chose the terms of the fight. Congressman Wilson can only be credited with playing on those terms in response. The President is not a God. He's owed no more decorum than he's willing to give.

We only caught snatches of the "Big Lie, er, Speech," and what we heard was only more of the same and had us yelling "liar" at the screen.

There are plenty of Americans out there who can read quickly and with good comprehension, and we know that the things proposed in this plan will do the things everyone is scared of. They may not happen right away, but it will be a gradual slide into the abyss of single payer hell.

Hrm, I see the cowards who vote things down without posting are out early today.

You couldn't be more completely wrong. Rep. Wilson's actions can be excused as passionate and in the moment, yours display a unmovable bias, lack of class and a contribution to politics that will never surpass a blog populated only by those that share your own views.

Rep. Wilson was correct to apologize and be chastised by members of the Republican party.

The tolerant folk on the left have made death threats against Joe Wilson.

Death threats for telling the truth.

Every single liberal in existence would take away our freedom of speech if they could. They'll lie and say differntly, but that is what it is. A lie.

And most of them are racist to boot? Disagree with Nixon? Tough shit, you know Nixon is right.

Posted by Robert_Ingersoll

2009-09-10 08:00:19

Okay, Robert, Pres. Obama attacked opponents of the health care plan as liars and questioned their motives. In a speech prepared with malice of forethought. Are you making the rounds of the liberal websites damning the President for not showing the same contrition showed by Congressman Wilson, or do your standards only apply when they advance a left-wing agenda?

Thank God somebody has the courage to speak out against the fascism of the Obama Administration and the deafening silence of the mainstream media. Today the headlines aren't about the points of Obama's speech, "LIAR!" is splashed all over the front pages.

Wilson apologized for his breach of protocol and respect, which is certainly true, but he did not apologize for what he said nor say that he took Obama at this word.

The other interesting thing about the reaction is that the Dems are trying to play this off as some sort of big rhetorical victory…yet none of them seem to be defending Obama as truthful to counter what Wilson actually said. They seem to be forgetting that support for Obama and the health care bill is solidly a *minority* position. Wilson is front page news today and Obama got called a liar on national TV. That's the news.

Here's the liberal spin: republican hypocrisy! They're the only one that can aggressively attack the opposition – get this – because they're the ones calling the opposition names and the opposition points out this fact daily.

If you've called out that you've been unfairly named a liar (or fascist, brownshirt, *insert liberal meme-of-the-day here*…) you can't call a spade a spade. The hypocrisy in these shouts of hypocrisy is just… wow. Liberals may be unable to surprise me, as they daily surpass themselves with sheer worthlessness, but they can still leave me speechless. Or, at least, with words that shouldn't be repeated in mixed company.

a blog populated only by those that share your own views

And speaking of hypocrites: you're here, aren't you? So you've read the blog, have you? Or are you implying that you're posting without reading? Given the average liberal, as soundly trounced on this site in every debate, ever, on every argument, ever, maybe you just lack the ability to read.

I don't think you can blame anybody for their emotions running high on such a contentious issue.

Politicians have been lying to us for years it isn't like he's saying anything new although coming from another politician it's like the pot calling the kettle black.

I actually found it refreshing, a first amendment outburst livening up the crowd and giving some viewers relief from the usual left wing rhetoric on this again contentious healthcare debate.

"I'd also add in the fact that, Pres. Obama used a speech to a joint session of Congress to accuse Chappaquiddickcare's opponents of lying hardly qualifies as decorus behavior. He chose the terms of the fight."

Don't forget attacking private businesses and the free market, condemning his critics in talk radio, and leveraging a dead man to make political points.

About the only thing he didn't speak out against was the Treaty of Versailles.

My take is that Mr. Wilson was simply engaging in boisterous debate. It was hardly indecorous, nor did he need to apologise for his actions.

I wish more Americans knew that in a number of other countries, the sitting leader appears before their legislative body to answer questions, not give a speech, but just to answer questions. And those sessions get rowdy, with accusations, name-calling and vehement shouting. In Britain the practice is known as "Questions to the Prime Minister" and is a half-hour weekly on Wednesdays. C-SPAN runs video of this every week, I believe. They do the same in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, India and Sweden. You all owe it to yourselves to catch "Questions to the Prime Minister" sometime on C-SPAN. It's loud, it's boisterous, it's political debate at it's grittiest and finest.

From my reading of history, this certainly isn't the first time that an elected representative has shouted at our president, and I hope it won't be the last.

Wow, up is down and down is up? Even when it is clear, simple and laid out in black and white, you wing nuts still don't get it. Just saying it is a lie does not make it so, even if Rush told you otherwise. I don't think you realize how ridiculous you look to anyone with the rationing ability above your average third grader.

We really need a conservative voice in today’s government. We are not getting that. If you feel you have to resort to making things up and denying simple truths to support your philosophy, what does that say about your belief in your own agenda? Does anyone have the ability to defend the right wing party ideals without making things up, lying, or ignoring blatantly obvious truths? Very Sad.

Posted by drumbum

2009-09-10 09:07:15

Shush, child. Adults are having a conversation.

People defending this idiot should also remeber that people where taken away by police from Bush speaches for doing nothing other than wearing a slogan on a T shirt under their coats.

"The tolerant folk on the left have made death threats against Joe Wilson.

Death threats for telling the truth. "

Completely and totally made up. You are lying. You are a liar that is lying defend someone for lying about someone else that was not lying in the first place.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 08:31:55

While all those points are true of his speech, I'd argue that the accusation of lying and the questioning of motives are what specifically justified Rep. Wilson's response. It's a matter of a direct affront, compared to taking a position.

Now, I'll make no pretense that I considered the entire calling of a joint session of Congress to make a political speech anything other than inappropriate. That's something that has historically been reserved for affairs of state, rather than politics.

I don't think you realize how ridiculous you look to anyone with the rationing ability above your average third grader.

Son, the next time you want to go to a site and insult people's intelligence, you might want to try picking up a dictionary. In Standard Written English, the phrase you're looking for is "reasoning ability".

Completely and totally made up. You are lying. You are a liar that is lying defend someone for lying about someone else that was not lying in the first place.

Posted by drumbum

2009-09-10 09:12:53

Look, I see the militant gays are out in force this morning. I'll go get the link from last night and destroy you shortly.

Don't fuck with Nixon.

Completely and totally made up. You are lying. You are a liar that is lying defend someone for lying about someone else that was not lying in the first place.

Hey, look it's Al Franken. Or at least a third rate wannabe.

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=15277

People talking about Rep. Wilson being killed.

Bow before Nixon, you leftist POS drumbum.

Completely and totally made up. You are lying. You are a liar that is lying defend someone for lying about someone else that was not lying in the first place.

2009-09-10 09:12:53

"Drumbum?" Facepalm.

Look, I see the militant gays are out in force this morning. I'll go get the link from last night and destroy you shortly.

And the best part is, you won't even break a sweat doing that. ;-)

To borrow a familiar phrase, you could do that with 3/4 of your brain tied behind your back just to make it fair.

Wow, classy guy.

I don't really mind it. It reminds me of other countries whose gov't gathering are much more feisty. It's not an outrage or deserve much hallybaloo.

But don't pretend that this somehow garner any really points in the debate. It was not only tremendously disrespectful to the President of the United States, but now opens the door for future outbursts from both parties.

Even in the midst of a more serious issue to me, going to war, the Dems (who don't always display the most class) didn't do something so weaselesque.

Mr. Hawkins says "to hell" with civility, but this wasn't even as trivial as common civility. It was an Joint Address & Wilson was out of order.

This does nothing to stop Obama's agenda. This, and an excellent speech, strengthens momentum.

Anyone know if the bill in any form would cover illegals?

Otherwise Joe Wilson is the liar.

http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/…
Clinton gave a similar speech in 1993 to try and prop up Hillarycare. But look at the differences. Clinton's speech is very positive and hopeful. He praises the American health care system as the best in the world. He lays out specific details and facts of his plan and how it will effect different people. He drops this whopper of a line that would make today's Democrats scream in terror: "Those that pay are picking up the tab for those who don't today. I don't think that's right."

Contrast that with Obama's speech. Accusations, confrontation, demands, demagoguery, absurd and transparent lies, attacks against his critics. Not to mention all the ridiculous mandates proposed by Obama that would cripple the private insurance industry. Hell, Clinton even seemed to know how insurance worked. Obama promises unicorns and pixie dust "without adding a single dime to the deficit". Right.

Obama is not Presidential. This pretender was never qualified to hold the office, and it's now glaringly obvious. When this speech doesn't move the polls, I expect Congress will prepare to ship him and his gang of thugs back to Chicago. They're not going to sacrifice their majority and their careers for a pretender.

President Bush did not have the nerve to attack the problem of healthcare over eight long years. Now I pay $14,200 a year for mediocre health care coverage. I am also a small business owner who cannot afford to hire until they reform health care.

A new president has the nerve and LEADERSHIP to try and tackle the problem. What do Republican'ts do? Call him a socialist, while they happily use their Medicare and Medicaid.

I suspect Rep. Wilson was making a (lately) typical cheap play for the hearts and minds of the far right. It certainly got him attention, didn't it? Too bad this issue is not about him. It should be about US.

Keep fighting health care reform, folks. And when your coverage by your employer gets cancelled because it costs too much, look in the mirror and cry.

Anyone know if the bill in any form would cover illegals?

Otherwise Joe Wilson is the liar.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 09:40:19

Well if obama continues to use the 46 million uninsured number, the illigals were counted when putting that togather. I havent heard him back off that even though its been shot to hell and back.

Mike, I don't know what you are talking about. There was no Pixie Dust here.

You can cop out and say its all a lie, but what Obama laid out could work very well.

You think he can't pull the 5-10 votes he needs to make it happen after this speech, and the ensuing head knocking that comes today to certain Dems?

It was an Joint Address & Wilson was out of order.

A joint address that was highly questionable to hold in the first place. As I've noted, Joint Addresses are usually reserved for affairs of state, rather than politics.

Posted by Diane

2009-09-10 09:44:26

Your going to be forced into even worse coverage provided by the govt. We see examples in the UK and canada. There are real and proven freemarket solutions for getting insurance costs down. All that the govt needs to do is get the fuck out of it and a little tort reform.

You can cop out and say its all a lie, but what Obama laid out could work very well.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 09:47:50

What part will lower costs, not raise taxes or debt, and not force all people(eventually)into govt care. Your so full of shit vega.

A joint address that was highly questionable to hold in the first place. As I've noted, Joint Addresses are usually reserved for affairs of state, rather than politics.

I don't know how could you separate "affairs of the state" from "affairs of politics", first of all.

Second of all, the President has the authority to call it. And he has the floor.

"You can cop out and say its all a lie, but what Obama laid out could work very well."

How, exactly? You'll recall Obama never bothered to explain that little detail.

Please. Enlighten us.

Anyone know if the bill in any form would cover illegals?

Otherwise Joe Wilson is the liar.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 09:40:19

Actually, it won't cover illegals, if anyone knows they are illegals. Since Government verification really doesn't work, yeah, illegals will be able to get into the system.

When we can verify everyone's status here in the US, something the left will never allow, illegal aliens will still be able to get benefits under this plan. Of course, Obama's plan does nothing to address the billions spent on ER care by hospitals treating illegals.

I don't know how could you separate "affairs of the state" from "affairs of politics", first of all.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 09:51:18

you cant see the differance between pushing socialized med on people and a state of the union.

The only word of truth I heard in the entire speech was when Rep. Joe Wilson stood up and told Obama "You lie!" Good for him. I think I might donate to his campaign.

"You think he can't pull the 5-10 votes he needs to make it happen after this speech, and the ensuing head knocking that comes today to certain Dems?"

What in the speech is going to change any minds? What do you think Rahm, Pelosi, and Reid have left to threaten the Blue Dogs with that they haven't already tried?

I'm posing the question seriously. What did Obama say that will swing votes or swing public opinion? Do you believe the bull that Dems are going to risk their seats and back an unpopular plan because Joe Wilson shouted?

What part will lower costs, not raise taxes or debt, and not force all people(eventually)into govt care. Your so full of shit vega.

A health insurance exchange.

drumbum, where did you run to bitch?

you cant see the differance between pushing socialized med on people and a state of the union.

This was not a State of the Union speech, that is something the President is required to do.

See? Joe Wilson just bought Cavalier's contribution. I would rather Wilson did his job and work for the betterment of the people of this country than grandstanding for his party.

"I would rather Wilson did his job and work for the betterment of the people of this country than grandstanding for his party."

He's doing an excellent job by trying to keep his constituients away from the hell of rationing, death panels, a sabotaged private insurance industry, and a fascist health care system administered in totality by the government.

Better to grandstand for freedom than silently march to your doom.

Having said that the healthcare bill will not cover illegal aliens, or fund abortions, or create "death panels" – Obama has just handed Republicans a blank check to write language into the bill to make those statements true. On those issues, the right wing just won by gaining the ability to clarify the legislative language and eliminate any ambiguity.

But having won on a few smaller issues, the right wing just lost on the big issue – whether the health care reform bill will pass at all. Obama's speech was not about pleasing Republicans or right wingers, it was about the moderates. If Obama's people can prove that the reform bill will not increase the deficit, he will get "blue dog" Democrats. If malpractice / tort reform gets in the bill, he gets a few moderate Republicans. If the "public option" is really as limited as he described, he keeps the liberals without losing the Senate Democrats who were uneasy. The changes to health insurance coverage will swing the great majority of voters over to supporting the bill. This was political manuevering at a high level, and it will probably work. Health care reform will pass.

There were two big losers. First, Joe Wilson. Even if he is sincere, he will be perceived as a loud mouthed jerk. With one comment, he destroyed his own abililty to influence anyone else in Congress. Sen. McConnell's reaction tells you everything you need to know about Rep. Wilson's non-future in Washington politics. Second, Sarah Palin. Obama was clearly aiming at her when he labelled the "death panel" issue a lie. She cannot prove him wrong. This will haunt her forever – it will proabably get used against her by Republican primary opponents in 2012. Bye, bye, Caribou Barbi.

I thought Wilson made himself look like a bit of an ass, but what I did think was really effective was when half the audience LOL'ed at Obama's claim that there are still "a few details that need to be ironed out". That was ultimately a much larger dismissal of the legitimacy of Obama's ideas than one guy losing control of his temper.

Second, Sarah Palin. Obama was clearly aiming at her when he labelled the "death panel" issue a lie. She cannot prove him wrong. This will haunt her forever – it will proabably get used against her by Republican primary opponents in 2012. Bye, bye, Caribou Barbi.

Posted by boatman47

2009-09-10 10:09:24

Incorrect Hogground. Can you explain why the White House is monitoring her Facebook page 24/7? And yes, there was language in the original pile of feces floated by Obama, confirmed by the NY Times (google it yourself, I have to go take a dump) that set up funded end of life counseling, involving non family members in the decision making process.

Thanks for playing.

Boy the libs are out in force today doing damage control. Obama's internals on the reaction to the speech must have been pretty horrific.

Caribou Barbi.

Posted by boatman47

2009-09-10 10:09:24

Nixon finds this sexist. Nixon feels your fear, my young padawan.

Incorrect Hogground. Can you explain why the White House is monitoring her Facebook page 24/7? And yes, there was language in the original pile of feces floated by Obama, confirmed by the NY Times (google it yourself, I have to go take a dump) that set up funded end of life counseling, involving non family members in the decision making process.

Thanks for playing.

Posted by Dick_Nixon

2009-09-10 10:13:42

Another lie from Nixon, please point out these non family member that are involved in the decision making process, who are they?

please point out these non family member that are involved in the decision making process, who are they?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:24:18

Please provide me the proof of David Duke supporting Bush in 2004.

ANd please crthns, make a list of the lies Nixon has uttered. Nixon won't hold his breath.

Wilson looked like an ass and he should have apologized. This is a joint session of Congress, that fact that so many conservatives think this is okay when the PRESIDENT of the United States is speaking shows their lack of class, but what do you expect from a party who's leaders are radio hacks. Shows how far the GOP has fallen, truly sad. In a time where we need conservative leaders, none are to be found, unfortunate, but when you play to peoples fears and lowest common denominator that is what you get.

Posted by Dick_Nixon

2009-09-10 10:25:23

So there is no non family member involved, thats what I thought, another lie from the right, you cant even defend your own propaganda, that fact is that end of life decisions will be made by the families, there are no death panels, there are no non family members involved, if there were you would be able to point those out.

If this werent so serious it would be funny. We have a dear leader that is trying to annex 1/6th of the US economy, legalize illegal mexicans, and push all citizens into crap socialized medicare. The plan he speaks of has had more holes shot in it than swiss cheese and yet the liberals here comeback from his lecture, that said nothing new, and claim it will work. Black is now white and up is now down.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:28:23

Um yes, there has to be a death panel. What else would you call a govt person or group of people that decide when to stop paying. There isnt an unlimited govt fund to pay for everybody with govt care you retard. Somebody with the govt checkbook in hand will have to make that decision. Your telling us that there is no amt of money the govt wont spend on you….so no need for a person to say the payments are stoping. Right.

They would have been up arms if a Dem would have done that to Bush when he was building support for the Iraq war.

We were already called traitors routinely.

SEC. 123. HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

(a) Establishment-

(1) IN GENERAL- There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.

SEC. 124. PROCESS FOR ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS; ADOPTION OF BENEFIT STANDARDS.

(a) Process for Adoption of Recommendations-

(1) REVIEW OF RECOMMENDED STANDARDS- Not later than 45 days after the date of receipt of benefit standards recommended under section 123 (including such standards as modified under paragraph (2)(B)), the Secretary shall review such standards and shall determine whether to propose adoption of such standards as a package.

There's your damn death panel. A government board empowered to dictate covered benefits for *any* insurance plan, subject to approval by the HHS Secretary.

This plan has never been about getting people insurance. It's about the government siezing absolute power over the health care of every American. This bill gives a government panel the authority to rewrite any insurance policy according to its own arbitrary standards. Irrefutible evidence of rationed care and death panels.

Here you go crthns, Nixon guesses he has to do all the work, since you never provide any proof for your arguments. Is it True that you are a sockpuppet of the same person behing fwankie/m77tha? Here is some language from Section 1233 of HR 3200:

Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual … or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility… or a hospice program." [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

And some other notes:

Additionally, Section 1401 establishes the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research. A similar center was established in the economic stimulus bill passed in February. The report issued by the House Appropriations Committee at that time explained what they hoped to accomplish with this “research.”:

“By knowing what works best and presenting this information more broadly to patients and healthcare professionals, those items, procedures and interventions that are most effective to prevent, control and treat health conditions will be utilized¸ while those that are found to be less effective and in some cases, more expensive, will no longer be prescribed. (Emphasis added).”

Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual … or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility… or a hospice program." [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

Section 1233 of HR 3200

August 11th, 2009 LimauAis Health

To hear backers of the government-run health care bill tell the story, pro-life advocates are making up wild-eyed claims about how the measure will push euthanasia. However, one leading bioethicist and a Washington Post Editorial Writer say the bill does give doctors financial incentive to push it.

At issue is Section 1233 of HR 3200, the government-run health care plan that the House will consider when it returns from its August recess.

The measure would pay physicians to give Medicare patients end-of-life counseling every five years or sooner if the patient has a terminal diagnosis.

While pro-life advocates say the section opens the door to physicians pushing euthanasia or withdrawal of lifesaving medical treatment, or even basic food and water, backers of the bill call the claims rubbish.

Charles Lane, an member of the editorial board of the liberal Washington Post newspaper, admits in a Saturday column that at least some of the concerns are well-founded.

“As I read it, Section 1233 is not totally innocuous,” Lane writes, adding that it “addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones.”

“Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren’t quite ‘purely voluntary,’” as backers of the bill assert, Lane adds. “To me, ‘purely voluntary’ means ‘not unless the patient requests one.’ Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive — money — to do so. Indeed, that’s an incentive to insist.

“Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit ‘formulation’ of a plug-pulling order right then and there,” Lane explains.

“What’s more, Section 1233 dictates, at some length, the content of the consultation,” Lane continues.

He points out the legislation says the doctor “shall” discuss “advanced care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to”; “an explanation of . . . living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses” even though those are legal and not medical papers. The physician “shall” present “a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families.”

“Admittedly, this script is vague and possibly unenforceable,” Lane writes. “What are “key questions”? Who belongs on ‘a list’ of helpful ‘resources?’ The Roman Catholic Church? Jack Kevorkian?”

Ultimately, the Post editorial writer says “Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party — the government — recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations.”

“You don’t have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach,” he concludes.

Bioethicist Frank Beckwith notes Lane’s analysis in comments of his own that appeared on the blog of the publication First Things.

“Supporters of H.R. 3200 claim that its end of life counseling provision, section 1233, is merely voluntary for the patient,” Beckwith explains.

“But a closer look shows that section 1233 includes conditions and financial incentives for physicians and other health care providers that create a setting in which an elderly patient’s decision to appropriate this option is likely to be less than voluntary,” he writes.

Beckwith says anyone with elderly parents should be “deeply concerned” about the section.

“If, let’s say, H.R. 3200 or something close to it were to become law and the public option pushes private insurance into near non-existence (as would surely happen with all the incentives in place), then there will no neighboring state to which to run,” he says. “You won’t be able to take your business elsewhere, since there will be no elsewhere.”

“And to whom will you issue your grievance, a special ‘health court,’” Beckwith asks.

Such a court, he says, would be “one likely informed by a youth-worshipping culture and a utilitarian bioethics philosophy that sees the elderly (not to mention, handicapped infants) as burdens that are siphoning away valuable resources that could be put to better use in support of society’s “real persons” and more productive contributors.”

Thanks to Punditandpundette.com and limauais.com for the synapsis.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 10:37:18

Mike,

Thats not a death panel sorry brother.

Posted by Dick_Nixon

2009-09-10 10:40:48

So to summarize you still havent found that non family member who is making end of life decisions for these people, thanks for admitting that you lied.

"Wilson looked like an ass and he should have apologized."

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:26:52

For the record, he did apologize, last night.

"This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the President's remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill. While I disagree with the President's statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility."-Joe Wilson

Thats not a death panel sorry brother.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:41:05

A panel that decides when to stop paying for your health care is not a death panel? What is it then?

We were already called traitors routinely.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 10:36:52

Those who were actively calling for the deaths of US soldiers were traitors.

I think Wilson calling Obama a liar was one of the two honest moments in that entire speech. The other was when Obama said he was hell bent to be the one to do the healthcare reform. The rest was half-truths, lies, and damned lies.

"Thats not a death panel sorry brother."

My apologies. Since we're exploiting the death of Ted Kennedy to push the plan I should have called it the "Ted Kennedy Memorial Death Panel and Happy Hour Club".

But as an Obama supporter you'd probably call an unelected panel with virtually unlimited power over life and death the "Leprechaun and Rainbow Unlimited Happiness Committee". Ministry of Love is a lot easier.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:28:23

Proof posted above, frankie/crthns

Um yes, there has to be a death panel. What else would you call a govt person or group of people that decide when to stop paying. There isnt an unlimited govt fund to pay for everybody with govt care you retard. Somebody with the govt checkbook in hand will have to make that decision. Your telling us that there is no amt of money the govt wont spend on you….so no need for a person to say the payments are stoping. Right.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 10:36:01

You mean versus the Insurance companies who decide what to pay or not pay based on their profit margin, pathetic that you think that is okay.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:43:56

Re-read this:

(1) IN GENERAL- There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 10:47:09

Does the Kennedy plan cover how to cover up drunk driving and murdering your mistress? Teddy was skilled at both.

But as an Obama supporter you'd probably call an unelected panel with virtually unlimited power over life and death the "Leprechaun and Rainbow Unlimited Happiness Committee". Ministry of Love is a lot easier.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 10:47:09

Mike,

What do you think insurance companies do now, they are an unelected body with virtually unlimited power over life and death right now, but you seem to be fine with that, what is the difference?

You mean versus the Insurance companies who decide what to pay or not pay based on their profit margin, pathetic that you think that is okay.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:47:32

So there is a death panel now. And no, your example is apples and oranges.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 10:47:44

Sounds like insurance companies right now, again what is the difference?

You mean versus the Insurance companies who decide what to pay or not pay based on their profit margin, pathetic that you think that is okay.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:47:32

If they are a private company their job is to make a profit. Apparently your education neglected to tell you that, fwankie/m88tha/crthns

And no, your example is apples and oranges.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 10:49:29

Really, enlighten us to the difference.

If they are a private company their job is to make a profit. Apparently your education neglected to tell you that, fwankie/m88tha/crthns

Posted by Dick_Nixon

2009-09-10 10:50:05

So that makes it okay that they deny expensive coverage because someone forgot to mention that they had a case of acne? Because they make a profit that means they can deny treatment for anyone they want to based on whatever they decide?

What do you think insurance companies do now, they are an unelected body with virtually unlimited power over life and death right now, but you seem to be fine with that, what is the difference?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:48:55

No. You sign a contract with the insurance company and by and large they always pay for what they are contractually bound to pay for. One or two examples of them not paying is not the status quo and explains why 80% of the those insured right now are just fine with their policy. You dont sign a contract with the US govt. They do as they please and will ration the care as needed. There isnt, again, unlimited money to pay for your care.

Really, enlighten us to the difference.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:50:36

You provide us with some proof, douchebag.

So that makes it okay that they deny expensive coverage because someone forgot to mention that they had a case of acne? Because they make a profit that means they can deny treatment for anyone they want to based on whatever they decide?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:51:53

Read the contract before you sign it and fill out the application. I know its hard not to lie. 85% of americans are insured and 80% of them are happy with it. And please stop using rare examples of instances when people were denied to justify your plan. Doesnt work.

So that makes it okay that they deny expensive coverage because someone forgot to mention that they had a case of acne? Because they make a profit that means they can deny treatment for anyone they want to based on whatever they decide?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:51:53

She also left out a pre existing heart condition. That is insurance fraud. Like mortgage fraud when you mis state your income or emplyment history. If a company violates it's contract, they are liable. If the person lies to enter the contract, that is fraud or mis representation of facts.

please, quit embarrassing yourself, frwankiem77thacrthns.

No. You sign a contract with the insurance company and by and large they always pay for what they are contractually bound to pay for

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 10:52:30

And when they dont people die, but yet the insurance companies are not held accountable for these despicable practices and you dont seem to want to hold them accountable.

And please stop using rare examples of instances when people were denied to justify your plan. Doesnt work.

But rare examples of people being denied by gov't health insurance is perfectly legitimate, right?

, but yet the insurance companies are not held accountable for these despicable practices and you dont seem to want to hold them accountable.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:55:00

10,000,000 lawyers in the US, courts filled with lawsuits, John Edwards is a multi millionaire. Yeah, no one holds insurace companies liable for breaking contract law.

Just stop the lies, please.

You mean versus the Insurance companies who decide what to pay or not pay based on their profit margin, pathetic that you think that is okay.

Obama would be proud of your lying skills crthns. I have a contract with my insurance company that clearly spells out what is and is not covered. If they deny me coverage of something in there that is covered they will be sued. I might die before it is settled, but I guarantee you that in the end the insurance companies will pay a lot more if they shafted me than they could have saved. If I ask for experimental treatment that is not covered and I do not get it then I have nothing to complain about.

In the case of government there will be no contract. The bureaucrat will make life & death decisions based on cost and when the collectivists are well entrenched, probably on ideological grounds too. Those that do not toe the line will be denied everything. That's a death panel if I ever heard of one.

And when they dont people die, but yet the insurance companies are not held accountable for these despicable practices and you dont seem to want to hold them accountable.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 10:55:00

Oh yes they are held accountable. You dont seem to have any idea how much they pay out to lawyers. Any why is it you seem to think the govt wont let people die? Look at the UK and the Canada fool. And again, the VERY small ratio of people that get truly fucked is so small it doesnt warrant scrapping the system. your just dumb as they get.

"You mean versus the Insurance companies who decide what to pay or not pay based on their profit margin, pathetic that you think that is okay."

Whoa, look at that deflection! Suddenly the conversation changes when you're confronted with the facts.

But if it's wrong when competing insurance companies do it, why do you think it should be consolidated into a single Ted Kennedy Memorial Death Panel and Happy Hour Club and given absolute power to make those decisions for every public and private entity offering insurance?

If anything you've provided a better argument against the plan.

Those who were actively calling for the deaths of US soldiers were traitors.

No, Nixon. People against the war were called traitors. Liberals were called traitors.

Don't attempt to diguise it by bringing up a handful of people.

Its a big reason why Obama is President now.

But rare examples of people being denied by gov't health insurance is perfectly legitimate, right?

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 10:58:27

Rare? haha

Lots more denied by crappy govt care in the countries they use it. You lose.

Boy the libs are out in force today doing damage control. Obama's internals on the reaction to the speech must have been pretty horrific.

As I posted on another thread: If you haven't yet seen it, this CNN poll crows about a "Double-digit post-speech jump for Obama plan."

http://shrinkurl.com/b5dc4

Scroll down to the very end to see "The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican." Ha! If they have to massage the numbers that badly, Obamacare is doomed!

Here is my favorite tidbit about the insurance companies:

Executives of three of the nation's largest health insurers told federal lawmakers in Washington on Tuesday that they would continue canceling medical coverage for some sick policyholders, despite withering criticism from Republican and Democratic members of Congress who decried the practice as unfair and abusive. [...]

An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.

It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for rescission and that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating the policies of customers with expensive illnesses.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/200...

But rare examples of people being denied by gov't health insurance is perfectly legitimate, right?

Rare? I got page after page:
http://tinyurl.com/29z92x

If anything you've provided a better argument against the plan.

No, Mike. It means that if there aren't death panels now, then there won't be under any public option.

Amazing that this thread, and the LiveBlog one, doesn't rely on line-by-line rebuttal points but on blabble, name-calling and general foot-stomping.

A kin to the stage props, er Republicans, last night. All they could do is sit there and sulk.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:00:16

Sorry brother the system is not working now, nor will it be sustainable in the future. You just seem to want to stick your head in the sand and pretend their is no problem, you are completly out of touch.

No, Nixon. People against the war were called traitors. Liberals were called traitors.

Link to where blanket statements were used. Nixon will counter with a link showing liberals calling for death of Geroge W Bush.

Executives of three of the nation's largest health insurers told federal lawmakers in Washington on Tuesday that they would continue canceling medical coverage for some sick policyholders, despite withering criticism from Republican and Democratic members of Congress who decried the practice as unfair and abusive.

Did you know that "the nation's largest health insurers" are all in bed with the Obamacare plan, since they would end up being the only private companies left in the country?

Amazing that this thread, and the LiveBlog one, doesn't rely on line-by-line rebuttal points but on blabble, name-calling and general foot-stomping.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 11:05:40

Vega,

Thats because they cant rebute if line by line, all they have left is name calling and fear mongering, look at the Repubs last night, they have nothing left to offer.

It means that if there aren't death panels now, then there won't be under any public option.

Oh, but there are death panels. Just ask Barbara Wilson. As I wrote on my blog:

The money quote (no pun intended) is from Dr. Som Saha, chairman of the commission that sets policy for the Oregon Health Plan: "If we invest thousands and thousands of dollars in one person's days to weeks … we are taking away those dollars from someone." Alright, so it's a death commission, not a death panel. Big difference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6ojBgTyA7I

So, it's OK to root for a guy who stood up and called Obama a liar (which I can't help but cheer for), but a parent refusing to allow their child to watch him speak (because he is a liar) is overreacting and worthy of chastisement?

Where is the disconnect?

Did you know that "the nation's largest health insurers" are all in bed with the Obamacare plan, since they would end up being the only private companies left in the country?

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-10 11:07:11

Cav,

I thought the public option would drive out private insurance companies?

Where is the disconnect?

Posted by Rhone

2009-09-10 11:10:13

Ask the conservatives, they seem to have it in spades.

Sorry brother the system is not working now, nor will it be sustainable in the future. You just seem to want to stick your head in the sand and pretend their is no problem, you are completly out of touch.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:06:08

Not working? B/C people complain about high costs and obama says it wont? News flash, it works just fine. A little costly, buy with cross state competition and tort reform it would go way down. There are 12 million that cannot pay for coverage. So cover them already. You dont need to socialize mine to do it. The best part of your little rant here is that the system you want to replace ours with has never worked in a country that uses it. Ever. Hell, even the CBO says it wont work here before we even try it. Too much money fool. Youve already conceded the death panel, so whats next?

I thought the public option would drive out private insurance companies?

That's the first good question I can ever remember you asking. Government health care would drive the price of private health care up so high that only the elites and very rich would be able to afford it. For 90% of us, the government "option" would be the only one we could afford.

Ask the conservatives, they seem to have it in spades.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:11:03

That is rich coming from the poster Vega made out to be a liar the other day. Too funny.

I thought the public option would drive out private insurance companies?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:10:15

Its called govt approved private coverage. They wouldnt be private companies anymore than GM or crystler still are. Do try and keep up.

Oh, but there are death panels. Just ask Barbara Wilson. As I wrote on my blog:

She is not only correct, but its something that has been common practice for insurance companies for years.

So if there are no death panels now, then there aren't under Obama's plan.

That's the first good question I can ever remember you asking. Government health care would drive the price of private health care up so high that only the elites and very rich would be able to afford it. For 90% of us, the government "option" would be the only one we could afford.

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-10 11:12:26

That is simply not true Cav, recently in British Columbia it was madated that part of your auto insurance had to be through a govt run program, many said that same thing then. It turned out that auto insurance prices dropped because the govt run program was able to compete with the private insurances. There is still private medical insurance you can buy in Canada, at a reasonable price.

Vega,

Thats because they cant rebute if line by line, all they have left is name calling and fear mongering, look at the Repubs last night, they have nothing left to offer.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:07:52

Weve gone line by line through the 1000 pages and shot it to shit. You didnt even know there was a death panel on page 17. But by all means, please post line by line what you want to debate. Not much left to do when the inmates run the asylum. They will get what they want.

Its called govt approved private coverage. They wouldnt be private companies anymore than GM or crystler still are. Do try and keep up.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:13:53

Sure sparky, sure. Again a wild claim with no basis in fact, this is all you have left.

I thought the public option would drive out private insurance companies?

Ms. Wagner lives in Oregon, where she is forced to rely on the Oregon state health plan. It was the state-run "death commission" which denied her medicine, but declared they would pay for suicide pills.

You didnt even know there was a death panel on page 17.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:16:29

Thats because their isnt one, why do you keep trying to make this claim?

"No, Mike. It means that if there aren't death panels now, then there won't be under any public option."

Oh silly me. And I though giving unlimited power to the government might have an effect on something. Apparently it's just going to mean everyone gets free pony rides and I can fly through the clouds collecting gold coins like Mario. If Obama wishes it, I could float off this floor like a soap bubble. Thanks for setting me straight vega.

So if there are no death panels now, then there aren't under Obama's plan.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 11:15:08

A contract with an insureance company is not a death panel.

This is:

(1) IN GENERAL- There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.

(1) REVIEW OF RECOMMENDED STANDARDS- Not later than 45 days after the date of receipt of benefit standards recommended under section 123 (including such standards as modified under paragraph (2)(B)), the Secretary shall review such standards and shall determine whether to propose adoption of such standards as a package.

Thats because their isnt one, why do you keep trying to make this claim?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:17:39

(1) IN GENERAL- There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.

(1) REVIEW OF RECOMMENDED STANDARDS- Not later than 45 days after the date of receipt of benefit standards recommended under section 123 (including such standards as modified under paragraph (2)(B)), the Secretary shall review such standards and shall determine whether to propose adoption of such standards as a package.

News flash, it works just fine.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:12:20

Like I said, you dont think there is a problem, continue to put your head in the sand, worked real well for conservative for the last three years.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:19:09

That is not a death panel.

There is still private medical insurance you can buy in Canada, at a reasonable price.

Canada is finally beginning to allow private health insurance companies to operate again, because their system is a failure. Canadians have to come to America to get decent and fast health care. The Canadian government realised it had to either a) make it illegal to get medical care outside the country, or b) allow private health insurance.

Whats up and vega are telling us that those words dont mean what they say. I guess i should just not bother to read the health care reform bill anymore, b/c it doesnt mean what it says.

"There is still private medical insurance you can buy in Canada, at a reasonable price."

For once you're right. Pay out of pocket for private insurance in addition to the hefty taxes the Canadian government takes and they'll be able to travel to the United States to get the care they need. Excellent assessment of the Canadian system.

You didnt even know there was a death panel on page 17.

Because there is isn't a death panel on page 17.

There's no point in showing vega and screw_up the facts, because they're just closing their eyes, sticking their fingers in their ears and chanting "La-la-la-la-Obama-protect-me-la-la-la…"

Like I said, you dont think there is a problem, continue to put your head in the sand, worked real well for conservative for the last three years.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:19:51

Haha…whats your congressional approval right now? And obama?

That is not a death panel.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:20:33

What is it then? It clearly states those are the people that decide on the coverage for people.

A contract with an insureance company is not a death panel.

I agree.

The contract would be the same under public health insurance.

"Because there is isn't a death panel on page 17."

Oceania is not at war with Eurasia. Oceania has never been at war with Eurasia. Quick, send it down the memory hole before someone else sees!

Guys, whats_up is the same poster as frankie/m88tha. He has a personal vendetta gainst Hawkins, and is just here to drive folks off. He hasn't violated any of John's rules yet to an extent to get banned. He has been proven both incorrect and a liar. Time to put him on the permanent ignore list. You will never win anything with him, even if you rub his nose in it. I dusted him earlier today, Vega kneecapped a few days ago.

Over and done with him and his same sex marriage self.

Because there is isn't a death panel on page 17.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 11:21:25

Sorry page 30.

(1) IN GENERAL- There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.

(1) REVIEW OF RECOMMENDED STANDARDS- Not later than 45 days after the date of receipt of benefit standards recommended under section 123 (including such standards as modified under paragraph (2)(B)), the Secretary shall review such standards and shall determine whether to propose adoption of such standards as a package.

because their system is a failure.

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-10 11:20:34

Actually its not, just ask Canadians.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/august/new_poll_shows_cana...

80% of Canadians are happy with their health care. The system in Canada works. In fact Americans cross the border all the time to get help in Canada, specifically for the prescription drugs.

I agree.

The contract would be the same under public health insurance.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 11:23:09

There isnt a legaly binding contract with the govt.

(1) IN GENERAL- There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.

(1) REVIEW OF RECOMMENDED STANDARDS- Not later than 45 days after the date of receipt of benefit standards recommended under section 123 (including such standards as modified under paragraph (2)(B)), the Secretary shall review such standards and shall determine whether to propose adoption of such standards as a package.

What is it then? It clearly states those are the people that decide on the coverage for people.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:22:56

It will be exactly like what private insurance companies do, you dont seem to have a problem with them deciding on coverage for people?

Let them throw money at his opponent. the more money they throw down a hole the less they have to support the other dim bulbs.

2010 is going to be a democrat bloodbath. Just make sure you wear your Personal Protective Equipment (gloves, mask, condom, etc.) before you wade into the river of blood, because you don't know where some of these slimeballs have been.

80% of Canadians are happy with their health care. The system in Canada works. In fact Americans cross the border all the time to get help in Canada, specifically for the prescription drugs.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:26:02

hahahaha…..they come here for care bub. You wait there. This isnt new stuff. And no, when rationing and waiting is needed to not lose as much money it doesnt work.

Whats_up, the difference is, if the insurance companies deny coverage, you can always sue them. If the government denies coverage, you're screwed.

It will be exactly like what private insurance companies do, you dont seem to have a problem with them deciding on coverage for people?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:27:29

They dont. You have a legaly binding contract for a policy you buy from an insurance company. You fill out your application, they approve or disaprove, your pay your premiums and you have insurance. They are legaly bound to offer what they agreed to cover you for. Obama is not legaly bound to offer your free care to you.

They dont.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:31:26

They certianly do, the testified before Congress that they do this, are you now calling those executives liars?

80% of Canadians are happy with their health care. The system in Canada works. In fact Americans cross the border all the time to get help in Canada, specifically for the prescription drugs.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:26:02

80% are happy there until they need imediate care…then they and the remaining 20% come here. We have more than 80% that are happy here.

There isnt a legaly binding contract with the govt.

Sure there is.

Whats_up, the difference is, if the insurance companies deny coverage, you can always sue them. If the government denies coverage, you're screwed.

No one can sue the gov't? Is that what you are saying?

Posted by Rorschach

2009-09-10 11:28:23

Oh look more predictions about elections, you should join CC.

They certianly do, the testified before Congress that they do this, are you now calling those executives liars?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:33:29

Im calling you a lier for using a very small percentage of instances to claim something much bigger. The numbers just dont back you up. Shame on you.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:35:23

Thank you for admitting that they do this, this is the problem that we are trying to solve, their is no accountabilty right now for the insurance companies that do this, in fact they encourage and reward their employees for doing this, to the tune of $300 million dollars over a five year period.

hahahaha…..they come here for care bub. You wait there. This isnt new stuff. And no, when rationing and waiting is needed to not lose as much money it doesnt work.

2009-09-10 11:28:50

Whats_fucked_up pulled those 'facts' from the same location where he claimed that slavery wasn't illegal….his ass.

"80% of Canadians are happy with their health care. The system in Canada works. In fact Americans cross the border all the time to get help in Canada, specifically for the prescription drugs."

You might want to tell the whole truth about that scenario – the reason they go to Canada to buy their prescription drugs is because the Pharma companies have regional pricing policies which cause them to charge the most for their products within the United States, less in Canada and Mexico, and variable amounts around the world. It has nothing to do with Health Canada or the Canadian government.

YOu also might want to include the fact that every border town with Canada has a steady influx of patients coming across the border for treatments which are not available to them in Canada, or for which they have to suffer inordinately long waiting times. Health Canada itself sends thousands of Canadians across the border at Detroit to get treatments which their system can't provide.

"80% of Canadians are happy with their health care."

Oh, a single telephone poll using a statistically unreliable sample size. Well *that* settles the argument…

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 11:35:53

King,

You dont like the direction that they country is headed you are certainly free to leave, I love America, we just need to fix the problems with affordable health care in this country, you dont seem to think there is even a problem.

Sure there is.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 11:34:08

post it.

Posted by martinhale

2009-09-10 11:37:59

So the pharma companies decide to screw those of us in the United States, gotcha. No doubt there are issues with the Canadian system, however it is not a failure, all health systems have their problems, that is what we are trying to address.

You dont like the direction that they country is headed you are certainly free to leave, I love America, we just need to fix the problems with affordable health care in this country, you dont seem to think there is even a problem.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:38:17

12 million people dont have coverage. 340 million do. That isnt a problem. I didnt know obama ran on socialized medicine? Oh, he didnt. Just another attempt to ramrod something through that people dont want, before they hear about it. What is that your only way to get things done?

all health systems have their problems, that is what we are trying to address.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 11:40:40

So going to one worse than ours is a way to fix something?

I don't know how could you separate "affairs of the state" from "affairs of politics", first of all.

Then, you're either being deliberately obtuse or you're not as bright as I've given you credit for. An affair of state, like the State of the Union or an address of war and peace is a matter that effects the nature of the state itself, regardless of policy. A political matter is simply an advocacy of a specific set of policies. While related, the two are clearly different.

Second of all, the President has the authority to call it. And he has the floor.

Yes, and the rules of procedure that "give him the floor" are traditions much like the traditions of Presidents reserving the full authority of the state for matters of statecraft and not the delivery of a political message. If Pres. Obama doesn't care to observe the latter tradition, it's not clear to me why his opponents need observe the former.

Posted by tblrk2006

2009-09-10 11:40:48

i know you dont think there is a problem, you have stated that many times. You are out of touch, every business in America is struggling with rising insurance costs, every one. Many Americans are reaching the point where they cant afford to pay for their own medical insurance due to the rising cost. My parents who are now retired pay close to $1200 a month just to pay for their premiums, they will be bankrupt within five years if nothing changes, and they were able to save a modest amount through their lifetime. This is an issue, but of course you dont think their is a problem.

You dont like the direction that they country is headed you are certainly free to leave,

I won't. In fact, I'll enjoy watching Obama lose his second term.

I love America,

You hate it, especially babies.

we just need to fix the problems with affordable health care in this country, you dont seem to think there is even a problem.

2009-09-10 11:38:17

You're the problem. Maybe when somebody puts a bullet to your head, we'll be all better for it. After all, since you're OK with premature babies dying, your death will mean that one extra person can have good health care.

Yes, and the rules of procedure that "give him the floor" are traditions much like the traditions of Presidents reserving the full authority of the state for matters of statecraft and not the delivery of a political message. If Pres. Obama doesn't care to observe the latter tradition, it's not clear to me why his opponents need observe the former.

Posted by Bill_Dalasio

2009-09-10 11:43:57

Please Bill, Reagan called a joint session to advocate for his tax cuts, Kennedy used it to advocate for his space programs. Dont act like this isnt done. Carter and Eisenhower both called joint session to talk about energy independence.

You're the problem. Maybe when somebody puts a bullet to your head, we'll be all better for it. After all, since you're OK with premature babies dying, your death will mean that one extra person can have good health care.

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 11:45:15

Ah yes the conservative debating tactic at its finest, so Christian of you King.

i know you dont think there is a problem,…

2009-09-10 11:44:03

I'd post in response but he is obviously lying. I'll be this parents are in a Medicaid-supported facility (if he didn't kill them already) while he has their money for disposable income.

That's all this boils down to….selfish reasons. The people he talks about are already covered. He knows this and lies to use them as pawns.

85% of US citizens insured are satisfied with their healthcare and insurance. Obama wants to ruin their's for the other 15%.

That is the bottom line.

Ah yes the conservative debating tactic at its finest, so Christian of you King.

2009-09-10 11:46:33

Which explains why you have been avoiding the topic. At least I'm not a liar.

every business in America is struggling with rising insurance costs, every one

Well, then, we should enact tort reform and allow health insurance firms to compete across state lines immediately, right?

"Many Americans are reaching the point where they cant afford to pay for their own medical insurance due to the rising cost."

Wrong. Many Americans are reaching the point where they can no longer afford to pay for their own medical care in addition to the tens of millions of freeloaders on the dole and those using the emergency room as their free primary care doctor.

Obama wants to put millions more on government subsidized plans and tax private insurance and the few people left in this country that hold a job to pay for it.

But "it won't cost a dime!" You must be exceedingly stupid to swallow this crap.

My parents who are now retired pay close to $1200 a month just to pay for their premiums, they will be bankrupt within five years if nothing changes

Ah-hah! Now I see why you want socialised medicine right away. You want your parents dead before they waste your meager inheritance.

Well, then, we should enact tort reform and allow health insurance firms to compete across state lines immediately, right?

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-10 11:49:08

Yes we should allow insurance firms to compete across state lines. I dont know how much tort reform will work but it is worth a try. Texas has enacted some of the toughest tort reform in the country but malpractice insurance has not gone down. However if it was done countrywide it might help. These are two very good proposals and should be included.

every business in America is struggling with rising insurance costs, every one

If costs are rising then transferring those costs to the American taxpayer will still rise. Taxpayers have to pay costs just like everyone else.

Why do you hate the children?

Yes we should allow insurance firms to compete across state lines. I dont know how much tort reform will work but it is worth a try.

Well I'll be damned, maybe there's hope for you yet.

Ah-hah! Now I see why you want socialised medicine right away. You want your parents dead before they waste your meager inheritance.

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-10 11:50:34

Cav,

What a sad life you must have, I love my parents, I want to reform the system so that they live longer, as it stands right now they will have nothing left.

Texas has enacted some of the toughest tort reform in the country but malpractice insurance has not gone down.

Really? As a Texas citizen, I know FOR A FACT that malpractice claims have gone down.

I'm done with this fuckwad.

If costs are rising then transferring those costs to the American taxpayer will still rise. Taxpayers have to pay costs just like everyone else.

Why do you hate the children?

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 11:51:46

Thats the whole point King, with a public option prices will drop helping all Americans out.

Really? As a Texas citizen, I know FOR A FACT that malpractice claims have gone down.

I'm done with this fuckwad.

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 11:53:08

No doubt claims have gone down, but the insurance premiums that doctors pay have not followed suit, why is that?

What a sad life you must have, I love my parents, money

I want to reform the system so that they live longer, as it stands right now they will have nothing left.

2009-09-10 11:52:35

Why? Is the Medicaid facility they're in right now currently bankrupt? Are they living in the decrepit conditions that other Medicaid patients are forced to live simply so you can have their money?

No doubt claims have gone down, but the insurance premiums that doctors pay have not followed suit, why is that?

2009-09-10 11:54:09

Yes they have. Ask my sister, the internist who lives in north Texas. I've mentioned this before on this site. Her premiums have gone down.

That is not a death panel.

It must be fun in Whats_up's world. Whenever anybody says anything he just pops up and goes "Nuh uh!" And evidently this counts as an argument.

That is not a death panel.

Nah, the baby who died (see other thread) died as a result of a LIFE panel. (rolls eyes)

I love my parents, I want to reform the system so that they live longer

If you care about your parents, you don't want a system under which they will be denied care because they're not worth the cost of saving. If you care about your children (whether you have or intend to have any), you don't want a system under which they will be taxed into the ground to pay for the huge debts that will be incurred by granting "free" health care to all comers. And if you care about yorself, you don't want a system under which you will have no choices; a system under which the government will decide what care you get, when you get it, and when it will end. So who the hell do you care about — certainly not your parents, choildren or yourself, if you advocate for this socialised medicine abomination.

"No doubt claims have gone down, but the insurance premiums that doctors pay have not followed suit, why is that?"

LIAR!!!!
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2004/rpt/2004-r-0918.htm
From the article: Medical malpractice liability limits became effective in Texas on September 1, 2003 and were part of a comprehensive tort law overhaul. Since that time, there have been 15 new entrants to the medical malpractice insurance market, general rate stabilization, a 5% increase in the number of physicians overall, and increases in key physician specialties, according to the Texas Department of Insurance.

You're a baldfaced liar whats_up, just like Obama. Go to hell.

Bravo what's up.

Shut the hell up, sock puppet. When the Libs start egging themselves on under false names, you know they ran out of talking points.

Posted by snohomish

2009-09-10 12:00:05

Really, w_up. When you're going to praise yourself, at least put a little effort into it.

HINT: Anybody can change ID's but its harder to change your writing style.

Really, w_up. When you're going to praise yourself, at least put a little effort into it.

Bravo, Kingfisher! You really whacked whats_up's ass that time. No wonder he's such a coward and has to create a new ID just to pretend he's correct.

It is obvious that whats_up is a trial lawyer who wants to make money off of the American people!

Keep kicking his ass.

Keep kicking his ass.

2009-09-10 12:07:26

Why, thank you I_A_N_K. We all obviously know that you're not a sockpuppet! Nobody would ever be THAT stupid to try that out!

(Rolls eyes)

Try again, w_u.

Yes, and the rules of procedure that "give him the floor" are traditions much like the traditions of Presidents reserving the full authority of the state for matters of statecraft and not the delivery of a political message. If Pres. Obama doesn't care to observe the latter tradition, it's not clear to me why his opponents need observe the former.

WU actually made some good points on this one, but I'll go further.

a) The state of healthcare in this country is trending towards a matter of national security. Even if you take the standard conservative position, it promises to break this country. We wouldn't have money to spend on anything else including defense. So this speech was a matter of state affairs.

b) State Affairs are the same as Political Affairs depending on other issues as well, including the Iraq War. Which was a matter of state, but also politics.

c) The POTUS can call a Joint Session anytime he/she feels its a matter of national importance. There is no litmus test.

d) The POTUS has the floor. Period. Not just when its something most pols agree on. Not just he is referring to war & peace. He has the floor according to common courtesy and Robert's Rules of Order.

It was not only tremendously disrespectful to the President of the United States, but now opens the door for future outbursts from both parties.

As usual Vega, you have it 180 degrees wrong. It was the democrats who opened the door for this with their pathological deranged disrespect for George Bush.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10…

I'll worry about Joe Wilson apologizing as soon as Pelosi, Clinton, Ried and the bunch apologize for that.

RWNReader,

Don't bother. Vega and w_u were high that night and "conveniently" forgot about that speech.

I wonder when Pelosi will apologize to the American people, claiming that they were carrying swastikas.

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/pelosi_limbaush_swast...

Trouble is, the wrongly accused claimant can sometimes be issued as to what amounts to a death sentence because their cancer waits for no one while the insurance company puts the claimant through a time consuming apppeals process or the case has to go to trial court.

2009-09-10 12:21:25

Which happens in societies all around the world with socialized medicine. Funny how long waits are acceptable when the government runs it, huh w_u?

Epic fail.

I think everyone is failing to understand Obama's secret agenda here. Most of those illegal immigrants still have citizenship and voting rights in Mexico. If we start treating them nice by giving them health care and amnesty and houses on the beach, they'll do us a favor by voting for the voluntary annexation of Mexico into the United States. And then BAM! We have 31 new states and access to Mexico's numerous natural resources. Sweet.

"The POTUS has the floor. Period."

So the Democrats were out of order when they lept to their feet and fanatically applauded every time Obama said the word "government"?

Or are you arguing as usual that restrictions on political speech only apply to those critical of Obama, while his supporters can say whatever they want?

I know healthcare has issues. But if the choice is between the problems we have now and what we will get if we let demcorats take this over, I pick what we have now to exlusion.

I just sent Mr. Wilson $75 and was proud to do it. I live in MA, which is a political wasteland, so I find myself supporting candidates in other states alot. However, we may have a really good candidate in the special election for the seat vacated by Sen. Chappaquidick. There are inklings that Andy Card will run for the seat and he needs our support, too.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 12:00:39

Interesting Mike, perhaps you should research a little more.
http://www.bacala.net/news1.html

Even more telling than that article though is that malpractice reform was supposed to lower health costs, it hasnt in Texas.

Posted by snohomish

2009-09-10 12:21:25

Which happens in societies all around the world with socialized medicine. Funny how long waits are acceptable when the government runs it, huh w_u?

Epic fail.

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 12:26:35

King,

I didnt write that, you really need to get some help man, you cant figure out who is who anymore, not a good sign, but go ahead wish death on me again, classy move from a good Christian man /sarc.

I didnt write that, you really need to get some help man,

You implied this. Close enough.

you cant figure out who is who anymore, not a good sign, but go ahead wish death on me again, classy move from a good Christian man /sarc.

OK, I will. Fuck off and die just like you want with that child.

So you are saying that the failings of health care systems in other countries justifies American private health care insurance companies wrongly accussing claimants of fruad and thus standing by while such claimants' illnesses take a greater toll on their lives. Two wrongs make a right. NOT!

2009-09-10 12:40:10

You didn't answer my question. Get off your soapbox and try again.

Newt Gingrich correctly pointed that private health insurance companies have higher administrative costs than government plans such as Medicare because the privates spend more money trying to root out fraud.

Well, you do have a point there. The government would never waste money trying to root out fraud. Too many politicians would be up to their asses in it.

classy move from a good Christian man

I have to wonder why you Liberals keep dragging religion into the debate. I thought you were all about the separation of Church and State. Stinking hypocrites.

So you are saying that the failings of health care systems in other countries…

2009-09-10 12:40:10

Interesting how you admitted that the health care of other countries have failed. And yet, you want that same failing system implemented here.

How's Medicaid doing so far and how many of our decedents will have to pay for your stupidity?

Radar detectors – "this product should not be used to detect police radar"

Water skiing vests – "this product should not be used as a flotation device."

Obamacare – "this plan will not cover illegal aliens"

I have to wonder why you Liberals keep dragging religion into the debate. I thought you were all about the separation of Church and State. Stinking hypocrites.

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-10 12:54:21

Cav,

Please would a good christian wish death upon someone, this has nothing to do with seperation of church and state. We have multiple preachers actually preaching for the death of the President of the United States and then we have supposedly good christians wishing death upon others because they dont agree with them politically, this is what Christianity has come to?

"Interesting Mike, perhaps you should research a little more."

Uh, perhaps you should notice that my article cites several examples of rate reductions and a general stabilization of rates statewide (in addition to more providers and more doctors and specialists practicing in the state), while yours cites one lone increase.

But we already know you're against providing actual health care, and are just interested in consolidating as much power as possible in the hands of the government while the Democrats are in charge. Who cares if tort reform works? The Great and Powerful Obama Who Sees All and Knows All does not approve, so it must be evil and discredited. Right?

Please would a good christian wish death upon someone

Keep religion out of the health care debate, please. Thanks.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 12:58:21

Does tort reform work Mike? The argument in Texas was that if tort reform was inacted it would lower health costs, has it?

I thought you were all about the separation of Church and State. Stinking hypocrites.

2009-09-10 12:54:21

I don't think Jesus would have allowed that baby to die which is why whats_up is full of shit.

Does tort reform work Mike? The argument in Texas was that if tort reform was inacted it would lower health costs, has it?

2009-09-10 12:59:13

I already told you it did. Where's your evidence?

I don't think Jesus would have allowed that baby to die which is why whats_up is full of shit.

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 13:00:42

Ill refer you to Cav's post:

Keep religion out of the health care debate, please. Thanks.

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-10 12:59:12

I already told you it did. Where's your evidence?

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 13:01:19

Really so health care costs in Texas have gone down? Really that is the argument that you are going to make?

We have multiple preachers actually preaching for the death of the President of the United States…

Posted by whats_up 2009-09-10 12:58:20

When you were challenged on this lie before, you were able to produce ONLY ONE preacher that had done that, then lyingly claimed you said there was only one. Now you are back to MULTIPLE.

More lies from the Liar!

Please would a good christian wish death upon someone, this has nothing to do with seperation of church and state. We have multiple preachers actually preaching for the death of the President of the United States and then we have supposedly good christians wishing death upon others because they dont agree with them politically, this is what Christianity has come to?

2009-09-10 12:58:20

You're not dead yet?

Really so health care costs in Texas have gone down? Really that is the argument that you are going to make?

2009-09-10 13:02:06

I'll be happy to provide evidence proving this after you provide evidence to support your arguments.

(Crickets chirping)

Keep religion out of the health care debate, please. Thanks.

2009-09-10 13:01:29

And I'll use this reference:

Please would a good christian wish death upon someone,

2009-09-10 12:58:20

You wished for that baby to die.

I'll be happy to provide evidence proving this after you provide evidence to support your arguments.

(Crickets chirping)

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 13:03:40

Here King, this is an article on how health care costs continue to rise in Texas.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnew...

Republicans: Stop basing your arguments on lies about the Canadian and UK systems:

A 2009 Harris/Decima poll found 82% of Canadians preferred their healthcare system to the one in the United States, more than ten times as many as the 8% stating a preference for a US-style health care system for Canada, while a Strategic Counsel survey in 2008 found 91% of Canadians preferring their healthcare system to that of the U.S.. In the same poll, when asked “overall the Canadian health care system was performing very well, fairly well, not very well or not at all?” 70% of Canadians rated their system as working either "well" or "very well".

I have Americans friends who now live in the UK and Canada, they all say the health care system works fine and they are happy with it.

here is another arctile King, same thing health care costs continue to rise.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/...

Economics 101 question for liberals:

It costs Acme Inc. $8 to purchase material for a widget, which it then sells for $10, creating a $2 profit. Acme Inc. hires a team of burecrats to renegotiate his supply contract and he now pays $9.99 for the same materials.

Acme's CEO should:

(a) Give those burecrats a raise for lowering his overhead burden from 20% to 0.01%!

(b) Report himself to flag@whitehouse.gov for being a capitalist pig enemy of the people.

(c) I like fuzzy math.

here is another arctile King, same thing health care costs continue to rise.

2009-09-10 13:10:06

Didn't see the word 'malpractice' in the article you provided, whats_up. What exactly are you trying to prove?

Texas has enacted some of the toughest tort reform in the country but malpractice insurance has not gone down.

2009-09-10 11:51:25

Posted by TheBaud

2009-09-10 13:02:10

Really Baud, you should keep up on things, both Steven Anderson a preacher in Arizona and Wiley Drake a preacher in California have preached for the death of Obama. Have you denounced this yet?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 12:59:13

So you disagree with the President on tort reform?

Here's another question: I presume that you believe a single-payer system would be preferable to the current system, as well as the plan on the table now. Does the President agree with you? Yes or no.

"Does tort reform work Mike? The argument in Texas was that if tort reform was inacted it would lower health costs, has it?"

I can't find statistics on final cost, but it has stabilized malpractice insurance rates, increased competition, and increased the number of practicing doctors in the state. Costs are almost undoubtedly lower than they would have been without the reforms.

Are you opposed to any of those things? Why are you pushing for a total government overhaul and takeover of the entire industry…except for this one area in which we have proof that it works?

Really Baud, you should keep up on things, both Steven Anderson a preacher in Arizona and Wiley Drake a preacher in California have preached for the death of Obama. Have you denounced this yet?

2009-09-10 13:13:32

I've never heard of either, and you have yet to provide proof. The last time you said MULTIPLE preachers, you posted one and claimed that's all there were.

So were you lying then, lying now, or (MOST LIKELY) lying both times!

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 12:59:13

So you disagree with the President on tort reform?

Posted by RWNReader2

2009-09-10 13:14:07

No I still think he should be looked at, but lets not pretend that it is the silver bullet that will lower health care costs. As Texas has shown, they have some of the most restrective tort refrom in the country and health care costs still continue to rise, so while it is part of the problem obviously it is not the entire problem.

Are you opposed to any of those things?

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 13:16:08

If those savings had been passed on to the consumer no problem, it doesnt look like they have though. Tort reform is still part of the package, but other things need to be looked at as well.

I've never heard of either, and you have yet to provide proof. The last time you said MULTIPLE preachers, you posted one and claimed that's all there were.

So were you lying then, lying now, or (MOST LIKELY) lying both times!

Posted by TheBaud

2009-09-10 13:16:20

So if you never heard of them it didnt happen, your ignorance is oustounding Baud.

blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/a-clockwork-orange/rev-wiley-drake-prays-for-obam/

Baud here is the link to Steven Anderson:

redblueamerica.com/blog/2009-08-31/arizona-preacher-is-openly-asking-his-congregation-to-pray-for-obamas-death-5763

"here is another arctile King, same thing health care costs continue to rise."

Yeah, citing a study conducted by a hardcore liberal lobbying group (Families USA) advocating for a single-payer system.

All you guys are gonna get is a little tort. And that's it.

Posted by Diane

2009-09-10 13:10:05

Be careful Diane, they will start to call you names and claim that you are lying.

So if you never heard of them it didnt happen, your ignorance is oustounding Baud.

2009-09-10 13:18:47

I didn't say it never happened. I said you lied about it once and are most likely lying again. Do you truly expect to be taken at your word with the huge number of times you've been caught lying here?

I didn't say it never happened. I said you lied about it once and are most likely lying again.

Posted by TheBaud

2009-09-10 13:22:25

did you not follow the links, were they too complicated for you? What part of the story was confusing?

Yeah, citing a study conducted by a hardcore liberal lobbying group (Families USA) advocating for a single-payer system.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 13:20:00

So are health care cost then going down Mike? You may not like the group but can you offer any proof that health care costs have dropped?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 13:23:50

I did go to both links, TO BLOGS. Opinion pieces.

Nice try, whats_up. At least you made the effort this time.

"If those savings had been passed on to the consumer no problem, it doesnt look like they have though."

You have zero evidence of that. The plain fact is that tort reform demonstrably improved the health care situtaion in Texas. It didn't solve every problem, nor has anyone ever claimed it would.

But because it's a conservative idea that hurts the one of the Democrat's biggest donor groups (trial lawyers) and weakens the power of government over businesses and individuals, you denounce it. You keep demonstrating that liberals value the power of government and the wealth of Democrat donors over actually improving health care.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 13:13:32

Who Never heard of them, and never saw their sermons. If that it what they really called/prayed for it is terribly un-christian, and deserves condemnation and derision.

But with literally 10s or even 100s of thousands preachers/priests in this country, saying that we should have heard of them and heard their words is pretty stupid.

I did go to both links, TO BLOGS. Opinion pieces.

Nice try, whats_up. At least you made the effort this time.

Posted by TheBaud

2009-09-10 13:25:56

Really Baud, so are you saying neither of these events took place, and since when are blogs not usuable?

Posted by bthewolf

2009-09-10 13:27:32

Wolf,

At least you codemn them, Baud doesnt even think they took place.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-10 13:26:23

Mike,

Once again I agree tort reform should take place, I have stated that three or four times now, along with other reforms. At least you can admit that there are other factors that need to be looked at too.

All you guys are gonna get is a little tort. And that's it.

Here's a puzzle. Is Vega's implication that Republicans are going to get assaulted, beaten and/or sued a descent, or, given his pathological cowardice and vehement idiocy, an improvement?

It's almost as difficult to contemplate as wondering how he gives Obama blowjobws with his head up his ass. (Obama or his own? Yes.)

Baud doesnt even think they took place.

2009-09-10 13:40:23

Except I never said that, I was just waiting for you to prove it, and you even failed at that.

Tell me, whats_up. What did you ever condemn Rev Wright and Obama for their unChristian behaviour?

Except I never said that, I was just waiting for you to prove it, and you even failed at that.

Posted by TheBaud

2009-09-10 13:48:53

Sure sparky. Where did I fell to prove it, did they take place, the answer is yes, did I prove that they took place, yes, have you denounced them yet, no. Thanks for playing.

have you denounced them yet, no. Thanks for playing.

2009-09-10 13:56:05

Typical whats_up. You accuse your opponents of being hypocrits while you are being a hypocrite. Now you want me to denounce preachers I have never heard of without you denouncing Wright.

Easy to see why you are such a miserable little shit, whats_up.

And for full disclosure, praying for Obama's death is wrong. It is playing God. And I don't want him dead, I want him defeated and humiliated and run out of politics.

Here's a puzzle. Is Vega's implication that Republicans are going to get assaulted, beaten and/or sued a descent, or, given his pathological cowardice and vehement idiocy, an improvement?

You are a lying, drive-by flaming piece of shit who barely deserves my routine smackdowns.

And StanW would say "Piss off & Die!"

But because it's a conservative idea that hurts the one of the Democrat's biggest donor groups (trial lawyers) and weakens the power of government over businesses and individuals, you denounce it.

I'm all for tort reform and interstate insurance buying, Mike.

Can you say you are for anything else Obama laid out last night?

I'm all for tort reform and interstate insurance buying, Mike.

Can you say you are for anything else Obama laid out last night?

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 14:11:37

Just like you manage to support the troops and not the war.

Can you say you are for anything else Obama laid out last night?

Why would I? Health insurance is the mess it is today because of government, and the collectivists in government in particular. What the left never brings up is that insurance companies are not allowed to break the law. Only democrat politicians – elites like Rangel, Pelosi, Reid, and so on – can do so it seems. Everything insurance companies do today is predicated on something a politician forced them to do. Everything. Period. All these people pissed with something insurance companies do, need to be pissed at the politicians that allowed them to do so. Obama’s secret deals with the industry are more of the same old tricks that got us where we are today.

Insurance costs are high because politicians have forced insurance providers to include all manner of ridiculous and ridiculously expensive procedures by default. From sex change operations to drugs to cover AIDS – a disease that with a few exceptions is contracted by making bad choices (drugs and sex wise) – and other such medical conditions, all are forced as standards by politicians that claim to be doing good (guess which party that is?). We all end up paying for these things, even if we never, ever will have them. That’s what has driven the cost of healthcare up, and done so the most, and most drastically. If you tack more and more things that have to be given as part of the basic/standard package, the premiums will go up. And the more complex and expensive that these treatments, procedures, or drugs that are added every year are, the quicker and more drastic the jump in premiums. Idiots seem unable to comprehend that when politicians pass bills that makes insurance companies pay for something new and expensive, the fact is that the people buying the insurance end up paying for it. Economics 101. That’s facts and logic: things that illicit the same reaction from liberals as garlic and holy symbols do from vampires.

The lefty idiots seem to be under the misguided illusion that handing healthcare to government will suddenly make that go away. It can only be the case when government drastically limits what is covered and what new and experimental procedures will be allowed. To a degree that far, far surpasses that of the insurance companies. After all, unlike the insurance companies that have to follow the rules, government controls the rules. Knowing this basic stuff, why anyone would think handing healthcare over to government is anything but a recipe for disaster, baffles me.

The other thing that has drastically increased costs is the legal mandate (sorry libs not two guys going out) that everyone gets treatment at the ER. Insurance or not. While this is all noble and stuff, it has also made it possible for many people to simply skip health insurance purchase. Even worse, billions are spent on illegal citizens. When someone points any of this out the left goes nuts and calls them evil. You can’t have it both ways. The real world has consequences.

I should also point out that I firmly believe that the collectivist politicians have purposefully pursued an agenda to undermine healthcare insurance in toto, so they could foist socialized medicine on us. The big lie in this debate is that government will somehow fix what it broke, often intentionally, in the first place. Only an insane bastard or a collectivist would push for a government takeover – and have no doubt that’s the end goal no matter how often these collectivists swear otherwise – when government is the problem. And anyone that denies government is not the problem to begin with, is either woefully misinformed, or coming to this argument with another agenda than fixing healthcare. And that's indisputable.

"At least you can admit that there are other factors that need to be looked at too."

I've posted a five point plan multiple times here that would have an immediate impact and literally not cost the government a dime in new spending:

1. Tort reform to cap punitive damages from malpractice.

2. Allow insurance companies to compete across state lines.

3. Remove government insurance policy mandates that force people to pay for coverage they don't need.

4. Ban all non-emergency care for illegals. Deport people with chronic problems to their home country.

5. Make individual health insurance premiums tax-deductible

That still leaves the problem of what to do with Medicare, but it would immediately take a huge burden off the industry, increase consumer freedom, and increase competition.

I am for all that, Mike.

Is there anything that Obama proposed that you support, though?

"Is there anything that Obama proposed that you support, though?"

If he really intends to offer a national insurance exchange where companies can compete across state lines, I'd be for that.

I'm also for tax credits for individual and small business policies.

I support an independent commission to root out waste and fraud in Medicare.

As for the rest of his socialist nonsense, forget it.

Thank you, Mike. I think that's a good start.

80% of Canadians are happy with their health care.
Bullshit.
The system in Canada works.
Then move there. You have no problem allowing innocent babies to die. Maybe the same thing will happen to you.

The only pols talking about gov't-run healthcare are the Republicans.

2009-09-10 15:17:24

No, they are all talking about Government Run Health Care.

Only the Democrats are lying by calling it something else.

Really, enlighten us to the difference.

Insurance companies are legally bound by contracts. As the Obama administration has made abundantly clear in the case of the auto bailouts, the government isn’t.

and to hell with the hand wringing over whether we’re going to lose some kind of moral authority if we’re only three times better, fairer, and more moral people than the Democrats rather than four times better.

I agree. The left always thinks they're morally superior so it doesn't matter what you do, they'll always think they're better.

I agree. The left always thinks they're morally superior so it doesn't matter what you do, they'll always think they're better.

Posted by Kingfisher

2009-09-10 16:05:25

And you conservatives are any different, please, pot meet kettle.

I agree. The left always thinks they're morally superior so it doesn't matter what you do, they'll always think they're better.

And you conservatives are any different, please, pot meet kettle.

The difference is we are the majority.

The difference is we are the majority.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 16:11:09

Well thats true for now no doubt about it.

The difference is we are the majority.

2009-09-10 16:11:09

Then stop whining about what the Republicans are doing, D-Vega.

You are in the majority, then pass you damn health care bill and be done with it.

You are in the majority, then pass you damn health care bill and be done with it.

Posted by TheBaud

2009-09-10 16:15:32

Oh we will dont worry, but it is fun to show how childish conservatives have become. The party of Reagan that used to have statesman and thoughtful thinkers has degenerated into a laughingstock run by radio hacks, too bad really as our country does need responsible leadership, not cat calling and fear mongering.

And you conservatives are any different, please, pot meet kettle.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-10 16:08:23

Yup I don't think I'm morally superior, I do question the morals of others, but that not's the same as claiming I'm superior. But then you knew that, you just had to try to lay moral equivalance on the argument to make yourself look better.

not cat calling and fear mongering.

2009-09-10 16:28:55

You must mean the threats from Obama, or Pelosi calling anyone who disagrees with her a Nazi. Your side has done nothing to further this debate except demand everyone do things their way, and whine that the Republicans won't sign on to it.

Too bad, so sad. You want this American-destroying monstrosity, then stand up and vote for it. If every Republican in office voted against this, IT WOULD STILL PASS. So why not just do it?

It is because the Democrats know what this bill will do to healthcare and the economy, and they want to be able to blame the Republicans for it.

The difference is we are the majority.

2009-09-10 16:11:09

DUH! No shit, Sherlock. It took you this long to figure out?

Then explain why your pussies in Congress cannot pass a health care bill by themselves. You have the votes, you don't need the support of Republicans. Or do I need to give you a lesson in how bills are passed through Congress?

It will be easier for the American people to decide who to support in 2010 and 2012.

You are in the majority, then pass you damn health care bill and be done with it.

Then explain why your pussies in Congress cannot pass a health care bill by themselves. You have the votes, you don't need the support of Republicans.

Soon

(in the Mel Gibson voice from The Patriot)

(in the Mel Gibson voice from The Patriot)

2009-09-10 16:54:23

Ignoring my question again, Vega?

I didn't ignore it, King. I said "soon".

Because either it will happen, or fall face flat.

I'm not arguing that the Dems' pussiness is a not problem.

It is a problem, and that's what this speech was about. Not about Wilson. Not about Republicans. But about Dems.

And Seniors.

If Obama can't convince those two groups, then its over.

The Republicans are irrelevant at this point, because no matter what the plan is, their goal is about defeating Obama not about healthcare. Obama can possibly pick up a few Reps, but they are not important.

The difference is we are the majority.

Just can't stop the lies, not even those as easily disproved as that…

"Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal."
http://tinyurl.com/loaftf

Yes, Cav. I would describe myself to a pollster as "moderate".

How would you describe yourself?

And what was that line that you all used constantly during the Bush years?

Oh, yes. The only poll that matters is an election. And according to elections in the House, Senate, Governors and President, the majority of this country is center-left. Even the poll you cite counts the moderates & liberals together at 46% vs. 40% conservative.

Seems also the Joe Wilson's Dem opponent just raised $500,000 in just 24 hrs.

Go Joe Wilson!

The lefty idiots seem to be under the misguided illusion that handing healthcare to government will suddenly make that go away.

The only pols talking about gov’t-run healthcare are the Republicans.

Seems also the Joe Wilson's Dem opponent just raised $500,000 in just 24 hrs.

All politics, all the time. The president lies, openly, repeatedly, and you don't care – so long as there's a chance that a guy who dared call a spade by its name runs a risks of losing an election.

When I say that there is no way to implement liberalism but the utter destruction of humanity, this is the kind of sickening behavior that proves my point beyond a shadow of a doubt.

What disgusting, little, petty people liberals are, to the last.

[...] John Hawkins: “To hell with civility, to hell with politeness, and to hell with the hand wringing over whether we’re going to lose some kind of moral authority if we’re only three times better, fairer, and more moral people than the Democrats rather than four times better.” [...]

The only pols talking about gov't-run healthcare are the Republicans.

The demcorats can't because it would then kill their takeover, Vega. You go to the crthns school of logic recently? Cause you came off real stupid there.

Seems also the Joe Wilson's Dem opponent just raised $500,000 in just 24 hrs.

Was that from Soros or Moveon.org? My guess is there is some irregularity here but nobody will say so. Me, I sent money to Wilson. First time I have given to anyone in 3 years. Wonder if the media will report how much money Wilson gets. if they don't you can bet it is a higher number.

<blockquote cite="24">

And that's why it will come down to a physical confrontation because the Left won't stop until it is forced to.

Oh, and for all the people saying Wilson was out of line, I still haven't heard a single one of you condemning what was done to President Bush back in 2005 by not just one but "MULTIPLE" (to borrow a phrase from w_u) Democrats.

To even begin to be remotely fair, the first thing out of the mouths of the defend-at-all-costs Leftists here should be, "Yeah, Wilson shouldn't have said that, but man…that's nothing like the 'boos' GW Bush got so I don't think our side has much credibility getting in high dudgeon over this"–but that would take integrity.

The Republicans are irrelevant at this point, because no matter what the plan is, their goal is about defeating Obama not about healthcare. Obama can possibly pick up a few Reps, but they are not important.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-09-10 17:19:00

Then explain why chimpy mcfascist has not gotten his bill passed yet if they are not relevant. The answer? IF even one Republican in the house and senate vote for it, Chimpy can claim it as bi partisan.

The only poll that matters is an election.

Oh, I can hardly wait for the 2010 "poll."

And according to elections in the House, Senate, Governors and President, the majority of this country is center-left.

If 100% of eligible voters had voted, and the Demo-fascists had still won, then I would have to agree with you. The best you can say is that the majority of those who bothered to vote were either moderates or Liberals, and with that I would agree… that is, if there hadn't been so much voter fraud (MN), intimidation (PA) and so on. The only way the Left can win elections in this country is to lie and cheat. And even when you do win, you don't have the balls to take responsibility for your agenda — you pathetic whiners are scared shitless to pass your filthy health care takeover bill without hiding behind the Republicans.

And that's why it will come down to a physical confrontation because the Left won't stop until it is forced to.

I'm sorry to have to say that I agree with you. Sooner or later, I foresee a new civil war in this country before the fascists are finally defeated.

If 100% of eligible voters had voted, and the Demo-fascists had still won, then I would have to agree with you.

You cited a poll earlier though that claimed how many people were conservative. Clearly, a record election is a much better sample. Especially when you include the local elections.

Obama won this past Nov fair & square.

Frankly, I'm surprised that no one has reminded people that Ted Kennedy stood on the floor of the Senate and called President Bush a liar on the record. It's one thing to have a momentary lapse of control and to blurt out something you may need to apologize later, and it's another thing entirely to deliberately say that the President told, "Lie after lie after lie after lie," while addressing the floor. And of course, he never apologized, either.

Ted Kennedy had the floor, though.

Call the President a liar if you want, but don't be a weasel by screaming like a wretch from the comfort of the crowd.

You people are Hilarious.

Joe Wilson was wrong and not one single post disputed that fact in any way whatsoever. Name calling and talk radio talking points do not change the truth. Nothing in this bill provides healthcare to illegal immigrants. Nothing anywhere even comes close. Not one person was able to provide a single reference to this bill providing healthcare.

The ridiculous argument that “they can get it now and they will still be able to get it after this bill” is ridiculous. People drive drunk now and they will still drive drunk after this bill therefore this bill allows drunk driving? Same defective logic and ignorant reasoning.

The argument about his claim on “the number of insured n this country” is even crazier. Whatever his number is, correct or incorrect, does not change the bill in anyway.

The idea the there will be a “bloodbath in the next election” is coming from the same people that say that about every election. Rush has been wrong on every election in the past 8 years. It is a campaign slogan, nothing more. These people have been wrong for the past 3 elections.

We have yet to recover from the disasters that the rightwing policies have created. It is ridiculous to think that people want more of what the GOP brought this country: The largest increase in government in history, record debt, record fraud, 2 wars, wiretaps, torture, rendition, a political legal system, and they totally destroyed the economy. A few freaks at a tea party are not evidence that anyone wants more of this.

[...] health care plan would absolutely not cover illegal aliens, to which the Representative shouted out “You lie!” It was probably the only honest thing said in the House that [...]

The best website……

Hey Websmaster , Awesome blog , if you need backlinks to your website I provide upto 10,000 high quality SEO backlinks for only $5. Check it out here :http://bit.ly/msweL2...

Cool sites…

[...]we came across a cool site that you might enjoy. Take a look if you want[...]……

Blogs ou should be reading…

[...]Here is a Great Blog You Might Find Interesting that we Encourage You[...]……

abraded thesaurus…

Hello I am so happy I found your weblog, I really found you by accident, while I was browsing on Yahoo for something else, Nonetheless I am here now and would just like to say thanks a lot for a incredible post and a all round interesting blog (I also …

Recent Blogroll Additions……

[...]usually posts some very interesting stuff like this. If you’re new to this site[...]……

Read was interesting, stay in touch……

[...]please visit the sites we follow, including this one, as it represents our picks from the web[...]……

Awesome website…

[...]the time to read or visit the content or sites we have linked to below the[...]……

Sources…

[...]check below, are some totally unrelated websites to ours, however, they are most trustworthy sources that we use[...]……

Websites you should visit…

[...]below you’ll find the link to some sites that we think you should visit[...]……

Detoxing From Alcohol…

I am really loving the theme/design of your weblog. Do you ever run into any browser compatibility issues? A number of my blog audience have complained about my site not operating correctly in Explorer but looks great in Chrome. Do you have any tips to…

Awesome website…

[...]the time to read or visit the content or sites we have linked to below the[...]……

Great website…

[...]we like to honor many other internet sites on the web, even if they aren’t linked to us, by linking to them. Under are some webpages worth checking out[...]……

Visitor recommendations…

[...]one of our visitors recently recommended the following website[...]……

Sources…

[...]check below, are some totally unrelated websites to ours, however, they are most trustworthy sources that we use[...]……

Blogs ou should be reading…

[...]Here is a Great Blog You Might Find Interesting that we Encourage You[...]……

Superb website…

[...]always a big fan of linking to bloggers that I love but don’t get a lot of link love from[...]……

Recent Blogroll Additions……

[...]usually posts some very interesting stuff like this. If you’re new to this site[...]……

California…

I wanted to create you this bit of note in order to say thanks as before with the pretty concepts you’ve shared on this site. This is quite remarkably generous with you in giving unhampered just what a number of people could have supplied as an e book…

Gems form the internet…

[...]very few websites that happen to be detailed below, from our point of view are undoubtedly well worth checking out[...]……

Online Article……

[...]The information mentioned in the article are some of the best available [...]……

Websites worth visiting…

I enjoyed reading your article, many thanks….

Websites worth visiting…

I enjoyed reading your article, by the way I sell sex toys…

Recommended websites…

Amazing blog! Thanks for the great contribution with this post….

Awesome website…

Really nice blog. I will check back for more information on this subject later….

Websites you should visit…

I really liked your blog, appreciate the great information….

Awesome website…

Really nice blog. I will check back for more information on this subject later….

Great website…

Cool post, I really enjoyed reading it. I will check out your site for some more content on this subject….

Websites worth visiting…

I enjoyed reading your article, many thanks….

Websites you should visit…

I really liked your blog, appreciate the great information….

Websites worth visiting…

I enjoyed reading your article, many thanks….

Amazing site…

I really liked your blog, thanks for sharing this useful information……

Recommended websites…

Amazing blog! Thanks for the great contribution with this post….

Ping Back…

you are really a good webmaster. The website loading speed is amazing. It kind of feels that you are doing any distinctive trick. Moreover, The contents are masterwork. you’ve performed a wonderful activity on this matter!…

Awesome website…

Really nice blog. I will check back for more information on this subject later….

Awesome website…

Really nice blog. I will check back for more information on this subject later….

Websites worth visiting…

I enjoyed reading your article, many thanks….

Awesome website…

[...]the time to read or visit the content or sites we have linked to below the[...]……