Hey Harry, is she real? Ask her Congressman

[JustRalph]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/04/16/Brain-Surgery-Patient-s-Obamacare-Plan-Denies-Meds-Drops-Doctors

http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Big-Government/2014/04/16/margaret-figueroa-figueroa-family.jpg

BRAIN SURGERY PATIENT'S OBAMACARE PLAN DENIES MEDS, DROPS DOCTORS

"Figueroa suffers from a disease known as Arnold Chiari Malformation and Syringomyelia. Even though the Obamacare plan she purchased assured her that she was covered, her insurance card was denied when she went to fill her prescriptions. Then she learned that none of her doctors accept her Obamacare plan. Figueroa says she cannot find a doctor who accepts her Obamacare plan; indeed, there are only six doctors in all of Staten Island who take her plan, none of whom she's been able to get appointments with.

Figueroa's congressman, Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY), intervened to help her obtain some of her vital prescriptions. Grimm says he's already received calls from at least a dozen Staten Island residents facing the same problem with Obamacare's "narrow networks" – extreme restrictions to doctor and hospital access imposed by Obamacare.

"Even though the insurance company cashed your check, it doesn't mean it (the policy) has been implemented," said Grimm at a Wednesday press conference with Figueroa. "That's the problem – that the back end of Obamacare hasn't been fully built. You can go on the front end of an application and look at a list of plans, but what they don't tell you is that many of those plans don't have doctors yet."
Figueroa is not alone."

[Robert Goren]

Did she have insurance before the ACA? If so, who was her company?

[newtothegame]

Did she have insurance before the ACA? If so, who was her company?

What difference does it make???
Did you read the article?

"though the Obamacare plan she purchased assured her that she was covered".

Her previous insurance plan was obviously not of the quality of the ACA plan.....:faint:

[HUSKER55]

BO is thinning the herd.

[Robert Goren]

What difference does it make???
Did you read the article?

"though the Obamacare plan she purchased assured her that she was covered".

Her previous insurance plan was obviously not of the quality of the ACA plan.....:faint:I doubt she had a plan before. Obviously the ACA hasn't gotten rid of the crooks in the insurance industry. Remember all the plans under the ACA are private companies or some sort of co-op. The government doesn't insure anybody unless they are in Medicare or Medicaid. Even with Medicaid, often the state pays for insurance with a private company. In Nebraska, Medicaid used United Health Care for some of it coverage in 2010 which is the last year I checked.

[Tom]

Did she have insurance before the ACA? If so, who was her company?

Irrelevant.
ASSCARE was supposed to fix this stuff.
It didn't.
People are going to die while this POS play politics and lies through his teeth.
And little twerps like Dingy Harry try to silence them.

[JustRalph]

Goren, nice try

Where's the Gang of Four?

[davew]

Irrelevant.
ASSCARE was supposed to fix this stuff.
It didn't.
People are going to die while this POS play politics and lies through his teeth.
And little twerps like Dingy Harry try to silence them.

The program is better than expected. It is just taking a little longer than expected in a very few areas because of the overwhelming interest. The majority of the people in the country will be much better off in a few years once all the kinks are worked out. The casualties along the way will be thought of as martyrs on the road to national health utopia.

[JustRalph]

The program is better than expected. It is just taking a little longer than expected in a very few areas because of the overwhelming interest. The majority of the people in the country will be much better off in a few years once all the kinks are worked out. The casualties along the way will be thought of as martyrs on the road to national health utopia.

I call them victims of tyranny. Tomato......tomato......

[johnhannibalsmith]

I doubt she had a plan before. Obviously the ACA hasn't gotten rid of the crooks in the insurance industry. ...

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Gee, where have I heard that before...

[classhandicapper]

Apparently she had some kind of coverage before because she was able to get the surgeries and medication before and they talk about her PREVIOUS doctors.

[mostpost]

I'm sure we won't have to wait long before we find that all is not as it seems in this little story. But even if it is true, it's not like this kind of thing didn't happen all the time before the passage of Obamacare. In fact it happened more often. And there is nothing in the Affordable Care Act that caused this to occur. Nothing in the Act says insurance companies have to narrow their networks. Nothing says doctors have to stop seeing patients. Nothing prevents insurers from covering medications. All of this is happening because insurance companies can't figure out how operate in the new system.

In the meantime, a lot of good things have been happening.
8 million people signed up for private insurance in the Health Insurance Marketplace. For states that have Federally-Facilitated Marketplaces, 35 percent of those who signed up are under 35 years old
That is one million more than the most optimistic projections. 35% under the age of 35 is right in line with what happened in Massachusetts under Romneycare.

5 million people are enrolled in plans that meet ACA standards outside the Marketplace, according to a CBO estimate. When insurers set premiums for next year, they are required to look at everyone who enrolled in plans that meet ACA standards, both on and off the Marketplace.

Health care costs are growing at the slowest level on record: Since the law passed, real per capita health care spending is estimated to have grown at the lowest rate on record for any three-year period and less than one-third the long-term historical average stretching back to 1960. This slower growth in spending is reflected in Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance.

CBO projects the deficit will shrink more and premiums will be lower than expected: CBO previously estimated that the ACA will reduce the deficit by $1.7 trillion over two decades, and, just this week, CBO concluded that lower-than-expected Marketplace premiums and other recent developments will cut $104 billion from our deficit over the next ten years. The CBO report also projects that lower-than-expected premiums will help to save $5 billion this year, and that lower premiums will persist in the years ahead, remaining 15 percent below projections by 2016 (the only year in which CBO provides a precise estimate).

Medicare spending growth is down: Medicare per capita spending is growing at historically low rates. This week, for the fifth straight year, the CBO reduced its projections for Medicare spending over the next 10 years – this time by $106 billion. CBO projects that Medicare and Medicaid costs in 2020 will be $180 billion below its 2010 estimates. Recent economic research suggests that the ACA’s reforms to Medicare may have “spillover effects” that reduce costs and improve quality across the health care system, not just in Medicare.

But all of this good news is offset by one person losing her coverage. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[davew]

True, there is nothing saying doctors can not see their patients. But many doctors will not be able to have their patients bill paid by the ACA insurance policies. So apparently there are many doctors (and hospitals) that do not meet the acceptable ACA requirements.

[mostpost]

What difference does it make???
Did you read the article?

"though the Obamacare plan she purchased assured her that she was covered".

Her previous insurance plan was obviously not of the quality of the ACA plan.....:faint:
There is no such thing as an Obamacare plan. Every time Breitbart uses that phrase they are lying to you. Medicare Medicaid and CHIP are the only health plans that have a government component.

Plans sold on the exchanges are private plans. Private companies set the premiums. Private companies set the benefits. Private companies determine the co-pays and deductibles. The government, federal and states, provide a virtual shopping mall for those companies to do business in.

If the private company that Figueroa bought insurance from told he she was covered and now she is not; it is that company which is responsible for making her whole. It is that company that deceived her.

Any Republican congressman will say anything to discredit the ACA. It's in their DNA.

[JustRalph]

But all of this good news is offset by one person losing her coverage. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

So, who gets to choose ? I mean, since you are suddenly fine with this lady dying, suffering etcetera. Who gets to decide?

First these things weren't happening. But now that they are, you're just fine with it as long as the greater good and the movement isn't impeded.

You are disgusting. You know, you are only a few steps away from the death panels at this point.

I seem to recall you bringing up "empathy" in another thread. What a joke

[mostpost]

I doubt she had a plan before. Obviously the ACA hasn't gotten rid of the crooks in the insurance industry. Remember all the plans under the ACA are private companies or some sort of co-op. The government doesn't insure anybody unless they are in Medicare or Medicaid. Even with Medicaid, often the state pays for insurance with a private company. In Nebraska, Medicaid used United Health Care for some of it coverage in 2010 which is the last year I checked.
What you say above is absolutely true. Yet some people insist on characterizing the Affordable Care Act as government insurance or socialized medicine. The truth is if Margaret Figueroa had Medicare, she would not have this problem. It is a private insurance company that is limiting her care.

[Clocker]

And there is nothing in the Affordable Care Act that caused this to occur. Nothing in the Act says insurance companies have to narrow their networks. Nothing says doctors have to stop seeing patients.

Everything in the ACA is causing this to happen. Insurers are faced with an impossible mandate to provide a virtually unlimited offering of benefits to a virtually unlimited demographic range of policy holders. The only practical way to do this without putting the financial future of the company in serious danger is to create networks as narrowly as possible.

The law does not literally say "Thou shalt construct a narrow network". The overburdening constraints of the law make it the only economically feasible solution. The result is narrow networks, not de jure, but inevitably de facto.

[HUSKER55]

Looks like Sarah was right after all.

[Clocker]

I seem to recall you bringing up "empathy" in another thread. What a joke

Only liberals have empathy.

And only liberals are able to intuit the exact circumstances of this woman's medical problems and her exact previous and current insurance coverages. Therefore only they can inform the rest of us unenlightened and unwashed what the truth is and where the fault lies. Don't presume to contradict those with the special knowledge.

[Clocker]

What you say above is absolutely true. Yet some people insist on characterizing the Affordable Care Act as government insurance or socialized medicine. The truth is if Margaret Figueroa had Medicare, she would not have this problem. It is a private insurance company that is limiting her care.

You actually wrote that without seeing the incredible contradictions and hypocrisy, if not irrationality, of your words.

You state that the woman's problem is that her care is limited because she has a policy from a private company. But she was forced to buy the policy because of the ACA. And the argument from the libs was that the bad apple insurance companies were selling worthless policies, and that ObamaCare would put an end to that.

But now you say that she has a worthless policy because it is from a private insurance company. But all policies bought under ObamaCare are from private insurance companies, and by your definition, are QUALITY HEALTH PLANS.

To recap, by your logic, all policies purchased under the ACA are Quality Health Plans, but all policies purchased under the ACA are private carriers policies, and private carrier polices are worthless because they limit coverage.

[newtothegame]

You actually wrote that without seeing the incredible contradictions and hypocrisy, if not irrationality, of your words.

You state that the woman's problem is that her care is limited because she has a policy from a private company. But she was forced to buy the policy because of the ACA. And the argument from the libs was that the bad apple insurance companies were selling worthless policies, and that ObamaCare would put an end to that.

But now you say that she has a worthless policy because it is from a private insurance company. But all policies bought under ObamaCare are from private insurance companies, and by your definition, are QUALITY HEALTH PLANS.

To recap, by your logic, all policies purchased under the ACA are Quality Health Plans, but all policies purchased under the ACA are private carriers policies, and private carrier polices are worthless because they limit coverage.

Thanks! I was going to post something similar but you said a mouthful.
Libs will always tell you that its a "private" insurance company when there was or is a problem. But, they fail to recognize that in the case of the now problems, the private insurance companies are forced to provide quality healthcare plans. (Their words).
So, in the past, the plans that were forced to change were worthless.....
Now, the plans that are still worthless, is the private sectors responsibilities...lol Even if they are now deemed QUALITY by ACA.
lol
Libs will always and only take the side that fits their agenda......
If its bad, its bush's fault, ........
:lol:
And when left with no where else to turn, their reply will be your racist or lack empathy........lol

[johnhannibalsmith]

What you say above is absolutely true. Yet some people insist on characterizing the Affordable Care Act as government insurance or socialized medicine. The truth is if Margaret Figueroa had Medicare, she would not have this problem. It is a private insurance company that is limiting her care.

Man, oh man, this is getting kind of sad. The most predictably pathetic scapegoating has already commenced. Everything good that happens is because of the gift given to us by Uncle Sugar and everything bad that happens to us because of Uncle's gift is actually because of the evil people that actually made the gift, wrapped it, priced it, and had it delivered first class no returns with no refunds or exchanges.

But, it's working and it's great.

[Clocker]

Libs will always tell you that its a "private" insurance company when there was or is a problem. But, they fail to recognize that in the case of the now problems, the private insurance companies are forced to provide quality healthcare plans. (Their words).
So, in the past, the plans that were forced to change were worthless.....
Now, the plans that are still worthless, is the private sectors responsibilities...lol Even if they are now deemed QUALITY by ACA.

I haven't quite figured it out yet, but I'm sure this was the premise of a Monty Python skit some years ago.

[NJ Stinks]

So, who gets to choose ? I mean, since you are suddenly fine with this lady dying, suffering etcetera. Who gets to decide?

First these things weren't happening. But now that they are, you're just fine with it as long as the greater good and the movement isn't impeded.

You are disgusting. You know, you are only a few steps away from the death panels at this point.

I seem to recall you bringing up "empathy" in another thread. What a joke

What the hell. I guess you want all guns taken away from everybody because somebody shot and killed somebody somewhere tonight. And I guess you want to get rid of those horse carriages in Central Park because somebody mistreated one of the 300 horses. And let's not forget motorcycles - must have been an accident today somewhere.

Your indignant remarks remind me of that saying: "thou doth protest too much". :rolleyes:

[tucker6]

Only liberals have empathy.

And only liberals are able to intuit the exact circumstances of this woman's medical problems and her exact previous and current insurance coverages. Therefore only they can inform the rest of us unenlightened and unwashed what the truth is and where the fault lies. Don't presume to contradict those with the special knowledge.
You bring up a good point. Why can't conservatives get the same news articles that the liberals get. My info doesn't include specifics on her circumstances, but obviously theirs does. Life isn't fair I guess.

[Tom]

how can this be called a success when it didn't put a dent in the number of people without HC insurance? 7 million signed up, of that 6 million had lost their insurance. 40 million were without before it all started.
So now we still have 39 million without. Mission Accomplished.

In the words of Might Joe Biden, this is a Big F'g Deal! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[JustRalph]

What the hell. I guess you want all guns taken away from everybody because somebody shot and killed somebody somewhere tonight. And I guess you want to get rid of those horse carriages in Central Park because somebody mistreated one of the 300 horses. And let's not forget motorcycles - must have been an accident today somewhere.

Your indignant remarks remind me of that saying: "thou doth protest too much". :rolleyes:

The analogy doesn't work. The government didn't force anybody to shoot anyone. You are forced to participate in OCare under penalty of law. Healthcare is not an enumerated right. As is the right to bear arms etc.

The government doesn't force you to ride a motorcycle. Riding a motorcycle isn't a right.

[Clocker]

how can this be called a success when it didn't put a dent in the number of people without HC insurance? 7 million signed up, of that 6 million had lost their insurance.

But the 6 million that lost their insurance had worthless policies from bad apple private insurance companies.

And the 7 million that sign up, if they ever actually complete the process and pay their premiums, will have QUALITY HEALTH PLANS.

Unfortunately, those QUALITY HEALTH PLANS will still be from bad apple private insurance companies that limit benefits, unlike real QUALITY HEALTH PLANS from the government, like Medicaid.

[mostpost]

You actually wrote that without seeing the incredible contradictions and hypocrisy, if not irrationality, of your words.

You state that the woman's problem is that her care is limited because she has a policy from a private company. But she was forced to buy the policy because of the ACA. And the argument from the libs was that the bad apple insurance companies were selling worthless policies, and that ObamaCare would put an end to that.

But now you say that she has a worthless policy because it is from a private insurance company. But all policies bought under ObamaCare are from private insurance companies, and by your definition, are QUALITY HEALTH PLANS.

To recap, by your logic, all policies purchased under the ACA are Quality Health Plans, but all policies purchased under the ACA are private carriers policies, and private carrier polices are worthless because they limit coverage.
Your argument MIGHT have some merit if the private insurance companies had not been doing this very thing for years before the ACA was even passed. On second thought, your argument has no merit. As usual.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Your argument MIGHT have some merit if the private insurance companies had not been doing this very thing for years before the ACA was even passed...

SO THEN WHAT F***ING GOOD IS IT OTHER THAN TO FORCE ME INTO THE INSURANCE SCAM THAT I HAVE AVOIDED FOR THIS VERY REASON??????????????????????????

[Clocker]

Your argument MIGHT have some merit if the private insurance companies had not been doing this very thing for years before the ACA was even passed. On second thought, your argument has no merit. As usual.

That's all you got???

For months on end, you have been beating the same broken drum. Sorry you can't keep your plan, and you can't keep your doctor, and you will be paying more. But ObamaCare will put an end to bad apple insurance companies selling worthless policies with limited benefits. ObamaCare will force all the companies to sell only QUALITY health plans. Sorry for the inconvenience, but now everyone will have a much better plan.

Now you say ObamaCare can't deliver on that, because the insurance companies were selling worthless plans before, and ObamaCare hasn't changed that. Under ObamaCare, they are still not selling QUALITY health plans.

You know what that means? It means that ObamaCare is not working. By your own admission.

[mostpost]

Obamacare has created conditions which force insurance companies to cancel policies by the millions. This has never happened before.

WRONG! FALSE!! UNTRUE!! NOT CORRECT!!! INACCURATE!!!!

Prior to the enactment of the ACA and the start of the exchanges, fifteen million people bought their health insurance on the individual market. Of those fifteen million, 17% kept the same coverage for more than one year. That means that 12,450,000 changed policies each year, either because the company cancelled the plan or the insured chose a different plan.

Cancelling plans has been commonplace forever.

[mostpost]

That's all you got???

For months on end, you have been beating the same broken drum. Sorry you can't keep your plan, and you can't keep your doctor, and you will be paying more. But ObamaCare will put an end to bad apple insurance companies selling worthless policies with limited benefits. ObamaCare will force all the companies to sell only QUALITY health plans. Sorry for the inconvenience, but now everyone will have a much better plan.

Now you say ObamaCare can't deliver on that, because the insurance companies were selling worthless plans before, and ObamaCare hasn't changed that. Under ObamaCare, they are still not selling QUALITY health plans.

You know what that means? It means that ObamaCare is not working. By your own admission.
Here's what I have.
8,030,000 people have signed up on the exchanges as of 4/15/14. Of those, 93% have paid or will pay by the insurance company's deadline.
10,620,000 have signed up for Medicaid.
3,000,000 young people now have coverage on their parent's policy until they are 27.
There is an annual limit on individual expenses.
There is a limit on lifetime expenses.
You can no longer be denied coverage due to a preexisting condition.
You can no longer be dropped if you become ill.
Many preventive services, such as mammograms, are covered at no additional
cost to the patient.
Annual physicals are covered at no additional cost.
Premiums are rising at the lowest rate in history.
The cost of the program is $106B less than originally projected.

Here is what you have.
Margaret Figueroa.
And you think you're winning. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

SO THEN WHAT F***ING GOOD IS IT OTHER THAN TO FORCE ME INTO THE INSURANCE SCAM THAT I HAVE AVOIDED FOR THIS VERY REASON??????????????????????????

Yes, you are that good! :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

40 million people are without health care insurance.
The ACA has failed to put a dent in that.
The ACA is a failure.

[Clocker]

Here is what you have.
Margaret Figueroa.
And you think you're winning. :rolleyes:

What I have is your admission in this thread that ObamaCare is forcing people into policies that are not, by its own definition, and yours, quality health plans.

Winning? This isn't about winning a meaningless debate with a Kool Aid drinking true believer on an anonymous forum. I am not debating to convince any dogmatic brain dead liberals of the errors of their ways. I am just amusing myself pointing out that the emperor has no clothes, and that those who believe he does have no common sense.

This isn't about winning, it's about losing, and people who are too blind to see it. The losers are millions of American citizens who have lost another big slice of their freedom of choice. The losers are millions of Americans who are subsidizing a huge new stealth welfare plan with stealth taxes because the spineless legislators passed, and a spineless president signed, a welfare bill that they were too cowardly to put in place openly and honestly.

But the biggest losers are the future generations who have lost freedoms that they will have never known, and who will be saddled with the debt of this debacle for all of their lives.

[HUSKER55]

the lady had a policy that was working.

[Tom]

But the biggest losers are the future generations who have lost freedoms that they will have never known, and who will be saddled with the debt of this debacle for all of their lives.

Osama Bin Laden would be proud of all this.
Obama did to us what Osama could not do.
The worst enemy of this nation is the DNC.

[tucker6]

Prior to the enactment of the ACA and the start of the exchanges, fifteen million people bought their health insurance on the individual market. Of those fifteen million, 17% kept the same coverage for more than one year. That means that 12,450,000 changed policies each year, either because the company cancelled the plan or the insured chose a different plan.

Cancelling plans has been commonplace forever.
That's asinine. The vast majority did not have either of those two situations occur. People change the specifics of their plans for all sorts of reasons, such as marriage, divorce, childbirth, deductible change, etc, etc, etc. It doesn't mean they changed whole plans or had them dropped by evil insurance companies. You're full of baloney. What those numbers tell me is that the old system worked in that people had choices and elected in many cases to exercise those options.

[Tom]

mostie - that is pretty stupid. I mean, really stupid.
I, and millions more like me, pick our polices every ears. WE get several to choose from and we pick depending on what is the best fit for us. To say we are cancelling our policies is the epitome of stupidity.

Here is something for you to think about.....if everyday, millions throw away old clothes or donate them to teh Salvatin Army, why are there not more naked people walking around?


:rolleyes: Even YOU can't be that gullible!

[NJ Stinks]

The analogy doesn't work. The government didn't force anybody to shoot anyone. You are forced to participate in OCare under penalty of law. Healthcare is not an enumerated right. As is the right to bear arms etc.

The government doesn't force you to ride a motorcycle. Riding a motorcycle isn't a right.

So you are basing your argument that Obamacare sucks in part on this woman's experience plus the indisputable fact that the Founding Fathers in 1776 did not mention healthcare. Hence, in 2014 nobody has a right to decent healthcare in this country.

Is it too far-fetched to think that decent healthcare was not available to anybody in the late 1700's? Is it too far-fetched to think that our Founding Fathers had no clue as to what tremendous medical advances were to come about after the 18th century?

Need I go on? I thought not.

OK then. Your serve. At :15: all. ;)

[Tom]

Is it too far-fetched to think that decent healthcare was not available to anybody in the late 1700's?

We do know that even after ample opportunity sign up, 40 million people do have it today, under the ACA.

[JustRalph]

So you are basing your argument that Obamacare sucks in part on this woman's experience plus the indisputable fact that the Founding Fathers in 1776 did not mention healthcare. Hence, in 2014 nobody has a right to decent healthcare in this country.

Is it too far-fetched to think that decent healthcare was not available to anybody in the late 1700's? Is it too far-fetched to think that our Founding Fathers had no clue as to what tremendous medical advances were to come about after the 18th century?

Need I go on? I thought not.

OK then. Your serve. At :15: all. ;)

That's a different subject. But I will stipulate that there are disadvantages to being locked into a document that old. But there are built in ways to change it. So the original document stands on it's own. It can be amended. Proving once again, the framers were able to see forward to an extent. Adding healthcare as an enumerated right could be accomplished. Get to work.

[johnhannibalsmith]

So you are basing your argument that Obamacare sucks in part on this woman's experience plus the indisputable fact that the Founding Fathers in 1776 did not mention healthcare. Hence, in 2014 nobody has a right to decent healthcare in this country.

Is it too far-fetched to think that decent healthcare was not available to anybody in the late 1700's? Is it too far-fetched to think that our Founding Fathers had no clue as to what tremendous medical advances were to come about after the 18th century?

Need I go on? I thought not.

OK then. Your serve. At :15: all. ;)

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Is this sarcasm? Or is it serious and I'm not understanding what you mean?

Because I know that up there isn't some implication that our Constitution lacks as part of the first ten amendments a provision labeling "(good or free or affordable or quality or qualifying or whatever) healthcare a right because they couldn't possibly understand the importance of physicians and medicine and health care during the good old days when a paper cut might kill you without basic medical care.

[Red Knave]

I haven't quite figured it out yet, but I'm sure this was the premise of a Monty Python skit some years ago.

The Pet Shop sketch?
================================================== ====
Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?

Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead, that's what's wrong with it!

Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.
================================================== ====
See it here (https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CC0QtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D4vu W6tQ0218&ei=q9VRU5X0FJDiyAHOrYCoCQ&usg=AFQjCNHCuWEImqUy1gNjQFpa8VlqsRGk6Q&sig2=A-U0m_N6nXBw23pc7HNOxw&bvm=bv.65058239,d.aWc)

[Clocker]

The Pet Shop sketch?
================================================== ====
Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?

Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead, that's what's wrong with it!

Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.
================================================== ====
See it here (https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CC0QtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D4vu W6tQ0218&ei=q9VRU5X0FJDiyAHOrYCoCQ&usg=AFQjCNHCuWEImqUy1gNjQFpa8VlqsRGk6Q&sig2=A-U0m_N6nXBw23pc7HNOxw&bvm=bv.65058239,d.aWc)

Winner, winner,
Chicken dinner.

[Clocker]

That's a different subject. But I will stipulate that there are disadvantages to being locked into a document that old. But there are built in ways to change it. So the original document stands on it's own. It can be amended. Proving once again, the framers were able to see forward to an extent. Adding healthcare as an enumerated right could be accomplished. Get to work.

As Obama is fond of whining about, the Constitution is a document of negative rights. It says what the government can't do to you, it doesn't say what the government has to do for you. Those are his words, almost verbatim.

The Constitution doesn't grant any rights. It recognizes natural rights and says the government has to respect them. The Bill of Rights was added because some at the time thought that those rights needed to be spelled out in more detail. The Bill of Rights does not grant any rights. It says people have these rights as humans, and the government can't screw with them.

There is nothing in the Constitution as originally written that said anything about education, benefits, etc. All of that was left to the states.

[Tom]

The whole purpose of the constitution was to LIMIT what the Fed could do.
Our FF would march on the WH with guns loaded if they were alive today and found out Obama was telling Americans what they HAD to buy with their money.

[newtothegame]

SO THEN WHAT F***ING GOOD IS IT OTHER THAN TO FORCE ME INTO THE INSURANCE SCAM THAT I HAVE AVOIDED FOR THIS VERY REASON??????????????????????????

John, youre asking too many questions sir......now please just make a deposit at your local IRS station, for the quality healthcare we as a country can now provide (and don't worry about these anecdotal stories) you keeping hearing. This is about the collective......
(make check payable to : We got ya sucka.......)
lol
Who else's vote can I buy and can I get the media to continue pushing my agenda....???

:lol:

[NJ Stinks]

That's a different subject. But I will stipulate that there are disadvantages to being locked into a document that old. But there are built in ways to change it. So the original document stands on it's own. It can be amended. Proving once again, the framers were able to see forward to an extent. Adding healthcare as an enumerated right could be accomplished. Get to work.

Ralph, must you be so level-headed? :)

[NJ Stinks]

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Is this sarcasm? Or is it serious and I'm not understanding what you mean?

Because I know that up there isn't some implication that our Constitution lacks as part of the first ten amendments a provision labeling "(good or free or affordable or quality or qualifying or whatever) healthcare a right because they couldn't possibly understand the importance of physicians and medicine and health care during the good old days when a paper cut might kill you without basic medical care.

Sarcasm.

[Clocker]

Hence, in 2014 nobody has a right to decent healthcare in this country.



No one has a right to health care funded by others.

As a compassionate and wealthy society, we should provide health care to the needy. The issues are how much, to whom, from whom, and how.

The issue here and now is from whom, and how. My experience is that health care is best and most efficiently provided as far down the government food chain as possible. Local is better than state, state is better than federal.

That said, if we as a society decide that some level of health care should be provided by the federal government, I would be hard pressed to come up with a worse, less efficient, less equitable program than ObamaCare.

And in total defiance of logic, the supporters of ObamaCare refuse to even discuss this problem, and deflect from the blatantly obvious and serious defects of the program by accusing any critics of being heartless, lacking empathy, waging a war on women, and being racist.

The issue here is not health care. The issue is a train wreck of a welfare program that was intended to drain the swamp, but leaves us up to our butts in alligators.

[NJ Stinks]

Clocker, I don't doubt your sincerity.

My thinking is Republicans would not have done a thing to fix a huge problem in this country. The Dems are trying. Good for the Dems and shame on the Republicans.

I'm being sincere too.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... The Dems are trying. Good for the Dems and shame on the Republicans.

I'm being sincere too.

I will also be sincere in saying that I'd be willing to take fairly short odds that at some point, in the recesses of your thoughts, you will come to disagree with those two sentences... and probably curse them for potentially ruining the chances for ever doing something right about the problem since nobody will go near this political disaster ever again after this unless there's literally no other option.

And I'm glad it was sarcasm. :D

[Clocker]

Clocker, I don't doubt your sincerity.

My thinking is Republicans would not have done a thing to fix a huge problem in this country. The Dems are trying. Good for the Dems and shame on the Republicans.

I'm being sincere too.

I am not a Republican. Both sides are at fault. But the Dems went to great lengths to cut the GOP out of this process. The result is already shaping up as a cure worse than the problem. Shame on the Dems for making it worse.

This whole thing is not about health care. It is about power and politics and ego, especially Obama's ego about getting his little place in history at any cost. And the ego of Pelosi and Reid and others. The Dems found themselves in a position to pass something, and that was their only thought: pass something. It is an abomination that will either self-destruct or ruin the health care system as we know it.

[NJ Stinks]

I am not a Republican. Both sides are at fault. But the Dems went to great lengths to cut the GOP out of this process. The result is already shaping up as a cure worse than the problem. Shame on the Dems for making it worse.

This whole thing is not about health care. It is about power and politics and ego, especially Obama's ego about getting his little place in history at any cost. And the ego of Pelosi and Reid and others. The Dems found themselves in a position to pass something, and that was their only thought: pass something. It is an abomination that will either self-destruct or ruin the health care system as we know it.

Thank you, Dr. Doom.

[tucker6]

Ever notice that no one in govt is ever called a statesman anymore like some were back called in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. That's because a few back then held the country in higher regard than their own ambitions and reelections and donors. I look at the political landscape and does anyone see a politician that could be described as a statesman (or woman). I honestly can't. We needed statesmen writing the ACA, but instead got political hacks. The resulting document is clear as mud. I don't see us rising above this position our country is in anytime soon.

[Tom]

The Dems are trying. Good for the Dems

Just as many people are without HC as before the ACA.
Do the math.
Is this what you call trying?

40 million have no HC AFTER the enrollment period.
A 100% democrat bill has left them high and dry.

[HUSKER55]

yes but her new policy will be a good one......should it get here in time. the other one that was paying was junk. ask mostpost and hcap

[mostpost]

Just as many people are without HC as before the ACA.
Do the math.
Is this what you call trying?

40 million have no HC AFTER the enrollment period.
A 100% democrat bill has left them high and dry.
You keep saying this. Where do you get your information? According to the Census Bureau at the end of September 2013-just before the opening of the exchanges-there were 48 million uninsured. Now, according to you and more importantly according to people who know what they are talking about, there are 40 million uninsured. Last time I took a math class, 40 million was less than 48 million; considerably less.

Also the percentage of uninsured has dropped over the last six months, from 18% to 15.6%.

But you just go ahead and continue to think that 40,000,000 is the same as 48,000,000 and 15.6% is the same as 18%.

[Tom]

Last time I took a math class, 40 million was less than 48 million; considerably less.

I was just using one of the many numbers you guys used to whine about daily.
OK, you are correct. It is 48 million without insurance.

The 100% democrat bill has left 48 million, considerably more than I thought, uninsured.

[HUSKER55]

EVER NOTICE they never stay on topic.

you can keep your doctor, you can keep your insurance

[Clocker]

According to the Census Bureau at the end of September 2013-just before the opening of the exchanges-there were 48 million uninsured.

And how many people are uninsured now according to the Census Bureau?

[JustRalph]

And how many people are uninsured now according to the Census Bureau?

You will never know, now that they' et changed the census

[Clocker]

You will never know, now that they' et changed the census

Spoil sport.

[mostpost]

I was just using one of the many numbers you guys used to whine about daily.
OK, you are correct. It is 48 million without insurance.

The 100% democrat bill has left 48 million, considerably more than I thought, uninsured.
Oh for Pete's sake!!! You still got it wrong. The number WAS 48 million last September. Now the number is 40 million.

[mostpost]

EVER NOTICE they never stay on topic.

you can keep your doctor, you can keep your insurance
__________________
What luck for rulers that men do not think...

Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.......Adolf Hitler

Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers.....Aristotle

Speaking of not staying on topic; I've been wanting to ask you about your third signature line-in bold above.
What do you think Aristotle meant by that? Did he think that was a good thing or a bad thing? Do you think what he said is true?

[johnhannibalsmith]

...
What do you think Aristotle meant by that? Did he think that was a good thing or a bad thing? Do you think what he said is true?

Since it struck you, can you tell me what you think he meant by it and all that?

[davew]

Oh for Pete's sake!!! You still got it wrong. The number WAS 48 million last September. Now the number is 40 million.

So they already are using the new census data, where they are counting different things?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by mostpost
Oh for Pete's sake!!! You still got it wrong. The number WAS 48 million last September. Now the number is 40 million.

BS. Only 7 million signed up.
What happened to the other 41 million?
IF they got their insurance BEFORE the sign up for NoCAre, then we did not need it to begin with.

[davew]

BS. Only 7 million signed up.
What happened to the other 41 million?
IF they got their insurance BEFORE the sign up for NoCAre, then we did not need it to begin with.

Possibly died, emigrated, or went home south of the border because of the economy here?

[HUSKER55]

MOSTPOST

I think he meant that those who haven't should not be telling those who have accomplished something, what to do. That includes government.

In another thread I used this example:

if I sell 1 million mouse traps and make a profit of $1M and you only sell 1ooo traps, why should you and 10 of your friends have any right to think I owe you anything, except common courtesy?

But....JMHO

happy easter

[Clocker]

BS. Only 7 million signed up.
What happened to the other 41 million?


The big steaming pile of BS in the room is that 48 million number.

Just the tip of the iceberg of BS, to mix metaphors, is the fact that the 48 million "Americans" without health insurance includes 9.5 million classified in the Census Bureau report as "Foreign born--Not a citizen".

[Clocker]

The number WAS 48 million last September. Now the number is 40 million.

Source?

[dartman51]

Source?


The WHITE HOUSE.......so you know it's a FACT. :rolleyes:

[tucker6]

The day that a republican WH controls the "facts" will be the day Mostie enters the nut house. Payback is gonna be a b!tch. I hope Mostie is making the most of these "happy times".

[Tom]

if I sell 1 million mouse traps and make a profit of $1M and you only sell 1ooo traps, why should you and 10 of your friends have any right to think I owe you anything, except common courtesy?

Put a dollar bill in each of the mouse traps, then sit back and enjoy the show. :D

[HUSKER55]

:lol: