Palin says Obama's health care plan is 'evil'

[highnote]

I love American politics!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_palin_health_care

[lsbets]

And in this case, she is right. It is immoral and evil.

I'm rethinking my thoughts on her quitting now. I thought she was done for good, but if it frees her up to make calls like that, I'm all for it.

[lamboguy]

And in this case, she is right. It is immoral and evil.

I'm rethinking my thoughts on her quitting now. I thought she was done for good, but if it frees her up to make calls like that, I'm all for it.as far as palin goes she's not that bad. she has a good head on her shoulders along with a pretty face.

[boxcar]

And in this case, she is right. It is immoral and evil.

I'm rethinking my thoughts on her quitting now. I thought she was done for good, but if it frees her up to make calls like that, I'm all for it.

She should have gone further and made that call on socialism, too.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Obama is evil.
He is not stupid.
He is not naive.
He is evil, rotten to the core.

I called him the Anti Christ and I still believe it.

The new Axis of Evil - Obama, Pelosi, Reid, they are enemies of America.
Top of the list - above Bin Laden.

BTW, libs, your boy murdered another one in Pakistan.....was he read his rights?

Barry Obama - mass murdering serial killer.
He is of the same class and caliber ( calibrate?) as Jeffery Dahmer.
Maybe lower.

[DJofSD]

Carefull, Tom, be carefull. See this (http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jul/29/la-mesan-convicted-obama-threats/?&zIndex=140050) article.

[boxcar]

Carefull, Tom, be carefull. See this (http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jul/29/la-mesan-convicted-obama-threats/?&zIndex=140050) article.

Gotta love this:

“You have a freedom of expression,” she said. “But the wonderful protections of the First Amendment are not without responsibility. The defendant intended the statement to be taken as a threat.”

Funny how this works. An INDIVIDUAL is now considered responsible for his choices -- for his actions -- when it suits the state -- whenever words or sentiments are basically anti-state. But, then, when it comes to people assuming personal responsibility for their own lives in virtually all other areas -- for their important life decisions -- for choices they make which can impact their lives until the day they die, they're suddenly not-so-responsible. We are, then, told by the state that the Responsible in society have some kind of moral or societal obligation to share the fruits of our hard labor with the Irresponsible. It's the responsibility of the Responsible to make certain that the Irresponsible get a free pass.

Boxcar

[DJofSD]

Most excellent points, Boxie. Spot on!

-signed, One of the Mob.

[Tom]

I am sure AC Obama ( Anti-Christ) is threatened by the truth, and the truthiis, he is a murderer. That is indisputable. HE said all those guys have rights, and HE is now violating them.

We need, as a nation, to ask the UN to intervene and arrest him and put him on trial.

[boxcar]

I am sure AC Obama ( Anti-Christ) is threatened by the truth, and the truthiis, he is a murderer. That is indisputable. HE said all those guys have rights, and HE is now violating them.

We need, as a nation, to ask the UN to intervene and arrest him and put him on trial.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

The only response we'd get from the U.N. is that they send their troops unto our soil as peacekeepers. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[witchdoctor]

Took my wife to the movies last night. One of the previews was for the end of the world flick "2012". I noticed the the President in that movie was African American. I told my wife "I guess they figure Obama's getting reelected." :D

[Indulto]

Obama is evil.
He is not stupid.
He is not naive.
He is evil, rotten to the core.

I called him the Anti Christ and I still believe it.

The new Axis of Evil - Obama, Pelosi, Reid, they are enemies of America.
Top of the list - above Bin Laden.

BTW, libs, your boy murdered another one in Pakistan.....was he read his rights?

Barry Obama - mass murdering serial killer.
He is of the same class and caliber ( calibrate?) as Jeffery Dahmer.
Maybe lower.It amazes me how little objection there is to Tom’s Obama-hating rhetoric which so far and away exceeds the anti-Bush rhetoric that PA at least made an effort to keep in check.

I don't object to making fun of the President and decrying his errors which are pronounced and hyped by a relentless opposition press as it should be. What I find repulsive is that Tom and his cheering section here hang on their every word and seem to live only to up it a notch within what has become protective confines for them. This right-wing mob mentality that has now extended to shout-out disruptions of town-hall-meetings are starting to resemble those that took place in depression-era German beer-halls. Liberals will indeed have to toughen up to protect democracy from those determined to dismiss election results

Tom,
I once considered you a witty and intelligent blowhard somewhere to the left of Limbaugh. Now I find your unabashed pseudo-cyber-terror not only devoid of humor, but possibly psychotic in its volume and intensity – not unlike that of a cyber-Taliban.

[DJofSD]

Tom, you need to say you're sorry.

[DJofSD]

It amazes me how little objection there is to Tom’s Obama-hating rhetoric which so far and away exceeds the anti-Bush rhetoric that PA at least made an effort to keep in check.

I don't object to making fun of the President and decrying his errors which are pronounced and hyped by a relentless opposition press as it should be. What I find repulsive is that Tom and his cheering section here hang on their every word and seem to live only to up it a notch within what has become protective confines for them. This right-wing mob mentality that has now extended to shout-out disruptions of town-hall-meetings are starting to resemble those that took place in depression-era German beer-halls. Liberals will indeed have to toughen up to protect democracy from those determined to dismiss election results

Tom,
I once considered you a witty and intelligent blowhard somewhere to the left of Limbaugh. Now I find your unabashed pseudo-cyber-terror not only devoid of humor, but possibly psychotic in its volume and intensity – not unlike that of a cyber-Taliban.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=948rhsRvIkw&feature=rec-HM-r2

[newtothegame]

It amazes me how little objection there is to Tom’s Obama-hating rhetoric which so far and away exceeds the anti-Bush rhetoric that PA at least made an effort to keep in check.

I don't object to making fun of the President and decrying his errors which are pronounced and hyped by a relentless opposition press as it should be. What I find repulsive is that Tom and his cheering section here hang on their every word and seem to live only to up it a notch within what has become protective confines for them. This right-wing mob mentality that has now extended to shout-out disruptions of town-hall-meetings are starting to resemble those that took place in depression-era German beer-halls. Liberals will indeed have to toughen up to protect democracy from those determined to dismiss election results

Tom,
I once considered you a witty and intelligent blowhard somewhere to the left of Limbaugh. Now I find your unabashed pseudo-cyber-terror not only devoid of humor, but possibly psychotic in its volume and intensity – not unlike that of a cyber-Taliban.

HUH??? Liberals to protect DEMOCRACY?
You might wish to look up the definition of a democracy and tell us what Obamamania has done to protect the COMMON PEOPLES RIGHT?

[lsbets]

Wow Indulto, what a post. You seemed to have taken a dive into the deep end of the koolaid pool last year, but now I'd say you drowned in it. Its a shame, you once seemed to have some intelligence, now you seem to be a tool. :ThmbDown:

[boxcar]

It amazes me how little objection there is to Tom’s Obama-hating rhetoric which so far and away exceeds the anti-Bush rhetoric that PA at least made an effort to keep in check.

I don't object to making fun of the President and decrying his errors which are pronounced and hyped by a relentless opposition press as it should be. What I find repulsive is that Tom and his cheering section here hang on their every word and seem to live only to up it a notch within what has become protective confines for them. This right-wing mob mentality that has now extended to shout-out disruptions of town-hall-meetings are starting to resemble those that took place in depression-era German beer-halls. Liberals will indeed have to toughen up to protect democracy from those determined to dismiss election results

Tom,
I once considered you a witty and intelligent blowhard somewhere to the left of Limbaugh. Now I find your unabashed pseudo-cyber-terror not only devoid of humor, but possibly psychotic in its volume and intensity – not unlike that of a cyber-Taliban.

So, let me see if I have this right? Expressing an honest opinion about someone's moral character, e.g. "he's evil" is now hate speech? Ditto for saying that the internal U.S. "axis of evil" is Reid, Pelosi and Obama? In other words in your version of utopia, only politically correct speech should be allowed -- a/k/a politically controlled speech. How long have you lived in Amerika? How do you like the digs on the Plantation? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

the country is being attacked by the president and we're supposed to sit quietly on our hands and what, write a letter to the editor?

[lsbets]

No Jim, you're supposed to shut up and go along with it. Il Duce Obama won the election, he is now free to do whatever he wants. Dissent will no longer be tolerated.

[Marshall Bennett]

Karl Marx would have been proud !!

[Tom]

Took my wife to the movies last night. One of the previews was for the end of the world flick "2012". I noticed the the President in that movie was African American. I told my wife "I guess they figure Obama's getting reelected." :D\


Or that he is the cause of the end of the world. :D

[Indulto]

No Jim, you're supposed to shut up and go along with it. Il Duce Obama won the election, he is now free to do whatever he wants. Dissent will no longer be tolerated.So it's no longer sufficient for you to oppose my positions with reasoned arguments? Now you have to resort to distortion?

This country is based on dissent - reasoned dissent.-- and dissent shouldn't take away the rights of others to be heard regardless of which side of the political spectrum is its source. Sounds like some Kool-Aid has dripped into your coffee.

[Tom]

Oh BS, Indulto, BS.

Where was the MSM when Bush, Cheney, McCain, almost any republican was shouted down by loud mouth idiots who WERE paid to be there, and WERE let in to private areas by members of Congress?

When the PEOPLE show up and express their outrage, were are the bad guys?

Cry all you want, you lefties will never shut us up. We know garbage when we smell it, and Obama is garbage.

[boxcar]

Actually, on the Stink-O-Meter, he registers more like raw sewage. I like to believe there's something positive and good about everyone; but I have, yet, to sense anything wholesome, virtuous or good about this guy. He's one huge Deceit Machine.

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

It amazes me how little objection there is to Tom’s Obama-hating rhetoric which so far and away exceeds the anti-Bush rhetoric that PA at least made an effort to keep in check.So very wrong. Not even worth a reply...but I'll try....

Do I need to dig up all the anti-Bush rhetoric for you to review these past eight years. How can you have such a selective memory?

And how did I make an effort to keep the anti-Bush rhetoric in check? Oh yeah, I did kick off the guy who insisted on calling Republicans NAZIS in every single post he ever made....I remember that one, but that wasn't exactly Bush-specific....

I realize the human brain can only process so much information, and now that Bush has been out of office for over six months now, your brain has probably purged all the outrageous things said about him and his administration here in off-topic from 2001-2008....so, I'll simply chalk your reply up to basic biology.

[boxcar]

Imagine if poor ol' Indulto's memory is seriously impaired, having some form of amnesia, perhaps. I wonder if, under ObamaCare, he'd be eligible for treatment?
Perhaps the medical czar would deny treatment for him on the basis that he's no longer useful to the ObamaCause. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Marshall Bennett]

...and add to that , I don't recall Bush making a wreck of his presidency only 7 months into it . This worthless excuse of a free world leader deserves it .

[NJ Stinks]

Wow Indulto, what a post. You seemed to have taken a dive into the deep end of the koolaid pool last year, but now I'd say you drowned in it. Its a shame, you once seemed to have some intelligence, now you seem to be a tool. :ThmbDown:

Indulto, is it possible to live a happy life after somebody as brilliantly perceptive as Isbets tells you you've lost your marbles? :confused:

And don't forget. Tom really is a great judge of character and, of course, a funny guy. (Everybody says so!) And PA really does moderate all of us down here.

Us liberals sure are lucky to have found such a pleasant place to exchange ideas with some of the most open-minded conservatives in the country!

(I can't waste this lucky feeling. I think I'll buy a lottery ticket!!:jump: :jump: :jump: )

[dartman51]

It amazes me how little objection there is to Tom’s Obama-hating rhetoric which so far and away exceeds the anti-Bush rhetoric that PA at least made an effort to keep in check.

I don't object to making fun of the President and decrying his errors which are pronounced and hyped by a relentless opposition press as it should be. What I find repulsive is that Tom and his cheering section here hang on their every word and seem to live only to up it a notch within what has become protective confines for them. This right-wing mob mentality that has now extended to shout-out disruptions of town-hall-meetings are starting to resemble those that took place in depression-era German beer-halls. Liberals will indeed have to toughen up to protect democracy from those determined to dismiss election results

Tom,
I once considered you a witty and intelligent blowhard somewhere to the left of Limbaugh. Now I find your unabashed pseudo-cyber-terror not only devoid of humor, but possibly psychotic in its volume and intensity – not unlike that of a cyber-Taliban.

With all due respect, Indulto, have you been asleep the last 8 years??? People on TV were making worse comments. But then, there has always been a double standard. Whatever the left accuses the right of doing, you can bet it's what they themselves are doing. Or have been doing.

[boxcar]

Indulto, is it possible to live a happy life after somebody as brilliantly perceptive as Isbets tells you you've lost your marbles? :confused:

Your assumption is all backwards! (But libs are always getting things twisted 180 degrees around!) What would possess you to think that any liberal could be happy to begin with? Many if not most statists are the most negative, humorless, pessimistic and cynical bunch of people on the planet. LS probably brightened his day, for a change, with the truth.

And don't forget. Tom really is a great judge of character and, of course, a funny guy. (Everybody says so!) And PA really does moderate all of us down here.

Tom is a fantastic judge of character. Doesn't he agree with me on virtually everything? :D And, yes, his sense of humor is second to none.

Us liberals sure are lucky to have found such a pleasant place to exchange ideas with some of the most open-minded conservatives in the country!

Actually, you're lucky we conservatives haven't tarred and feathered the lot of you statists and run you off the web. :D

(I can't waste this lucky feeling. I think I'll buy a lottery ticket!!:jump: :jump: :jump: )

Great idea! You'll have a far better chance of winning that jackpot before you'll ever see BO deliver on any of his promises.

Boxcar

[Tom]

pssst, Indulto....I have been consciously restraining myself on Obama. :D

Remember, I am a mirror - you libs have set the standard that I follow.

[Hank]

It amazes me how little objection there is to Tom’s Obama-hating rhetoric which so far and away exceeds the anti-Bush rhetoric that PA at least made an effort to keep in check.

I don't object to making fun of the President and decrying his errors which are pronounced and hyped by a relentless opposition press as it should be. What I find repulsive is that Tom and his cheering section here hang on their every word and seem to live only to up it a notch within what has become protective confines for them. This right-wing mob mentality that has now extended to shout-out disruptions of town-hall-meetings are starting to resemble those that took place in depression-era German beer-halls. Liberals will indeed have to toughen up to protect democracy from those determined to dismiss election results

Tom,
I once considered you a witty and intelligent blowhard somewhere to the left of Limbaugh. Now I find your unabashed pseudo-cyber-terror not only devoid of humor, but possibly psychotic in its volume and intensity – not unlike that of a cyber-Taliban.

I'm amazed that you're amazed.You don't get reasoned argument from men in a state of panic and fear.These neoconderthals can see a future much like their close kin the neanderthal....extinction beckons to them so cut them some slack.Adios :D

[hcap]

And in this case, she is right. It is immoral and evil.

I'm rethinking my thoughts on her quitting now. I thought she was done for good, but if it frees her up to make calls like that, I'm all for it.Me too.
Now if you guys could only run her at the top of the ticket in 2012, with Joe the Plumber at the bottom, the repugs will have sealed their fate as the used-to-be republican party.

Maybe Howard Rourke as Secretary Of Housing? :bang:

Indulto, you are severely outnumbered. Probably picking one fight, backing up your argument with clearly demonstrated facts and logic is more effective than certainly trying to point out the extreme right wing bias here.

BTW, notice that Tom has switched his avatar from one of say-outrage and surprise-to one of voluntarily choosing not to see? That pretty much sums up what you are up against here. I am having a similar problem with Lsbets on the "Does Ted Kennedy Get Counsling?" thread. Amazing how well blinkers work on creatures other than the four legged kind :lol:

[hcap]

Maybe you gentlemen have not thought out fully how "Obamacare" will not only lead to euthanasia as per Palins' babble, but.......

Why haven't you guys mentioned the second part of his nefarious scheme -- to solve word hunger by converting the old folks into soylent green? :cool:

[robert99]

Maybe you gentlemen have not thought out fully how "Obamacare" will not only lead to euthanasia as per Palins' babble, but.......

Why haven't you guys mentioned the second part of his nefarious scheme -- to solve word hunger by converting the old folks into soylent green? :cool:

Hcap,

A half dozen Peter Griffinistas standing next to a washing machine is not really full out thinking, or is it?

They will only mention soylent green once the health lobby has told them to and the 30 pieces of silver are safely in their oh so ample back pockets.
They are as incapable of the freedom of any original thought as they are blind to the consequences in harming the prospects of their fellow Americans.

[Indulto]

... Indulto, you are severely outnumbered.You mean this board isn't really dominated by the left? :eek: Probably picking one fight, backing up your argument with clearly demonstrated facts and logic is more effective than certainly trying to point out the extreme right wing bias here.I'm not really concerned about being outnumbered. There was only one voice of reason capable of meaningful dialogue over there, but it now seems mesmerized by Palin. You know how they have these ringers only kids can hear? Maybe the screech in Palin's voice has a sweet note only right-wing repugs can hear.BTW, notice that Tom has switched his avatar from one of say-outrage and surprise-to one of voluntarily choosing not to see? That pretty much sums up what you are up against here. I am having a similar problem with Lsbets on the "Does Ted Kennedy Get Counsling?" thread. Amazing how well blinkers work on creatures other than the four legged kind :lol:I'd just like to know what his hand is covering when he's not posting.:jump:

[highnote]

How many have read the Democrat's proposed Health Care bill?

Here's a link:

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/DraftHealthCareReform-BillText.pdf

If you have read it, what is good or bad about it? Can you point out the specific sections you do or don't like so that I can check it out for myself?

If you have not read it then how do you know whether it is a good plan or bad plan?

[lsbets]

Bobby boy, you don't even understand what freedom is, as has been well demonstrated.

Yes Hcap, your blinkers are amazing. You throw up bullshit and get called on it and keep charging ahead. But, it might not be blinkers, I am starting to think you just might be stupid.

[lsbets]

Indulto, is it possible to live a happy life after somebody as brilliantly perceptive as Isbets tells you you've lost your marbles? :confused:

And don't forget. Tom really is a great judge of character and, of course, a funny guy. (Everybody says so!) And PA really does moderate all of us down here.

Us liberals sure are lucky to have found such a pleasant place to exchange ideas with some of the most open-minded conservatives in the country!

(I can't waste this lucky feeling. I think I'll buy a lottery ticket!!:jump: :jump: :jump: )

Hey NJ, I'm still waiting for you to explain your brilliant observation that Republicans are somehow blocking healthcare. You've never expanded on that civics lesson. Will you step up to the plate today?

[boxcar]

I'm amazed that you're amazed.You don't get reasoned argument from men in a state of panic and fear.These neoconderthals can see a future much like their close kin the neanderthal....extinction beckons to them so cut them some slack.Adios :D

Yeah, you'd know all about that, wouldn't you? When was the last time a statist or greenie gave a "reasoned argument" on man-made global warming (or is it just the more generic "climate change" now?). The sky is falling! The sky is falling! The oceans are rising. The oceans are rising. :bang: :bang:

Go back on the plantation and beg like a dog for food from your Master's hand with the other brown shirts, will ya? That's what you've been trained to do, isn't it? You're out of your league over here.

Boxcar

[highnote]

How many have read the Democrat's proposed Health Care bill?

Here's a link:

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/DraftHealthCareReform-BillText.pdf

If you have read it, what is good or bad about it? Can you point out the specific sections you do or don't like so that I can check it out for myself?

If you have not read it then how do you know whether it is a good plan or bad plan?


Well -- any responses?

[DRIVEWAY]

Well -- any responses?

Having trouble saving the document. There are countless references to other legislative initiatives. Would need to sit in the congressional library to cross reference everything. This could be very time consumming.

Are there summaries available that breakdown the legislation into major minor points and topics? 850 pages takes time.

But need to save the document to work through it.

[boxcar]

Well -- any responses?

SJ, I've only read snippets of the bill because to me the bill itself is irrelevant. Any program that brings us further down the dark, dangerous path of socialism is a non-starter for me. I'm opposed to it on principle. I'm opposed to any legislation that would further empower the state at the expense of my individual liberties.

Boxcar

[Indulto]

Well -- any responses?Yet a third post requesting opinions of others without offering one of your own. Why don't you prove that YOU'VE actually read it by pointing out significant portions that you agree and/or disagree with?

[boxcar]

Yet a third post requesting opinions of others without offering one of your own. Why don't you prove that YOU'VE actually read it by pointing out significant portions that you agree and/or disagree with?

Oh...so, it's an opinion you want? Here it is: The bill sucks raw eggs in principle.

Don't forget: You heard it here first. ;)

Boxcar

[mostpost]

...and add to that , I don't recall Bush making a wreck of his presidency only 7 months into it . This worthless excuse of a free world leader deserves it .
Your recall is correct. It wasn't until 7 1/2 months into Bush's presidency that the World Trade Center was attacked. An attack made more likely by Bush's indifference and apathy.

[Indulto]

Oh...so, it's an opinion you want? Here it is: The bill sucks raw eggs in principle.

Don't forget: You heard it here first. ;)

BoxcarHardly original and totally worthless. No statements of what is good or bad (or, in your case, just what's bad) and no justification based on the bill's content and interpretation of it.

One might say the box was empty.;)

[lsbets]

Hardly original and totally worthless. No statements of what is good or bad (or, in your case, just what's bad) and no justification based on the bill's content and interpretation of it.

One might say the box was empty.;)

really? You are slipping more and more every day.

If someone like Boxcar is opposed in principle to the government getting more involved with our healthcare system, do they need to red the bill to know they think its bad? Would reading the bill change his mind and make him believe in bigger government? Hardly. Your last post amounted to nothing more than trolling.

Now, what have you liked about the bill, since I'm sure you have read it more than once and even had your favorite sections tattooed on your rear end next to a smiling picture of Obama.

Oh, and before you report me - All Hail Obama! All Hail Obama!

[boxcar]

Hardly original and totally worthless. No statements of what is good or bad (or, in your case, just what's bad) and no justification based on the bill's content and interpretation of it.

One might say the box was empty.;)

The only empty head, heart and soul around here is yours. LS said it best already. But I will add that I pity your pathetic existence because you're so soulless. You obviously possess no real core values (or principles) upon which your life revolves; for if you did, you would readily understand how people can take a firm stand on core principles alone, apart from becoming hopelessly entwined in mindless, incomprehensible minutia.

Ciao,
Boxcar

[mostpost]

Hey NJ, I'm still waiting for you to explain your brilliant observation that Republicans are somehow blocking healthcare. You've never expanded on that civics lesson. Will you step up to the plate today?
NJ, If I may.
The Republicans are blocking Health Care Reform in several ways.
First, by delaying tactics in Congress. During the July 13 meeting of the Senate committee charged with the bill, Senator Dodd informed the committee that 64 amendments proposed by the Republicans had been agreed to by all. He then asked Senator Enzi if they could proceed to other matters. Senator Enzi said no, because further debate was needed on the 64 amendments. Dodd then reminded Enzi that the Democrats had agreed to everything in the amendments and Enzi replied the very Republicans who had initiated the amendments had problems with them.
ANother thing they did was to propose a long series of amendments, all of which said, in varying ways; we should amend this bill by deleting everything from the first page to the last and then do nothing.
Then there are the lies.
Lie number one: Someone will come too your home and persude you to commit suicide.
Lie number two: It's socialized medicine.
Lie Number three: It will bankrupt the country.
Lie Number four: You will be forced into a government run plan.
Lie number five: A government Bureaucrat will choose your doctor.
Lie number six: A government bureacrat will decide on all courses of treatment.
Lie number seven: Republicans are for Health Care Reform. Really. Cross our hearts.
And here are statements by Republican leaders:
Jim DeMint: If we can defeat Obama on health care, It will be his WATERLOO.
James Inhofe: We are plotting the demise on a week by week basis.
William Kristol: We need to drive a stake through its heart.

[Indulto]

really? You are slipping more and more every day.

If someone like Boxcar is opposed in principle to the government getting more involved with our healthcare system, do they need to red the bill to know they think its bad? Would reading the bill change his mind and make him believe in bigger government? Hardly. Your last post amounted to nothing more than trolling.

Now, what have you liked about the bill, since I'm sure you have read it more than once and even had your favorite sections tattooed on your rear end next to a smiling picture of Obama.

Oh, and before you report me - All Hail Obama! All Hail Obama!The bolded portion supportive of your fellow closed-minded circle member shows exactly how far you've fallen. I've never considered getting a tatoo, but the location you're focused on suggests you have considerable experience admiring tatoos in that area.:jump:

[mostpost]

Oh BS, Indulto, BS.

Where was the MSM when Bush, Cheney, McCain, almost any republican was shouted down by loud mouth idiots who WERE paid to be there, and WERE let in to private areas by members of Congress?

When the PEOPLE show up and express their outrage, were are the bad guys?

Cry all you want, you lefties will never shut us up. We know garbage when we smell it, and Obama is garbage.
Really, when did this happen. Chapter and verse. No one who objected to Bush was ever allowed anywhere near to any of his public appearances. Same with Cheney. And when McCain was on the campaign trail all you heard was Obama's an Arab and Kill Obama. So show us where this occured.
And if you are referring to the Code Pink demonstrations at some congressional committee meetings, those never escalted to the point where they interfered with someone's right to speak.

[mostpost]

Hardly original and totally worthless. No statements of what is good or bad (or, in your case, just what's bad) and no justification based on the bill's content and interpretation of it.

One might say the box was empty.;)
You've been here long enough to know that Boxcar has very strong opinions and very weak arguments to back those opinions. :D

[mostpost]

You've been here long enough to know that Boxcar has very strong opinions and very weak arguments to back those opinions. :D
And he is really good at insults>

[BenDiesel26]

Really, when did this happen. Chapter and verse. No one who objected to Bush was ever allowed anywhere near to any of his public appearances. Same with Cheney. And when McCain was on the campaign trail all you heard was Obama's an Arab and Kill Obama. So show us where this occured.
And if you are referring to the Code Pink demonstrations at some congressional committee meetings, those never escalted to the point where they interfered with someone's right to speak.

Actually they did. July 4, 2008. Code Pink interrupted Bush five times while giving a speech at Montichello. Once again you're dead wrong. You must also have forgotten the time they interrupted his speech during his second inauguration. Replace the word Bush with Obama in your third sentence and that would be about right. And if you really want to see the left interfering with someone's right to speech, go watch the Columbia protest of the Minutemen in which they physically stormed the stage and would not allow the speech to take place. Or how about the time Obama's baby ACORN broke into houses? When Obama trained ACORN in the 90's, this is the stuff that he was teaching them. It is what a community organizer does.

[lsbets]

The bolded portion supportive of your fellow closed-minded circle member shows exactly how far you've fallen. I've never considered getting a tatoo, but the location you're focused on suggests you have considerable experience admiring tatoos in that area.:jump:

So Indulto, I take it, since you won't answer, that you have not read the bill, but like it because Obamas says too. There's some independent thought for you.

Mostpost - the Republicans can stop nothing in the House or the Senate. The Democrats have a huge majority in the House and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Previously you guys said you couldn't get things through the Senate because you didn't have 60 votes. Now you have them. The only thing that stopped it from beig passed before the recess was fear of constituents, you know the people back home.

Lie number one: Someone will come too your home and persude you to commit suicide.
Lie number two: It's socialized medicine.
Lie Number three: It will bankrupt the country.
Lie Number four: You will be forced into a government run plan.
Lie number five: A government Bureaucrat will choose your doctor.
Lie number six: A government bureacrat will decide on all courses of treatment.
Lie number seven: Republicans are for Health Care Reform. Really. Cross our hearts.

Now onto your lies about supposed lies:

1) Did anyone say that, really? No, they didn't. But when you have a bill that is being sold as a way to control costs, and then highlight end of life counseling, people step back and say hmmmmmm. Are the bean counters going to encourage people to cut costs and avoid life support measures? No, bureacrats are perfect and always have the public in the front of their minds. Yeah, okay, sure.
2) Taken in its entirety with its effects (which even Obama knows, and he stated it is how to get where he wants to go) it is the first step towards a single payer socialized system.
3) It will bankrupt the country. Look at the numbers put up by the Concord Coalition. We cannot afford anymore spending when you look at our debt and add our already committed future obligations on top of it. For us to add any more spending anywhere right now is insanity.
4) That is the plan, as stated by Obama. TO drive us towards a single payer system ala Canada. This bill is a first step.
5) See #4.
6) Yep, thats in the bill. The government will send out directives with what the most effective treatments are. i know, they are merely suggestions. Okay, yeah, sure.
7) The choice for reform is not this bill or nothing. It is not single payer or nothing. Being opposed to this bill does not mean one is opposed to reform. The biggest lie of all is the one you are spreading there, that if you oppose this bill you oppose reform.

But I know, as Obama stated. If you don't agree with him, you need to step aside and get out of his way. He won. And if you know of someone who disagrees with him, report them to the white house office of dissident control. Ail Hail Obama! All Hail Obama!

[lsbets]

Actually they did. July 4, 2008. Code Pink interrupted Bush five times while giving a speech at Montichello. Once again you're dead wrong. You must also have forgotten the time they interrupted his speech during his second inauguration. Replace the word Bush with Obama in your third sentence and that would be about right.

Ben, you've been here long enough to know that most posts a lot, thinks he knows what he's talking about, but sees the world in an alternate reality that doesn't exist. I cannot think of another poster who uses so many words to demonstrate that he knows so little.

[boxcar]

The bolded portion supportive of your fellow closed-minded circle member shows exactly how far you've fallen. I've never considered getting a tatoo, but the location you're focused on suggests you have considerable experience admiring tatoos in that area.:jump:

LS focused on that "area" because that, in all likelihood, is the area into which your onboard 'puter is plugged.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

You've been here long enough to know that Boxcar has very strong opinions and very weak arguments to back those opinions. :D

And this from someone who has the intellectual depth of a mud puddle -- if that. :rolleyes:

Boxcar
P.S. This wasn't intended as an insult because I would never insult mud or puddles.

[boxcar]

And he is really good at insults>

You really have no clue just how good I can be. ;)

Boxcar

[Indulto]

The only empty head, heart and soul around here is yours. LS said it best already. But I will add that I pity your pathetic existence because you're so soulless. You obviously possess no real core values (or principles) upon which your life revolves; for if you did, you would readily understand how people can take a firm stand on core principles alone, apart from becoming hopelessly entwined in mindless, incomprehensible minutia.

Ciao,
BoxcarOne of my "core values" is that certainty is a trap that one should avoid whenever possible. Your reliance on religion rather than reality, and inablity or unwillingness to debate on any basis other than ideology, deserves no respect from me.

I am not saying that religion has no value; only that there appears to be significant, irreconcilable differences among them. Each group of believers can't be right under all circumstances. IMO no one should suffer because they truly believe differently from others who happen to be in the majority; particularly with regard to secular issues that affect everyone.

The basic difference between us, as far as I can tell, is that I want to see citizens of this country get along for the greater benefit to all. I see political compromise as basically a good thing. OTOH it appears that you have no use for anyone whose thinking doesn't match yours, line for line.

Unfortunately, people like you make it harder for people like me to collectively improve the quality of life for the deserving portion of those who don't benefit from the status quo because you are determined to deny the undeserving at any cost. A good compromise IMO would involve measures to reduce fraud and corruption as well as cost, but of course politicians of all stripes would have to agree; many to their own detriment. That includes several representing the State of California who have proven that diversity doesn't decrease damage done to its residents.

[Tom]

NJ, If I may.
The Republicans are blocking Health Care Reform in several ways.



Wrong yet again...who woulda thunk it?
The repubs are not delaying it at all - they CANNOT delay it. The dems can put it to a vote today and pass it without a single repub vote.

Were you lying or ingnorant?

[mostpost]

Wrong yet again...who woulda thunk it?
The repubs are not delaying it at all - they CANNOT delay it. The dems can put it to a vote today and pass it without a single repub vote.

Were you lying or ingnorant?
As I said, there are many ways a minority can subvert the will of the majority. An endless stream of amendments. A majority too concerned with Bipartisanship. Complicity of a few members of the majority. Can they stop it permanently? No, but they can delay unless Democratic leadership grows some.

[boxcar]

One of my "core values" is that certainty is a trap that one should avoid whenever possible. Your reliance on religion rather than reality, and inablity or unwillingness to debate on any basis other than ideology, deserves no respect from me.

A couple of things, sir: First, I don't rely upon "religion", i.e. an institutionalized system per se. I rely upon the sure bedrock foundation of God's revelation to Man. Big dif between this, as a bible-believing Christian, and "religion".

Now a question: By "certainty", was this used as a euphemism for "absolutes"?

I am not saying that religion has no value; only that there appears to be significant, irreconcilable differences among them. Each group of believers can't be right under all circumstances.

Within the framework of my core principles, why need I concern myself with all the different world religions and their manifold differences? I only need to know that I am living according to God's revealed will.

Boxcar

[Indulto]

So Indulto, I take it, since you won't answer, that you have not read the bill, but like it because Obamas says too. There's some independent thought for you. ...I haven't read it all and, frankly, don't understand everything I did read.

I think the White House was smart to allow congress to be the first to fail. From my limited understanding of it, I'm inclined to allow it to die and let the White House go back and lead the charge for a single payer plan for which it takes primary responsibility.

If Obama really believes single-payer is the right way to go, he shouldn't be afreaid to seek re-election as confirmation of his position. But then I'm not a Democrat.;)

[Lefty]

Rahm Emmanuel's Brother, Ezekial is an Obama health advisor. just look up his thghts on giving Seniors' Healthcare.

[lsbets]

I haven't read it all and, frankly, don't understand everything I did read.

I think the White House was smart to allow congress to be the first to fail. From my limited understanding of it, I'm inclined to allow it to die and let the White House go back and lead the charge for a single payer plan for which it takes primary responsibility.

If Obama really believes single-payer is the right way to go, he shouldn't be afreaid to seek re-election as confirmation of his position. But then I'm not a Democrat.;)

Fair answer. Obama does believe in a single payer system, he has said so previously. But he doesn't have the balls to push for one outright. He seems to think the way to go is to put something in place that will destroy the private system. He won't lead the charge for one outright, he is not a leader.

[Indulto]

A couple of things, sir: First, I don't rely upon "religion", i.e. an institutionalized system per se. I rely upon the sure bedrock foundation of God's revelation to Man. Big dif between this, as a bible-believing Christian, and "religion".

Now a question: By "certainty", was this used as a euphemism for "absolutes"?



Within the framework of my core principles, why need I concern myself with all the different world religions and their manifold differences? I only need to know that I am living according to God's revealed will.

BoxcarI stand corrected. Readers please note that I should have written,"Your reliance on THE BIBLE rather than WHAT MAN HAS LEARNED ABOUT HIMSELF AND HIS UNIVERSE IN 5000 YEARS, and inablity or unwillingness to debate on any basis other than ideology, deserves no respect from me."


No further comment necessary.

[boxcar]

I stand corrected. Readers please note that I should have written,"Your reliance on THE BIBLE rather than WHAT MAN HAS LEARNED ABOUT HIMSELF AND HIS UNIVERSE IN 5000 YEARS, and inablity or unwillingness to debate on any basis other than ideology, deserves no respect from me."


No further comment necessary.

Ahh...but permit me one, sir. When you said that one of your "core values" is that "certainty is a trap that one should avoid whenever possible", you unwittingly fell into a syllogistic trap of your own making, if you meant that there is no such thing as any absolutes, and you're certain about that! This becomes a very obvious self-defeating statement. On the the other hand, by your phrase "whenever possible" you mean that it may not always be possible or even desirable, then I'd say your your lack of respect for anyone who argues from a set of "ideological' core principles or values, whether these be secular, philosophical, religious or biblical in nature is irrational. Pick your poison, sir, because either is sufficient for you to carry out a little act of euthanasia -- something you can easily support, as I recall. ;)

Boxcar

[robert99]

Wrong yet again...who woulda thunk it?
The repubs are not delaying it at all - they CANNOT delay it. The dems can put it to a vote today and pass it without a single repub vote.

Were you lying or ingnorant?

The actual words posted were "The Republicans are blocking Health Care Reform in several ways." We all know the Bill cannot be blocked if needs be. It is Health Care Reform that is being blocked as you are well aware.

You know darn well that Obama is seeking cross party consensus on a major Bill that has to last more than 3 1/2 years of his Presidency. The Republicans sense that to defeat a concensus Bill will cripple the President - another lame duck even at such a difficult time for the prospects of America's future.

The vested health interests are funding the propaganda to Democrats and Republicans. It is the Republicans that are not playing ball by not putting up reasoned amendments to improve the Bill for all Americans - just shamelessly peddling what they know, and you know, to be lies.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/09/obama-healthcare-reform-defeat

"Palin's astonishing comments were an incendiary contribution to a national debate that is threatening to spill over into civil disorder. Scores of "town hall" public meetings held by Democratic politicians in recent days have been disrupted by Republican supporters or protesters linked to groups funded by the healthcare industry. Some meetings have been cancelled out of a fear of violence. In Missouri six people were arrested at one event. A group of supporters even hung an effigy of a Democratic congressman outside his office; another Democrat has received death threats.

The efforts have prompted Obama's own campaigning body, Organising for America, which grew out of his presidential campaign, to promise to turn up to public meetings to provide a voice in favour of reform. Several union groups have also vowed to follow suit. In a memo sent to union activists by John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO union group, he called on members to go to the meetings to oppose the Republicans.

The tactics of Republicans, conservative protest groups and healthcare lobbyist-linked organisations have been decried by many commentators. Though Republican leaders and other conservatives have claimed the protests are a genuine outburst of anti-healthcare reform feeling, there have been instances of activists being caught red-handed.

One woman who protested at a public meeting held by Wisconsin congressman Steve Kagen, a Democrat, had said she was "just a mom" but turned out to be a former senior Republican party official. "They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems," said Washington Post columnist Steven Pearlstein

"If they defeat him, it's going to be bad. He is being outfoxed by a Republican party that should be outnumbered," said Shaun Bowler, professor of political science at the University of California.

"It is the first time he has seemed to be weak," said Bowler. "He has started to seem like any other president. The shine has come off."

Ironically, Obama's main problems lie with his own party and with his desire to reach consensus on the healthcare issue rather than to dictate a reform programme. He has insisted on Republican involvement in the drafting of new legislation. He has also paid heed to the "Blue Dog" group of Democratic politicians who represent conservative-leaning electorates and who have pushed aggressively for him to water down his healthcare proposals by, among other things, taking out the public option.

At the same time, as anti-lobbying watchdog groups have pointed out, money has been flowing to the group's members from the healthcare industry in the form of campaign contributions. Blue Dog Democrats have collected more money than any other congressional grouping this year, with more than half the cash coming from healthcare businesses or the insurance and financial services sector.

But perhaps the most surprising thing about the whole debate is that the appetite for health reform remains extremely popular with most Americans, even as Obama's poll numbers sink and the fight with Republicans and the healthcare industry grows uglier and uglier. One recent poll showed that 62% of Americans favoured a public option and 61% supported higher taxes on the wealthy in order to pay for it."

[Indulto]

Fair answer. Obama does believe in a single payer system, he has said so previously. But he doesn't have the balls to push for one outright. He seems to think the way to go is to put something in place that will destroy the private system. He won't lead the charge for one outright, he is not a leader.A good leader needs to listen in order to determine the direction in which to lead. Obama may have been advised to let the Blue Dogs show their scales on their own in order to weaken their opposition later on.

Why do you believe that private insurance company profits deserve to be preserved while so many working families can't afford any protection and so many of us have seen our health care insurance premiums skyrocket? Do you still support the absence of price negotiation with pharmaceutical companies in the Medicare drug prescription program?

[boxcar]

The actual words posted were "The Republicans are blocking Health Care Reform in several ways." We all know the Bill cannot be blocked if needs be. It is Health Care Reform that is being blocked as you are well aware.

You know darn well that Obama is seeking cross party consensus on a major Bill that has to last more than 3 1/2 years of his Presidency. The Republicans sense that to defeat a concensus Bill will cripple the President - another lame duck even at such a difficult time for the prospects of America's future.

The vested health interests are funding the propaganda to Democrats and Republicans. It is the Republicans that are not playing ball by not putting up reasoned amendments to improve the Bill for all Americans - just shamelessly peddling what they know, and you know, to be lies.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/09/obama-healthcare-reform-defeat

"Palin's astonishing comments were an incendiary contribution to a national debate that is threatening to spill over into civil disorder. Scores of "town hall" public meetings held by Democratic politicians in recent days have been disrupted by Republican supporters or protesters linked to groups funded by the healthcare industry. Some meetings have been cancelled out of a fear of violence. In Missouri six people were arrested at one event. A group of supporters even hung an effigy of a Democratic congressman outside his office; another Democrat has received death threats.

The efforts have prompted Obama's own campaigning body, Organising for America, which grew out of his presidential campaign, to promise to turn up to public meetings to provide a voice in favour of reform. Several union groups have also vowed to follow suit. In a memo sent to union activists by John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO union group, he called on members to go to the meetings to oppose the Republicans.

The tactics of Republicans, conservative protest groups and healthcare lobbyist-linked organisations have been decried by many commentators. Though Republican leaders and other conservatives have claimed the protests are a genuine outburst of anti-healthcare reform feeling, there have been instances of activists being caught red-handed.

One woman who protested at a public meeting held by Wisconsin congressman Steve Kagen, a Democrat, had said she was "just a mom" but turned out to be a former senior Republican party official. "They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems," said Washington Post columnist Steven Pearlstein

"If they defeat him, it's going to be bad. He is being outfoxed by a Republican party that should be outnumbered," said Shaun Bowler, professor of political science at the University of California.

"It is the first time he has seemed to be weak," said Bowler. "He has started to seem like any other president. The shine has come off."

Ironically, Obama's main problems lie with his own party and with his desire to reach consensus on the healthcare issue rather than to dictate a reform programme. He has insisted on Republican involvement in the drafting of new legislation. He has also paid heed to the "Blue Dog" group of Democratic politicians who represent conservative-leaning electorates and who have pushed aggressively for him to water down his healthcare proposals by, among other things, taking out the public option.

At the same time, as anti-lobbying watchdog groups have pointed out, money has been flowing to the group's members from the healthcare industry in the form of campaign contributions. Blue Dog Democrats have collected more money than any other congressional grouping this year, with more than half the cash coming from healthcare businesses or the insurance and financial services sector.

But perhaps the most surprising thing about the whole debate is that the appetite for health reform remains extremely popular with most Americans, even as Obama's poll numbers sink and the fight with Republicans and the healthcare industry grows uglier and uglier. One recent poll showed that 62% of Americans favoured a public option and 61% supported higher taxes on the wealthy in order to pay for it."

Wow! Talk about someone who has O.D'd on the KoolAid! :bang: :bang:

Boxcar

[Indulto]

Ahh...but permit me one, sir. When you said that one of your "core values" is that "certainty is a trap that one should avoid whenever possible", you unwittingly fell into a syllogistic trap of your own making, if you meant that there is no such thing as any absolutes, and you're certain about that! This becomes a very obvious self-defeating statement. On the the other hand, by your phrase "whenever possible" you mean that it may not always be possible or even desirable, then I'd say your your lack of respect for anyone who argues from a set of "ideological' core principles or values, whether these be secular, philosophical, religious or biblical in nature is irrational. Pick your poison, sir, because either is sufficient for you to carry out a little act of euthanasia -- something you can easily support, as I recall. ;)

BoxcarThe bible is full of absolutes that are interpreted differently. One can never be absolutely certain whose conflicting absolute is the right one.

IMO no-one should be denied the right to die under circumstances they previously and thoughtfully considered while of a sound mind. Those who didn't plan for such contingencies would have the same protection they have today. Keep on spinning.

[JustRalph]

Hardly original and totally worthless. No statements of what is good or bad (or, in your case, just what's bad) and no justification based on the bill's content and interpretation of it.

One might say the box was empty.;)

How about this part of the bill............Congressman and their families can opt out? Why do you think that part is in there? Huh?

Because it is such a good bill huh?

[Tom]

Bobby, Obama is after total control of the economy and over our lives.
End of story.

[Indulto]

How about this part of the bill............Congressman and their families can opt out? Why do you think that part is in there? Huh?

Because it is such a good bill huh?No argument from me. I hope it goes down for that reason alone. How does that square with "representing" one's constituents?

The only reason we're getting this kind of result is because your guys won't step up to the plate either to help produce a bill almost everyone can support. If people can see true co-operation at work, legitimate dissent will be more focused, reasonable, and effective. Imagine if Obama had to refute reasonable logic for a change instead of over-the-top rhetoric.:lol:

[boxcar]

The bible is full of absolutes that are interpreted differently. One can never be absolutely certain whose conflicting absolute is the right one.

One can be reasonably and rationally certain and confident through the consistent application of sound hermeneutical principles. Further, the bible is self-interpreting through the hermeneutical principle of the "analogy of scripture". But this, sir, is a complex subject and not one on which I would waste my valuable time with anyone as intellectually dishonest as you.

IMO no-one should be denied the right to die under circumstances they previously and thoughtfully considered while of a sound mind. Those who didn't plan for such contingencies would have the same protection they have today. Keep on spinning.

Your "opinion" is just that. An opinion grounded in the deep darkness of ignorance -- in the ever shifting sands of mutability -- in your situational ethics that are always in a constant state of flux. This is why you have no real set of core values or principles that would serve as sure anchors to the soul during life's many storms. You hang your hat on nothing because you believe in everything -- hence, nothing -- certainly nothing of any substance.

The Christ spoke well of people like you when he said:

Matt 7:24-27
24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine, and acts upon them, may be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock . 25 "And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded upon the rock . 26 "And everyone who hears these words of Mine, and does not act upon them, will be like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. 27 "And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and it fell, and great was its fall."
NASB

Boxcar

[Indulto]

One can be reasonably and rationally certain and confident through the consistent application of sound hermeneutical principles. Further, the bible is self-interpreting through the hermeneutical principle of the "analogy of scripture". But this, sir, is a complex subject and not one on which I would waste my valuable time with anyone as intellectually dishonest as you.



Your "opinion" is just that. An opinion grounded in the deep darkness of ignorance -- in the ever shifting sands of mutability -- in your situational ethics that are always in a constant state of flux. This is why you have no real set of core values or principles that would serve as sure anchors to the soul during life's many storms. You hang your hat on nothing because you believe in everything -- hence, nothing -- certainly nothing of any substance.

The Christ spoke well of people like you when he said:

Matt 7:24-27
24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine, and acts upon them, may be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock . 25 "And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded upon the rock . 26 "And everyone who hears these words of Mine, and does not act upon them, will be like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. 27 "And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and it fell, and great was its fall."
NASB

BoxcarWell, it was only a matter of time before I got "scriptured" once again by his hole-in-the-headliness. Too bad you continue to waste your time.

Despite all the dogma I was exposed to as a kid, it's been consistently clear to me that Jesus was an icon for forgiveness to help those entrapped by the status quo to remain that way with the Catholic Church discovering ways to add to their misery. No wonder so many offshoots and versions of Christianity exist including your non-institutional one!

Just tell me one thing, Box, how can it be that one so blessed with knowledge and certainty is so obviously unhappy?

[boxcar]

Well, it was only a matter of time before I got "scriptured" once again by his hole-in-the-headliness. Too bad you continue to waste your time.

Just wanted to share with you that your "icon" Jesus very often also had the faithless like you in mind when he taught.

Despite all the dogma I was exposed to as a kid, it's been consistently clear to me that Jesus was an icon for forgiveness to help those entrapped by the status quo to remain that way with the Catholic Church discovering ways to add to their misery. No wonder so many offshoots and versions of Christianity exist including your non-institutional one!

More of the usual drivel. Next you'll be telling me he came to establish the New World Political Order. :rolleyes:

Just tell me one thing, Box, how can it be that one so blessed with knowledge and certainty is so obviously unhappy?

It seems to me, sir, that only the hopelessly or willfully stupid, foolish or ignorant could be happy with a tyrannical government.

Now, I have one for you: Which of the above categories characterizes you the best? (No need to be ashamed if you say "all the above" because I would understand.)

Any other questions?

Boxcar

[mostpost]

So Indulto, I take it, since you won't answer, that you have not read the bill, but like it because Obamas says too. There's some independent thought for you.

Mostpost - the Republicans can stop nothing in the House or the Senate. The Democrats have a huge majority in the House and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Previously you guys said you couldn't get things through the Senate because you didn't have 60 votes. Now you have them. The only thing that stopped it from beig passed before the recess was fear of constituents, you know the people back home.



Now onto your lies about supposed lies:

1) Did anyone say that, really? No, they didn't. But when you have a bill that is being sold as a way to control costs, and then highlight end of life counseling, people step back and say hmmmmmm. Are the bean counters going to encourage people to cut costs and avoid life support measures? No, bureacrats are perfect and always have the public in the front of their minds. Yeah, okay, sure.
2) Taken in its entirety with its effects (which even Obama knows, and he stated it is how to get where he wants to go) it is the first step towards a single payer socialized system.
3) It will bankrupt the country. Look at the numbers put up by the Concord Coalition. We cannot afford anymore spending when you look at our debt and add our already committed future obligations on top of it. For us to add any more spending anywhere right now is insanity.
4) That is the plan, as stated by Obama. TO drive us towards a single payer system ala Canada. This bill is a first step.
5) See #4.
6) Yep, thats in the bill. The government will send out directives with what the most effective treatments are. i know, they are merely suggestions. Okay, yeah, sure.
7) The choice for reform is not this bill or nothing. It is not single payer or nothing. Being opposed to this bill does not mean one is opposed to reform. The biggest lie of all is the one you are spreading there, that if you oppose this bill you oppose reform.

But I know, as Obama stated. If you don't agree with him, you need to step aside and get out of his way. He won. And if you know of someone who disagrees with him, report them to the white house office of dissident control. Ail Hail Obama! All Hail Obama!
1. The only highlighting of "End of life counseling is that being done by opponents of the bill. And end of life counseling is a very inaccurate way to portray this. What the bill does is provide medicare coverage of voluntary counseling. There is nothing mandatory about it.
2. You are going to believe what you need to believe.
3. The most alarmist projections say the new Plan will cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years. Here are the projections on the annual INCREASE in Health Care Spending over the next ten years. (Asssuming we do nothing)
2010: 114.9 billion; 2011: 145.9b 2012: 160.4b 2013: 180.2b 2014: 202.1b
2015: 228.3b 2016: 275.9b 2017: 271.5B 2018: 291.5b. The total additional apending over the next ten years, if we do nothing, is $1,870,700,000. One trillion eight hundred and seventy billion plus.

Not only do we spend almost two trillion more, projections show that the number of uninsured will continue to soar. What does that mean? More and more people will be forced to obtain health care at the emergency room. This is a problem in a number of ways. First emergency room care costs the government money. The state of California lost 750 Million due to ER visits in one year. I knowCA. numbers are inflated due to a large immigrant population, but I also know costs are high everywhere. Second, what the government doesn't cover, hospitals must. How do they do that? By raising the price of services conveyed to paying patients and their insurance providers.

Last on this point, the free market will not solve this problem because there is no free market. Insurance companies are exempt from anti trust and they are colluding on prices.

4, 5 and 6. Our present system is an abject failure. But we are talking about this bill. There is no single payer in this bill. This bill specifically provides that you can keep your plan and doctor. This bill does not mandate or suggest government control of treatments.
7. Republicans had control of the Presidency for eight years and control of Congress for six of those years. They made zero attempts to fix the health care system.

[boxcar]

Mosty, ever hear of "incrementalism"? Do you understand how it works? What it means? Did you hear Barney Da Frankfurter tell the world that this bill is "the best path to a one-payer system?

Boxcar

[david botsford]

The actual words posted were "The Republicans are blocking Health Care Reform in several ways." We all know the Bill cannot be blocked if needs be. It is Health Care Reform that is being blocked as you are well aware.

You know darn well that Obama is seeking cross party consensus on a major Bill that has to last more than 3 1/2 years of his Presidency. The Republicans sense that to defeat a concensus Bill will cripple the President - another lame duck even at such a difficult time for the prospects of America's future.

The vested health interests are funding the propaganda to Democrats and Republicans. It is the Republicans that are not playing ball by not putting up reasoned amendments to improve the Bill for all Americans - just shamelessly peddling what they know, and you know, to be lies.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/09/obama-healthcare-reform-defeat

"Palin's astonishing comments were an incendiary contribution to a national debate that is threatening to spill over into civil disorder. Scores of "town hall" public meetings held by Democratic politicians in recent days have been disrupted by Republican supporters or protesters linked to groups funded by the healthcare industry. Some meetings have been cancelled out of a fear of violence. In Missouri six people were arrested at one event. A group of supporters even hung an effigy of a Democratic congressman outside his office; another Democrat has received death threats.

The efforts have prompted Obama's own campaigning body, Organising for America, which grew out of his presidential campaign, to promise to turn up to public meetings to provide a voice in favour of reform. Several union groups have also vowed to follow suit. In a memo sent to union activists by John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO union group, he called on members to go to the meetings to oppose the Republicans.

The tactics of Republicans, conservative protest groups and healthcare lobbyist-linked organisations have been decried by many commentators. Though Republican leaders and other conservatives have claimed the protests are a genuine outburst of anti-healthcare reform feeling, there have been instances of activists being caught red-handed.

One woman who protested at a public meeting held by Wisconsin congressman Steve Kagen, a Democrat, had said she was "just a mom" but turned out to be a former senior Republican party official. "They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems," said Washington Post columnist Steven Pearlstein

"If they defeat him, it's going to be bad. He is being outfoxed by a Republican party that should be outnumbered," said Shaun Bowler, professor of political science at the University of California.

"It is the first time he has seemed to be weak," said Bowler. "He has started to seem like any other president. The shine has come off."

Ironically, Obama's main problems lie with his own party and with his desire to reach consensus on the healthcare issue rather than to dictate a reform programme. He has insisted on Republican involvement in the drafting of new legislation. He has also paid heed to the "Blue Dog" group of Democratic politicians who represent conservative-leaning electorates and who have pushed aggressively for him to water down his healthcare proposals by, among other things, taking out the public option.

At the same time, as anti-lobbying watchdog groups have pointed out, money has been flowing to the group's members from the healthcare industry in the form of campaign contributions. Blue Dog Democrats have collected more money than any other congressional grouping this year, with more than half the cash coming from healthcare businesses or the insurance and financial services sector.

But perhaps the most surprising thing about the whole debate is that the appetite for health reform remains extremely popular with most Americans, even as Obama's poll numbers sink and the fight with Republicans and the healthcare industry grows uglier and uglier. One recent poll showed that 62% of Americans favoured a public option and 61% supported higher taxes on the wealthy in order to pay for it."Sir I'm afraid that your informed perspective falls upon mute ears O'Bama turns out he's a black socialist and the ANTI-CHRIST. We look at things differently over here if you have pre-existing conditions or simply can't afford Health care premiums then you deserve to die.We have those really hard Christ like values.

[Indulto]

Sir I'm afraid that your informed perspective falls upon mute ears O'Bama turns out he's a black socialist and the ANTI-CHRIST. We look at things differently over here if you have pre-existing conditions or simply can't afford Health care premiums then you deserve to die.We have those really hard Christ like values.:lol:
Well said.

[boxcar]

Sir I'm afraid that your informed perspective falls upon mute ears O'Bama turns out he's a black socialist and the ANTI-CHRIST.

Fer sure, you're at least half right.

We look at things differently over here if you have pre-existing conditions or simply can't afford Health care premiums then you deserve to die.

You forgot to tell him that we do have Medicaid.

We have those really hard Christ like values.

How I wish this were true! But having said this, the bible never promises anyone, including Christians, that life would be easy or that anyone would find heaven (utopia-like conditions) right here on planet earth. Oddly, though, it does put quite a bit of emphasis on personal responsibility, as well as loving our neighbor -- as this is defined in the bible.

Boxcar

[david botsford]

Fer sure, you're at least half right.



You forgot to tell him that we do have Medicaid.



How I wish this were true! But having said this, the bible never promises anyone, including Christians, that life would be easy or that anyone would find heaven (utopia-like conditions) right here on planet earth. Oddly, though, it does put quite a bit of emphasis on personal responsibility, as well as loving our neighbor -- as this is defined in the bible.

BoxcarWell let me tell you something I have a stage 4 terminal condition have to much income to qualify for medicaid can't even apply for medicare for over a year no insurance would underwrite for any amount of money and I have son with a disease that has already cost him sight in one eye and his medical expenses have cost over 50,000 a year so you can take your pompous ass attitude and stick it in your smartest end just below your waste.

[boxcar]

Well let me tell you something I have a stage 4 terminal condition have to much income to qualify for medicaid can't even apply for medicare for over a year no insurance would underwrite for any amount of money and I have son with a disease that has already cost him sight in one eye and his medical expenses have cost over 50,000 a year so you can take your pompous ass attitude and stick it in your smartest end just below your waste.

I am very sorry to hear about your condition as well, as your boy's. But please tell me: I'd like to understand why you think your situation makes me, or anyone else for that matter, personally responsible to bear your costs? How is it my moral obligation to pick up part of your medical tab? How did you acquire this sense of entitlement? Why do you think you have some kind of right to a portion of my income through the process of government taxation? And finally, why should any of us who are completely satisfied with our insurance situation be forced to [eventually] abandon that, as well as our freedom of choices, so that someone like you might have it a little bit better while we would have it significantly worse?

Do not misunderstand me by this line of questioning. I fully recognize my duty, as a Christian, to "love my neighbor" and how that love should find concrete expressions, as mandated by the bible. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever helping people the biblical way, which does not include approval of any godless government entity [legally] confiscating my hard-earned money (through taxes) in the name of some "public good".

Boxcar

[robert99]

A good leader needs to listen in order to determine the direction in which to lead. Obama may have been advised to let the Blue Dogs show their scales on their own in order to weaken their opposition later on.

Why do you believe that private insurance company profits deserve to be preserved while so many working families can't afford any protection and so many of us have seen our health care insurance premiums skyrocket? Do you still support the absence of price negotiation with pharmaceutical companies in the Medicare drug prescription program?

I would expect Obama's superior intellect to have thought this whole process through to America's overall advantage and to have long started on the road to defeat the vested interests that currently enslave USA from ever progressing into full democracy.

What the opposing non-readers of the Bill are actually supporting with their mindless echoing of every lie and deceit from the vested interests is summed up by Wendell Potter, a once senior executive at giant US healthcare firm Cigna.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/26/us-healthcare-obama-barack-change

"Potter, who had worked at Cigna for 15 years, decided to check it out. What he saw appalled him. Hundreds of desperate people, most without any medical insurance, descended on the clinic from out of the hills. People queued in long lines to have the most basic medical procedures carried out free of charge. Some had driven more than 200 miles from Georgia. Many were treated in the open air. Potter took pictures of patients lying on trolleys on rain-soaked pavements.

For Potter it was a dreadful realisation that healthcare in America had failed millions of poor, sick people and that he, and the industry he worked for, did not care about the human cost of their relentless search for profits. "It was over-powering. It was just more than I could possibly have imagined could be happening in America,"

Potter resigned shortly afterwards. Last month he testified in Congress, becoming one of the few industry executives to admit that what its critics say is true: healthcare insurance firms push up costs, buy politicians and refuse to pay out when many patients actually get sick. In chilling words he told a Senate committee: "I worked as a senior executive at health insurance companies and I saw how they confuse their customers and dump the sick: all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors."

He has seen all this before. In his long years with Cigna he rose to be the company's top PR executive. He had an eagle-eye view of the industry's tactics of scuppering political efforts to get it to reform. "This is a very wealthy industry and they use PR very effectively. They manipulate public opinion and the news media and they have built up these relationships with all these politicians through campaign contributions," Potter said

Potter was witness to the campaign against Michael Moore's healthcare documentary Sicko. The industry slammed the film as one-sided and politically motivated. Secret documents leaked from the American Health Insurance Plans, the industry's lobby group, detailed the plan to paint Moore as a fringe radical. Potter now says the film "hit the nail on the head". "The Michael Moore movie that I saw was full of truth," he admits.

Potter was also working for Cigna when it became embroiled in the case of Nataline Sarkisyan, whose family went public after Cigna refused to pay for a liver transplant that it considered "experimental" and therefore not covered by their policy. Cigna reversed this decision only hours before the Californian teenager died. "I wish I could have done more in that case," Potter said.

Such sentiments are rare in an industry that has given America a healthcare system that can be cripplingly expensive for patients, but that does not produce a healthier population. The industry is often accused of wriggling out of claims. Firms comb medical records for any technicality that will allow them to refuse to pay. In one recently publicised example, a retired nurse from Texas discovered she had breast cancer. Yet her policy was cancelled because her insurers found she had previously had treatment for acne, which the dermatologist had mistakenly noted as pre-cancerous. They decreed she had misinformed them about her medical history and her double mastectomy was cancelled just three days before the operation.

"It is a system that is rigged against the policyholder," Potter said. The congressional probe found that just three firms had rescinded more than 20,000 policyholders between 2003 and 2007, saving hundreds of millions. "That's a lot of money that will now go towards their profits," Potter said.

A lot of that money also goes into contributions to politicians of both parties - $372m in the past nine years - and in lobbying groups to run TV ads slamming Obama's plans. Many of these ads deploy naked scare tactics. One report said that the industry was spending $1.4m a day on its campaign. In the face of that, it is perhaps no wonder that the Senate has delayed its vote, dealing a massive blow to Obama. "I have seen how the opponents of healthcare reform go to work... they are trying to delay action. They know that if they keep the process going for months, and turn it into a big mess, then the political impetus behind it will lessen," Potter said."

[Tom]

Sir I'm afraid that your informed perspective falls upon mute ears O'Bama turns out he's a black socialist and the ANTI-CHRIST. We look at things differently over here if you have pre-existing conditions or simply can't afford Health care premiums then you deserve to die.We have those really hard Christ like values.

I'm confused - I thought you thought this was a horse racing site????

[lsbets]

A good leader needs to listen in order to determine the direction in which to lead. Obama may have been advised to let the Blue Dogs show their scales on their own in order to weaken their opposition later on.

Why do you believe that private insurance company profits deserve to be preserved while so many working families can't afford any protection and so many of us have seen our health care insurance premiums skyrocket? Do you still support the absence of price negotiation with pharmaceutical companies in the Medicare drug prescription program?

Why do you and our ignorant friend from across the pond think that because I am opposed to government involvement in healthcare I like the current system and support the status quo?

It does not take a man with great vision to see the myriad of problems with Britain's system. Only a fool would defend it the way bobby does.

I have chosen not to participate in our current system. Most was correct in saying there is no free market in health care. There needs to be. Until consumers take responsibility in their decision to purchase an economic commodity, prices will not come under control. More government involvement will only make the situation worse.

The choice is not between more government involvement and the status quo. There are other alternatives, and ones that will actually work. I don't give sanction to the current system. What's funny is everyone who says if you don't support this bill you support the insurance companies, when the insurance companies think they are getting a great deal with this bill if they get mandated coverage for everyone like they want. They are the ones pushing the hardest for the bill. What they don't realize is by crawling in bed further with the looters in the government, they are guaranteeing their death. But, it is the supporters of this bill who are in bed with the insurance companies.

[jognlope]

Okay so you don't want to be responsible for the health costs of this boy. Why don't you complain about the years and years of ridiculous superfulous, selfish pork projects you've been paying for all along. Why aren't you complaing about that? You paid into $22 million project to find a mouse that did not exist out west and several million for a bike path, ridiculous museum projects .... all brought to your tax bill by "career congressman." You only need to check the congressional record. You paid $50,000 for a Pentagon toilet over and over.

You already have health insurance. All of you do, am I wrong?

[lsbets]

You already have health insurance. All of you do, am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong.

[ArlJim78]

If all they were proposing was a solid plan to insure the uninsured it would be one thing, and if that was all it was why would they have to tear apart the whole system and take it over? What they are proposing is a nightmare.

[jognlope]

I thought they were going to operate as an alternative funding source that that's it... the digitalizing and cost cutting and streamlining, I don't know what that is. It's probably too technical. There is no bill yet, only committee recommendations. I guess none of you believe Obama when he says it is strictly not to add to deficit. But you're against him anyway so no matter what he does you'll tear it down.

[dartman51]

I thought they were going to operate as an alternative funding source that that's it... the digitalizing and cost cutting and streamlining, I don't know what that is. It's probably too technical. There is no bill yet, only committee recommendations. I guess none of you believe Obama when he says it is strictly not to add to deficit. But you're against him anyway so no matter what he does you'll tear it down.

You are right. They want to tear down the whole house, to remodel the bathroom. Doesn't make sense to me.:confused:

[jognlope]

So how do you pay for health care?

[dartman51]

I thought they were going to operate as an alternative funding source that that's it... the digitalizing and cost cutting and streamlining, I don't know what that is. It's probably too technical. There is no bill yet, only committee recommendations. I guess none of you believe Obama when he says it is strictly not to add to deficit. But you're against him anyway so no matter what he does you'll tear it down.

If your boss or coworkers lied to you repeatedly, would you be eager to believe anything they said? I can't believe anyone is that nieve. But then, wasn't it P.T. Barnum that said "there is a sucker born every minute" ?;)

[lsbets]

So how do you pay for health care?

Normally cash. Sometimes barter. We'll cater breakfast for our pediatrician's office in exchange for our kid's checkups. We seem to get to the head of the line for our appointments doing that, the office staff loves us. :)

[jognlope]

Ok that's a real answer I can sink my teeth into...you know fanaticism is a good thing in raising the emotional level of the constituents and keying up discussion. That's democracy. Palin does well to talk like an idiot because at least it shows she is not a thinker and cannot ultimately be trusted to be in any major position in our government. She's a player, a change agent, but not a finalizer. The ones who have the courage are those who stay up all night in committees in Washington and work out the details.

We have to have protest and craziness or otherwise it's dead and dormant and the csars move in. It's the thinkers and doers in government who have the heavy burden of coming up with the brass tacks. They have to keep a level head.

[jognlope]

There was a nice letter to the editor of NY Times stating why not just expand the eligibility requirements in Medicaid. Say, you can make so and so, instead of like $600 a month? who knows... medicaid is frought with inefficiency and waste and fraud.

[highnote]

I'd like to understand why you think your situation makes me, or anyone else for that matter, personally responsible to bear your costs? How is it my moral obligation to pick up part of your medical tab? How did you acquire this sense of entitlement? Why do you think you have some kind of right to a portion of my income through the process of government taxation? And finally, why should any of us who are completely satisfied with our insurance situation be forced to [eventually] abandon that, as well as our freedom of choices, so that someone like you might have it a little bit better while we would have it significantly worse?

What is so wrong with sharing the costs of healthcare for the nation for those who want to participate in that sort of plan? It would probably make sense that anyone is free to opt out of the program, though.

We share the costs of building highways. We share the cost of defending the nation. We share the costs of politicians salaries. If we make an income or spend money, we are obligated to share those costs and we can not opt out of them. So you already share a portion of your income with the nation. Some people share more of their income than others.

Aren't there some things that can be better done collectively than individually? Maybe healthcare is one of them?

A person who works for a company that provides healthcare has no strong reason to change. However, a person who lives in a rural area where there are fewer opportunities to work for a company that can afford to pay their employees healthcare is likely to do without healthcare because their salary is too low to justify the expense.

I don't know what good options people in those areas have. I'm guessing most of them forego routine medical checkups and wait until they have a medical emergency before going to the doctor or the emergency room. But maybe that's the way it has to be -- too bad for them?

It is an issue that is not likely to go away, so it's important that whatever solution is finally decided upon is the best one. And, of course, doing nothing is one possible solution, I don't know how long that is sustainable. We'll probably find out because I don't see anything changing soon.

[Lefty]

jog, No I don't believe Obama when he says his healthcare plan will not add to the deficit. 1. His own CBO says it will add to the deficit.
2. He hasn't read the plan so how would he know? 3. He's been wrong on everything else. He said if the stimulus was rushed through, it would keep unemployment at 8%. WRONG.
Medicaid, Medicare is going broke. So if we can't fund these for a few, how can we fund a Universal healthplan? Nobody has answered this question.
Ezekial Emmanuel, Rahm's brother, is one of Obama's advisors. Read up on him and what he thinks about giving seniors heathcare.
polls say 80% of us are happy with our healthcare plan.
Don't believe me, read up on what the dims have said themselves.
scary...Find out what Obama said about single payer in 03-04. Read about ezekial Emmanuel. Read Daschiel's book.

[46zilzal]

What is so wrong with sharing the costs of healthcare for the nation for those who want to participate in that sort of plan? It would probably make sense that anyone is free to opt out of the program, though.

We share the costs of building highways. We share the cost of defending the nation. We share the costs of politicians salaries. If we make an income or spend money, we are obligated to share those costs and we can not opt out of them. So you already share a portion of your income with the nation. Some people share more of their income than others.


A lot of logic here

[Lefty]

wrong zilly. FORCED sharing is not sharing, it's socialism leading into Communism.
people who get into group plans willingly, to help bring costs down, now that's sharing...

[highnote]

wrong zilly. FORCED sharing is not sharing, it's socialism leading into Communism.
people who get into group plans willingly, to help bring costs down, now that's sharing...


Is forced income and sales taxation socialism / communism?

By the way, I'm all for voluntary taxation -- but I would imagine it would be bad policy because tax revenue would fall dramatically.

It might be the case that the best gov't plan would be one that people can opt into or out of. If enough people enrolled then the cost should be reasonable. Also the gov would not be forced to make a profit like the insurance companies. There would still be critics and there would still be problems. Would it be any better than what we have now? That's the trillion dollar question.

[boxcar]

What is so wrong with sharing the costs of healthcare for the nation for those who want to participate in that sort of plan? It would probably make sense that anyone is free to opt out of the program, though.

We share the costs of building highways. We share the cost of defending the nation. We share the costs of politicians salaries. If we make an income or spend money, we are obligated to share those costs and we can not opt out of them. So you already share a portion of your income with the nation. Some people share more of their income than others.

Aren't there some things that can be better done collectively than individually? Maybe healthcare is one of them?

A person who works for a company that provides healthcare has no strong reason to change. However, a person who lives in a rural area where there are fewer opportunities to work for a company that can afford to pay their employees healthcare is likely to do without healthcare because their salary is too low to justify the expense.

I don't know what good options people in those areas have. I'm guessing most of them forego routine medical checkups and wait until they have a medical emergency before going to the doctor or the emergency room. But maybe that's the way it has to be -- too bad for them?

It is an issue that is not likely to go away, so it's important that whatever solution is finally decided upon is the best one. And, of course, doing nothing is one possible solution, I don't know how long that is sustainable. We'll probably find out because I don't see anything changing soon.

SJ, SJ -- funding for a nation's infrastructure, which is a legitimate government responsibility, isn't exactly the same thing as the government trying to fund a universal health care scheme on the backs of actual taxpayers. In one case, taxpayers are providing funds to maintain common areas in the nation -- areas that are legitimately shared and used by all, such as highways, bridges, etc. But health care is a personal and complex responsibility whereby everyone has different needs. Why should I pay to take care of my family and also help pay to care for someone else's PERSONAL needs? When I assume personal responsibility for my family's care, how does this translate into taking on the responsibility for everyone else's? The "Robin Hood" syndrome, while having a nice romantic ring to it, is highly immoral. This is thievery. Plain and simple. The end should never justify the means.

Permit to frame this argument in different terms -- with one of my impeccably crafted analogies -- as only a critical and truly independent thinker can do. :)

I don't know if you have ever lived or owned a condo or co-op. But in this kind of living environment, the condo board of association (which could be likened to the government) sets the monthly condo fees (taxes) that each condo owner has to pay in order to maintain the common areas of their condo. For example, pool, recreation hall, golf course, landscaping -- all these kinds of things are common or available to all the owners for use. Therefore, each condo owner is required by the by-laws of the board or condo association to pay their monthly fees (government taxes) so that that board can pay for the maintenance of these common areas. In this commonly used scheme, everyone benefits.

Now, does this arrangement for shared costs for the ongoing maintenance of the common areas spillover to an owner's apartment, as well? If I own a unit in the building and I want to upgrade my kitchen, let's say, should I have the right to submit the estimate to the board and demand that all the other owners in the building share my personal expenses for my personal living quarters? Should the condo association demand of the other owners that they share in my expense -- simply on the basis they can afford it? How is my upgrade to my apartment going to benefit the other owners? They're out of some money and a little bit poorer, while I get to live a little bit better and enjoy my improved living conditions. And I did that at their expense! That's fair? That's equitable?

So, too, in society, there is such a thing as personal responsibility and legitimately shared responsibility for commonly used infrastructure components. Once a government crosses that line and decides that it's better equipped to take on my personal responsibility by forcing me to participate in some common scheme, then this is usurping my power of free choice. And when the state forces me to participate in an inferior health care scheme and I'm forced to drop a superior plan, then all that happens is that I get to share in everyone's misery, which is precisely what "equal outcomes" is all about. Many would benefit with an upgrade in care (which is easy when you have very little or nothing) but Most would experience a downgrade in service and benefits. This, too, would be fair? Equitable?

Boxcar

[jognlope]

Health care is so inflated now, for instance doctors in ERs have free license (paid for by insurance) to take a patient for a CT scan because he has a headache. Don't know why this is allowed, I guess because insurance is willing to pay for it.... because they have plenty of premiums, high premiums that are bankrupting smaller business. Both these sides need to come down, as well as malpractice fees ($500,000 or so for a big city surgeon). The torts laws need to be worked on that forbid the high malpractice suit pay outs.

I dont' hear anything about government actually telling private insurance carriers what they can and cannot allow.
The way I see it is a shared responsibility is that the health care system, double its cost since about 5 years ago, is of national concern and impacts Medicare's ability to not bankrupt the government.

[46zilzal]

MOST of the CYA tests are the direct result of litigation history, NOT sound medical judgement.

[highnote]

Box --

Citizens of the US are the ultimate infrastructure. An America that is filled with healthy citizens will build a better country and make bigger contributions.

As far as the condo analogy... I would think of the maintanence fees as similar to a basic healthcare plan that keeps everyone healthy. If a person wants a more elaborate plan then they could opt out of the plan in order to upgrade their kitchen. But if they opt into the plan they can accept the basic kitchen that comes with the condo.

I'm not convinced that everyone should be forced to opt into the plan, but I think that a gov't run plan could be done effectively and that people should be given the choice of whether or not they want to participate and contribute to the plan.

[Lefty]

swety, why don't we keep the discussion of the plan as it is and not as we want it to be? The plan says once you change jobs or your healthcare plan changes in any way, you then have to go on the govt plan.
Look at the people involved. Ezekial Emmanuel, is an advisor on healthcare.
Just read what he says about giving healthcare to seniors.
Why do you think they can run a Universal healthcare plan when they have failed with all others/ I.E. Medicare, Medicaid, SS. All dim govt plans. All going broke.
Answer please. where does all this faith in govt come from? Obama has been wrong on everything so far, yet you trust him on healthcare?

[david botsford]

I am very sorry to hear about your condition as well, as your boy's. But please tell me: I'd like to understand why you think your situation makes me, or anyone else for that matter, personally responsible to bear your costs? How is it my moral obligation to pick up part of your medical tab? How did you acquire this sense of entitlement? Why do you think you have some kind of right to a portion of my income through the process of government taxation? And finally, why should any of us who are completely satisfied with our insurance situation be forced to [eventually] abandon that, as well as our freedom of choices, so that someone like you might have it a little bit better while we would have it significantly worse?

Do not misunderstand me by this line of questioning. I fully recognize my duty, as a Christian, to "love my neighbor" and how that love should find concrete expressions, as mandated by the bible. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever helping people the biblical way, which does not include approval of any godless government entity [legally] confiscating my hard-earned money (through taxes) in the name of some "public good".

BoxcarWell let me make this clear I don't won't nothing from you I wouldn't mind getting back part of the million or more taxes I paid during my life supporting dumb ass wars and bridges to nowhere.I did not misunderstand you and if you think I'm fooled by your psuedo christian bullshit my ignore list is now a total of 1

[Lefty]

http://www.wizbangblog.com/content/2009/07/26/ezekiel-emanuel-deny-coverage-to-elderly-and-disabled-for-the-greater-good.php

this guy is an obama Healthcare advisor.

[Lefty]

David, I sure would like to get part of my tax money. Especially all the money that has been wasted on the so called war on Poverty. Last i heard, it was 6 Trillion bucks. Another failed dim idea.

[boxcar]

Box --

[quote]Citizens of the US are the ultimate infrastructure.

Hmm...I never thought of myself or any other person a being concrete and steel. I think of people as consisting of very unique individuals who have unlimited potential to become whatever they want to be. I think of people as being producers, which stands in sharp contrast to government, which has never produced anything nor ever will.

An America that is filled with healthy citizens will build a better country and make bigger contributions.[/b]

Correct. And each American should be free to decide how to best do this for him or herself.

[quote]As far as the condo analogy... I would think of the maintanence fees as similar to a basic healthcare plan that keeps everyone healthy. If a person wants a more elaborate plan then they could opt out of the plan in order to upgrade their kitchen. But if they opt into the plan they can accept the basic kitchen that comes with the condo.

With all due respect, you scenario is a pipe dream. In order to implement a nationalized scheme, the state will need every single tax dollar it can get. There will be no opting out. That's not an option -- unless the drop out is willing to pay the state penalties for non-participation. In the end, everyone will pay whether they're in or out. This is why your attempt to draw a parallel between maintenance fees universal health care is pretty lame, with all due respect. What you're overlooking is that under my analogy, everyone benefits equally because those common areas are available to be used by all. This arrangement, therefore, is imminently fair to all. This is precisely why a condo owner can't and wouldn't want to opt out because this action out wouldn't be necessary -- ever. But with your attempt at embellishing my analogy with your own, you already instinctively know that forcing fees on owners who want a better plan would be grossly unfair. In the real world, other condo owners are not going to want to share my expenses for any upgrade to my personal living quarters.

I'm not convinced that everyone should be forced to opt into the plan, but I think that a gov't run plan could be done effectively and that people should be given the choice of whether or not they want to participate and contribute to the plan.

How could this work? Who is going to pay for the Have Nots? Who is going to carry the freight for the poor? Who is going to carry the water for them?
Again, this is a pipe dream. The Haves will be forced to participate because their participation will be absolutely necessary. The Haves will have to have their money confiscated by the state in order to pay for Have Nots. As a result, the Haves will have less income and an inferior plan, while the Have Not's health standards will be raised somewhat. Or the alternate scenario will be that the Haves will have to pay what would amount to two "premiums" a superior one for them and inferior one for the Have Nots. In either case, the Haves will share in the misery of the Have Nots.

Boxcar

[Lefty]

Rush just read a page that said under Obama's plan, EVERYONE will be issued a National Healthcare Card. And the govt will have access to everyones bank acct for purposes of electronic transfer. I think he said page 30, but not sure.
This thing gets scarier, eh what?

[boxcar]

Well let me make this clear I don't won't nothing from you I wouldn't mind getting back part of the million or more taxes I paid during my life supporting dumb ass wars and bridges to nowhere.I did not misunderstand you and if you think I'm fooled by your psuedo christian bullshit my ignore list is now a total of 1 emphasis mine.

Good thing you dont 'cause I think I'd have to kick in for an education for you, too, just to get by your atrocious grammar.

Boxcar
P.S. For your info, when you use double negatives, this means you really do want something from me. :bang: :bang:

[Marshall Bennett]

Rush just read a page that said under Obama's plan, EVERYONE will be issued a National Healthcare Card. And the govt will have access to everyones bank acct for purposes of electronic transfer. I think he said page 30, but not sure.
This thing gets scarier, eh what?
Yeah , and then the system gets hacked and puts everyone's information at risk . An accident waiting to happen , sums up this administration .

[boxcar]

Box --

Citizens of the US are the ultimate infrastructure. An America that is filled with healthy citizens will build a better country and make bigger contributions.

As far as the condo analogy... I would think of the maintanence fees as similar to a basic healthcare plan that keeps everyone healthy. If a person wants a more elaborate plan then they could opt out of the plan in order to upgrade their kitchen. But if they opt into the plan they can accept the basic kitchen that comes with the condo.

I'm not convinced that everyone should be forced to opt into the plan, but I think that a gov't run plan could be done effectively and that people should be given the choice of whether or not they want to participate and contribute to the plan.

Your attempt to revise my perfect analogy is lame, with all due respect. This is because your ideal of everyone having a choice to opt in or out will not and cannot happen. Someone has to pay for the "have nots". Someone has to pony up for them -- one way or the other. Someone has to rob Peter to pay Paul.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

The SKY is falling!!!

Our system here has a single database called Pharmacare to insure for drug interaction problems and "shoppers" looking for pain meds.

ALL OTHER DATA is held in offices clinics or hospitals like MOST all health care coverage on the planet.

[Lefty]

Our Nev Senior senator, the coward Harry Reid, is having a Town Hall Meeting.
So why is he a coward, pray tell?
He's having it via telephone1
Danny Tarkanian, son of coach Jerry Tarkanian, has just announced he will
run against Harry Reid.

[Tom]

The SKY is falling!!!

Our system here has a single database called Pharmacare to insure for drug interaction problems and "shoppers" looking for pain meds.

ALL OTHER DATA is held in offices clinics or hospitals like MOST all health care coverage on the planet.

That is your system. Show me where it like that in our proposed system.

BTW, we got supermarkets here that do that for us.

[Lefty]

I'm losing too much weight. Last week my Dr Decided i should have a Catscan. I'm having it tomorrow, Tues. Under Obama's plan how long would I have to wait? Since i'm 72, probably forever.

[46zilzal]

I'm losing too much weight. Last week my Dr Decided i should have a Catscan. I'm having it tomorrow, Tues. Under Obama's plan how long would I have to wait? Since i'm 72, probably forever.

I would CHANGE physicians quickly. The most important part of any diagnosis is the HISTORY not secondary findings

[Tom]

There ya go Lefty, get the damn procedure done quick! :lol:

[Lefty]

I don't like mot Dr's, don't trust em. This one I do. the history is a type 2 diabetic 72 yr old man with sudden wght loss whose white count is up. Under Obama care i'd prob get a dr like you, zilly, if i got one at all.
No thanks.

[Indulto]

Your attempt to revise my perfect analogy is lame, with all due respect. This is because your ideal of everyone having a choice to opt in or out will not and cannot happen. Someone has to pay for the "have nots". Someone has to pony up for them -- one way or the other. Someone has to rob Peter to pay Paul.

BoxcarYour misconceptions are immaculate. The only catostrophic health insurance provider when the bible was written was the dispenser of occasional miracles. Still think that'll get the job done today?

[Lefty]

It's amazing to see libs' make fun of one's faith in religion then reveal their own unshakable faith in the Government. I'm amazed. i'm astounded. I'm flabbergasted.

[46zilzal]

I don't like mot Dr's, don't trust em. This one I do. the history is a type 2 diabetic 72 yr old man with sudden wght loss whose white count is up. Under Obama care i'd prob get a dr like you, zilly, if i got one at all.
No thanks.
That is not a history....there is much much more to it.

Cheif complaint, history of the current illness, Review of systems, general health, illnesses, injuries, immunizations, surgeries, allergies, medications current and past, social familal history. travel, occupational history etc etc.

The good ones LOOK and REVIEW along with take physical findings before they order tests

[Lefty]

He has been my Dr many years. He knows my history. I trust him implicitly, where i would never trust a Dr that the Government designates for me.

[46zilzal]

He has been my Dr many years. He knows my history. I trust him implicitly, where i would never trust a Dr that the Government designates for me.
The MAJOR problem with a patient's records when they have been a long time with one practitioner COMPLACENCY and not updating the history

Histories are plastic. They change over time and most ASSUME what was, still is. BIG MISTAKE

[boxcar]

Your misconceptions are immaculate. The only catostrophic health insurance provider when the bible was written was the dispenser of occasional miracles. Still think that'll get the job done today?

Absolutely oh, ye, of such little faith. Once a miracle worker, always one. Oh...but wait...your blind, irrational faith is in the "messiah" in the White House, isn't it? Just goes to show...everyone has some kind of faith.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Histories are plastic. They change over time and most ASSUME what was, still is. BIG MISTAKE

You finally provided us with an accurate description of yourself. I'm ecstatic. :jump: :jump: "BIG MISTAKE" are the two most truthful words you have ever uttered. (Now if we could only stuff you back into the test tube...) :D

Boxcar

[boxcar]

It's amazing to see libs' make fun of one's faith in religion then reveal their own unshakable faith in the Government. I'm amazed. i'm astounded. I'm flabbergasted.

No need for amazement. Indulto is only being true to his reprobate nature. He probably prays to BO daily on his prayer rug turned in the direction of D.C.

Boxcar

[Indulto]

It's amazing to see libs' make fun of one's faith in religion then reveal their own unshakable faith in the Government. I'm amazed. i'm astounded. I'm flabbergasted.I guess you missed Boxie's post where he explained that he doesn't belong to any organized religion, but rather is a self-interpreter of a bible which allegedly interprets itself.

Let me make it clear my humor is targeted at the poster only. I take religion very seriously. It is the greatest source of division and anguish in my lifetime.

Not all left-leaners share that view, but then, as you've proven yourself to be the board's least-accurate liberal labeler, the fruits of your efforts seldom reach beyond the low and lying.;)

Do you flinch everytime Franco Harris's catch is remembered?

[jognlope]

Boxcar, you've been paying for the "have nots except for a congressman in my pocket" porkers for years. This health bill involving taking Roosevelts and Vanderbilts out of health insurance profiteering system. I just don't want to pay for their expensive life styles any more. And the malpractice lawyers, a whole slew of second story men and woman trying to make bucks around the actual ones who went to school and did 72-hour residencies with no sleep. Like Azilal, sorry spelling.

[boxcar]

Boxcar, you've been paying for the "have nots except for a congressman in my pocket" porkers for years. This health bill involving taking Roosevelts and Vanderbilts out of health insurance profiteering system. I just don't want to pay for their expensive life styles any more. And the malpractice lawyers, a whole slew of second story men and woman trying to make bucks around the actual ones who went to school and did 72-hour residencies with no sleep. Like Azilal, sorry spelling.

I mentioned tort reform as A free market solution, among several others. I'm all for real reform within a free market framework. I am not for the unnecessary demolition of the current health care industry to be replaced with an elite government group of left wing radicals at the helm determining who gets what health care services and when, etc., etc.

Boxcar
P.S. I guess my position makes me part of the "mob"? :jump: :jump: Probably a "rabid radical" even... :jump: :jump: :jump:

[boxcar]

I guess you missed Boxie's post where he explained that he doesn't belong to any organized religion, but rather is a self-interpreter of a bible which allegedly interprets itself.

You're a real piece of work. No doubt another grad from Dumb Down U. :bang: :bang: I never said anything about not belonging to any "organized religion". Go back and re-read what I really said in #64, and try to get it right this time. This time, have enough pride in yourself to at least feign some semblance of genuine intelligence, and that you may actually have something between your ears other than tissue-destroying mold growth. Maybe then some of us may actually take you as seriously as you allegedly take religion.

Boxcar

[ddog]

SJ, SJ -- funding for a nation's infrastructure, which is a legitimate government responsibility, isn't exactly the same thing as the government trying to fund a universal health care scheme on the backs of actual taxpayers. In one case, taxpayers are providing funds to maintain common areas in the nation -- areas that are legitimately shared and used by all, such as highways, bridges, etc. But health care is a personal and complex responsibility whereby everyone has different needs. Why should I pay to take care of my family and also help pay to care for someone else's PERSONAL needs? When I assume personal responsibility for my family's care, how does this translate into taking on the responsibility for everyone else's? The "Robin Hood" syndrome, while having a nice romantic ring to it, is highly immoral. This is thievery. Plain and simple. The end should never justify the means.

Permit to frame this argument in different terms -- with one of my impeccably crafted analogies -- as only a critical and truly independent thinker can do. :)

I don't know if you have ever lived or owned a condo or co-op. But in this kind of living environment, the condo board of association (which could be likened to the government) sets the monthly condo fees (taxes) that each condo owner has to pay in order to maintain the common areas of their condo. For example, pool, recreation hall, golf course, landscaping -- all these kinds of things are common or available to all the owners for use. Therefore, each condo owner is required by the by-laws of the board or condo association to pay their monthly fees (government taxes) so that that board can pay for the maintenance of these common areas. In this commonly used scheme, everyone benefits.

Now, does this arrangement for shared costs for the ongoing maintenance of the common areas spillover to an owner's apartment, as well? If I own a unit in the building and I want to upgrade my kitchen, let's say, should I have the right to submit the estimate to the board and demand that all the other owners in the building share my personal expenses for my personal living quarters? Should the condo association demand of the other owners that they share in my expense -- simply on the basis they can afford it? How is my upgrade to my apartment going to benefit the other owners? They're out of some money and a little bit poorer, while I get to live a little bit better and enjoy my improved living conditions. And I did that at their expense! That's fair? That's equitable?

So, too, in society, there is such a thing as personal responsibility and legitimately shared responsibility for commonly used infrastructure components. Once a government crosses that line and decides that it's better equipped to take on my personal responsibility by forcing me to participate in some common scheme, then this is usurping my power of free choice. And when the state forces me to participate in an inferior health care scheme and I'm forced to drop a superior plan, then all that happens is that I get to share in everyone's misery, which is precisely what "equal outcomes" is all about. Many would benefit with an upgrade in care (which is easy when you have very little or nothing) but Most would experience a downgrade in service and benefits. This, too, would be fair? Equitable?

Boxcar


your analogy is insane, if all or most of the other condo members default or lose their jobs/income and can't perform upkeep in their units, does YOUR unit not suffer as well.

If other condo members start running meth houses out of their units or start "leasing" to riff-raff , does your unit not suffer as well.

Since you and the association are "required" to pay for the services no matter what is coming in, would it not be in YOUR long-term interest to see about helping the other owners to become/stay functioning members of your condo assoc?

So to run YOUR analogy to IT'S logical end, you ARE such an ends guy ,the other members of your assoc become unable to perform do you advocate the "final solution" for them? Toss them out in the street and look on like a dope while the value of YOUR unit sinks just like the others in YOUR association and YOU end up paying more and more of the associations costs.

So, you favor the bama plan for euthanasia , or in your analogy , toss em out in the street we don't much care, but you WILL say a prayer Sunday.


O and one more thing, if you ever have had the scratch to get into an assoc , which I doubt, you WILL find that certain "standards" are MANDATED for all members and you will pay for those , even if on YOUR personal unit.


Seems you need to rethink your crafting abilities, but we already knew that. :D

[Indulto]

You're a real piece of work. No doubt another grad from Dumb Down U. :bang: :bang: I never said anything about not belonging to any "organized religion". Go back and re-read what I really said in #64, and try to get it right this time. This time, have enough pride in yourself to at least feign some semblance of genuine intelligence, and that you may actually have something between your ears other than tissue-destroying mold growth. Maybe then some of us may actually take you as seriously as you allegedly take religion.

BoxcarFine, Boxie. Here it is:A couple of things, sir: First, I don't rely upon "religion", i.e. an institutionalized system per se. I rely upon the sure bedrock foundation of God's revelation to Man. Big dif between this, as a bible-believing Christian, and "religion".

Now a question: By "certainty", was this used as a euphemism for "absolutes"?

Within the framework of my core principles, why need I concern myself with all the different world religions and their manifold differences? I only need to know that I am living according to God's revealed will.

BoxcarNow, why don't you explain exactly what you meant as clearly as you explained your position to db in post #86.

Take all the time and space you need, because I want to be sure I understand your position vis a vis that upon which you don't rely. Perhaps you have devined a new way to utilize religion that I might find worthy of consideration.

Have you ever noticed how frequently you question the intelligence of your opposition? Is it possible that a self-proclaimed/defined theologist might have an inflated estimate of his own intellectual power? ;)

[slewis]

I'm losing too much weight. Last week my Dr Decided i should have a Catscan. I'm having it tomorrow, Tues. Under Obama's plan how long would I have to wait? Since i'm 72, probably forever.


Im 40 yrs old with a serious pre-existing condidtion.

I lost my job last yr and cobra ran out. I've priced ins. privately and have been turned down by every major insurer I've called with the exception of two.

Quoted premiums per yr are as follows:

Co A) $34,350

Co B) $29,375

See for every dumb example (including your very own) you can come up with I can give you a 100 REAL stories like above.

[boxcar]

your analogy is insane, if all or most of the other condo members default or lose their jobs/income and can't perform upkeep in their units, does YOUR unit not suffer as well.

If other condo members start running meth houses out of their units or start "leasing" to riff-raff , does your unit not suffer as well.

Since you and the association are "required" to pay for the services no matter what is coming in, would it not be in YOUR long-term interest to see about helping the other owners to become/stay functioning members of your condo assoc?

I would suggest that if you're in such a low end condo district as you describe, you made a really big mistake buying in there in the first place, which would not surprise me in your case, since you probably never had enough scratch to buy yesterday's newspaper. :rolleyes:


O and one more thing, if you ever have had the scratch to get into an assoc , which I doubt, you WILL find that certain "standards" are MANDATED for all members and you will pay for those , even if on YOUR personal unit.

Yes...I would pay those for myself -- not for all the other members. The fees a condo assoc. or town home assoc. collect are for the maintenance of the COMMON AREAS -- not personal living quarters. Every owner is ultimately responsible for his own unit. My "communal" responsibility would extend only to the common areas that all owners use or that are available to them for use. I would neither be morally or legally obligated to assume the expenses of other owners for their units.

Seems you need to rethink your crafting abilities, but we already knew that. :D

My analogy is spot-on due to what I just stated above. But I sure hope you can eventually extricate yourself from your Meth-by-the-Shore condo because living there truly explains your incoherent and unbelievably asinine posts. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Fine, Boxie. Here it is:Now, why don't you explain exactly what you meant as clearly as you explained your position to db in post #86.

Take all the time and space you need, because I want to be sure I understand your position vis a vis that upon which you don't rely. Perhaps you have devined a new way to utilize religion that I might find worthy of consideration.

Have you ever noticed how frequently you question the intelligence of your opposition? Is it possible that a self-proclaimed/defined theologist might have an inflated estimate of his own intellectual power? ;)

Yeah...it's pretty easy to question someone's intelligence when he equates non-reliance upon a religion for seeking and determining spiritual truth and reliance strictly from the bible for these purposes, and membership in a local church setting with like-minded people. I chose my church on the basis of what God had already revealed to me in his word -- not the other way around. Your inability to distinguish between these two concepts speaks poignantly to your to utter lack of depth within your own soul and mind.

Boxcar
P.S. Does ObamaCare provide any remedies for your shallowness?

[DRIVEWAY]

Im 40 yrs old with a serious pre-existing condidtion.

I lost my job last yr and cobra ran out. I've priced ins. privately and have been turned down by every major insurer I've called with the exception of two.

Quoted premiums per yr are as follows:

Co A) $34,350

Co B) $29,375

See for every dumb example (including your very own) you can come up with I can give you a 100 REAL stories like above.

Move to Mass. as soon as possible or take any job that offers health insurance.
Those premiums are pure insanity. You've had continuous coverage and should not be penalized for losing your job/cobra.
This is a case where government regulation is the only solution.

[boxcar]

Move to Mass. as soon as possible or take any job that offers health insurance.
Those premiums are pure insanity. You've had continuous coverage and should not be penalized for losing your job/cobra.
This is a case where government regulation is the only solution.

And I would add to Driveway's advice: Don't forget to also burn incense at the State's altar and whatever you do, don't forget to endlessly recite the mantra: Hopey and Changey, Hopey and Changey, Hopey and Changey...that we all can believe in. :jump: :jump: :jump:

Boxcar

[Lefty]

slewis, the sad thing is, the govt plan will prob not help you either.
Indulto, No, I did not miss Boxy's post where he said he did not belong to any organized religion. is it your assumption that a person has to belong to a organized religion to be religious?

zilly, My Dr is not complacent. Do you actually think a man's personal Dr will become complacent but a govt Dr would not? I think that's insane, quite frankly.

[david botsford]

I'm losing too much weight. Last week my Dr Decided i should have a Catscan. I'm having it tomorrow, Tues. Under Obama's plan how long would I have to wait? Since i'm 72, probably forever.What plan are you under medicare,aarp insurance,other?

[Marshall Bennett]

Im 40 yrs old with a serious pre-existing condidtion.

I lost my job last yr and cobra ran out. I've priced ins. privately and have been turned down by every major insurer I've called with the exception of two.

Quoted premiums per yr are as follows:

Co A) $34,350

Co B) $29,375

See for every dumb example (including your very own) you can come up with I can give you a 100 REAL stories like above.
I've run into the same dilemma . I had heart surgery in 1995 and was enrolled in a group plan with the firm where I worked . Upon leaving , and after the cobra ran out , the only way I could get insurance was through a high risk plan through Blue cross . I now pay $1130 per month . Under an " Obama " plan I'm sure my cost could be reduced quite a bit , but at what cost in terms of quality protection . I see tens of millions of uninsured suddenly being thrown into the program . Where are the doctors ? Until they find a way to adjust for this ( and I don't see a solution ) I'll keep what I've got .

[slewis]

slewis, the sad thing is, the govt plan will prob not help you either.
Indulto, No, I did not miss Boxy's post where he said he did not belong to any organized religion. is it your assumption that a person has to belong to a organized religion to be religious?

zilly, My Dr is not complacent. Do you actually think a man's personal Dr will become complacent but a govt Dr would not? I think that's insane, quite frankly.


Good use of a LOADED word lefty.


PROB(ably)....

And what do you base this "prob" on? The (propaganda)commercials you've seen by CPrights.org depicting several Canadians telling their stories how they would be dead under the Canadian system?

[david botsford]

Normally cash. Sometimes barter. We'll cater breakfast for our pediatrician's office in exchange for our kid's checkups. We seem to get to the head of the line for our appointments doing that, the office staff loves us. :)Try bartering a MRI,heart cath,liver transplant it will take more than breakfast.

[Indulto]

Yeah...it's pretty easy to question someone's intelligence when he equates non-reliance upon a religion for seeking and determining spiritual truth and reliance strictly from the bible for these purposes, and membership in a local church setting with like-minded people. I chose my church on the basis of what God had already revealed to me in his word -- not the other way around. Your inability to distinguish between these two concepts speaks poignantly to your to utter lack of depth within your own soul and mind.

Boxcar
P.S. Does ObamaCare provide any remedies for your shallowness?Do your fellow congregation members all share your conservative approach to politics, or are any liberals also inspired by the tenets you value? I'd hate to think the soul of a liberal couldn't be saved no matter how "Christian-like" his motives and actions.

Here's another shallow example of how in deep over your head you are:
You won't distinguish between robbing Peter to pay Paul, and taxing Peter to pay Paul's medical bills; even though any other taxpayer's medical bills including your own would also be paid. However, you have no qualms about robbing both Peter and Paul without paying all medical bills for either; which is what happens now.

Do people of your faith ever get sick? Can they all afford to pay for care if they do? Do they even believe medical care is necessary?

[slewis]

I've run into the same dilemma . I had heart surgery in 1995 and was enrolled in a group plan with the firm where I worked . Upon leaving , and after the cobra ran out , the only way I could get insurance was through a high risk plan through Blue cross . I now pay $1130 per month . Under an " Obama " plan I'm sure my cost could be reduced quite a bit , but at what cost in terms of quality protection . I see tens of millions of uninsured suddenly being thrown into the program . Where are the doctors ? Until they find a way to adjust for this ( and I don't see a solution ) I'll keep what I've got .

Marshall,

This is one of your best post. It sums up an honest depiction of one of the questions many Americans fear regarding what might take place in a Govt program, and rightfully so.

Although no one knows for certain, I, personally am confident that any Govt sponsored system wont change one of the most fundamental aspects of the USA. MONEY.

If you, or Lefty, or I or anyone can afford a special doctor, or special treatment, etc, you will get it. ALWAYS.
In the USA, money talks. That will never change regardless of how many scream "Socialism".
When the wealthy cry about a Govt sponsored program, they are NOT really concerned about losing or limiting THEIR medical choices. What they are REALLY crying about is WHO WILL FUND IT! They know that it is the wealthy who will be taxed highest to jumpstart this system... and thats the REAL issue here.

That's why Boxcar on this thread uses the term "personal responsibility".

It is my personal opinion that there are certain things that a country as advanced as ours should make available to ALL it's LEGAL citizens...regardless of how far one takes the arguement of "personal responsibility".

Education for example, is one. It is in our countries best interest that all LEGAL citizens have VERY AFFORDABLE access to college.
Access to Health care is another, and Im not just talking about emergency care.

These are two important issues that must be overhauled for the LONG TERM success of the USA.

[riskman]

That's why Boxcar on this thread uses the term "personal responsibility".

It is my personal opinion that there are certain things that a country as advanced as ours should make available to ALL it's LEGAL citizens...regardless of how far one takes the arguement of "personal responsibility".

Education for example, is one. It is in our countries best interest that all LEGAL citizens have VERY AFFORDABLE access to college.
Access to Health care is another, and Im not just talking about emergency care.

These are two important issues that must be overhauled for the LONG TERM success of the USA.

I totally agree with you. Your point is well made.
Extremists are never good for anyone. In fact, they’re often dangerous, whether they’re from the “no government” or “complete government” intervention camp. As with everything, the real answer lies somewhere in between.

Moderation is always the best solution. We have here some conservative pontificators with an air of intellectual superiorty that realize that most people can more easily grasp extreme viewpoints because such arguments are cut and dry, lacking complexity. Unfortunately, they often lack validity.

There’s no easy way. Things are rarely black or white. The truth is that most things have a shade of grey. Those who choose to believe things are black or white are most often those who get things wrong.

[boxcar]

Do your fellow congregation members all share your conservative approach to politics, or are any liberals also inspired by the tenets you value? I'd hate to think the soul of a liberal couldn't be saved no matter how "Christian-like" his motives and actions.

In a nutshell, Indulto: The bible doesn't support socialist principles; for, among other things, the emphases in the bible are on personal responsibility, a strong work ethic and charitable giving ("loving your neighbor") but on a personal level.

Here's another shallow example of how in deep over your head you are:You won't distinguish between robbing Peter to pay Paul, and taxing Peter to pay Paul's medical bills;

Fine. Explain the difference to me. Give it your best shot.

Do people of your faith ever get sick? Can they all afford to pay for care if they do? Do they even believe medical care is necessary?

People of genuine faith don't ultimately rely upon other men to meet our needs -- spiritual or temporal. The bible teaches that all good things come from God. And scripture is replete with promises that he will meet our needs. Therefore, we look to him to meet our needs. I realize that this would be extremely difficult if not impossible for you to truly understand because the popular secular thing today is to look more and more to the state. But regardless...the God of the bible is a theistic God. He is very concerned about his people -- his family. Having said this doesn't mean that he doesn't use secondary means to answer prayer and to meet our needs. The members of my little congregation are very tight nit and we watch over one another. We are personally involved (to one degree or another, of course) in each other's lives and we try to minister to one another as God leads.

And, no, we're not some weird cult that doesn't believe in medical treatment.
But because we, generally, tend to be resourceful, productive and responsible, God has blessed us for the most part and we have all managed to get the care we need when we have needed it, apart from applying for any assistance by any government.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Education for example, is one. It is in our countries best interest that all LEGAL citizens have VERY AFFORDABLE access to college.
Access to Health care is another, and Im not just talking about emergency care.

These are two important issues that must be overhauled for the LONG TERM success of the USA.

Mr. Sl...what about something even more fundamental than either education or health care: What about FOOD!? Without food, we'll all get sick and eventually die. Going with your line of reasoning, shouldn't we all get "free" food? Shouldn't the cost of food be funded entirely with taxpayer money, and why or why not?

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

And when McCain was on the campaign trail all you heard was Obama's an Arab and Kill Obama.I love it when you guys resort to simply making stuff up out of thin air.

One instance which was even debated by a secret service agent is turned into "all you heard" by mostpost...

Loving it guys...simply loving it!

Oooops, I forgot..."we" dominate this board...:lol: :lol: :lol:

[slewis]

Mr. Sl...what about something even more fundamental than either education or health care: What about FOOD!? Without food, we'll all get sick and eventually die. Going with your line of reasoning, shouldn't we all get "free" food? Shouldn't the cost of food be funded entirely with taxpayer money, and why or why not?

Boxcar


Mr B,

You're getting desparate. No one used the term "free".

I said Govt subsidized with tax payer money.

Then up pops the issue (again) of Socialism. Those that use this flawed arguement need to understand the difference between a real socialist Govt and a Govt that provides important, well managed and regulated services necessary to INSURE the long term success of our capitalist system.

Im sure many will laugh at my last statement....almost like an oxi-moron. ( Govt well regulated and managed )...but it dosen't have to be that way.

Yes, I will be the first to say that many Govt agencies are inept.
This, unfortunetly is more a result of the political process and "job-favor appointing" then anything else. It needs to end, especially with a health care system.
I can comfortably say this as long as I know that there is one Govt agency that year after year is by far the best and most technologically advanced in the entire world.
If that agency can continuoulsy boast of world superiority (and they do)in a day where many countries are flying past us, I'm comfortable that any Govt managed health plan which is implemented properly, will work.

[PaceAdvantage]

The only reason we're getting this kind of result is because your guys won't step up to the plate either to help produce a bill almost everyone can support.Stop it...you're making me pass out from all the laughter I'm forced to produce from this nonsense...

As if health care reform is the most important thing to make sure gets done at this exact moment in time...OUR BOYS ARE STILL DYING....OUR ECONOMY SUCKS...OUR SPENDING IS OUT OF CONTROL....all these things the left cried about during Bush and during campaign '08.

And here we are, wringing our hands over something that is simply going to destroy this country because the government will never be able to administer this kind of massive program effectively or economically.

This is flying by the seat of your pants at its best...it's truly frightening that anyone in their right mind could get behind a behemoth like this, after screaming at us these past eight years about how Bush is spending us to death....

What a monstrous, scary joke this has quickly become.

[PaceAdvantage]

Well, it was only a matter of time before I got "scriptured" once again by his hole-in-the-headliness. Too bad you continue to waste your time.

Despite all the dogma I was exposed to as a kid, it's been consistently clear to me that Jesus was an icon for forgiveness to help those entrapped by the status quo to remain that way with the Catholic Church discovering ways to add to their misery. No wonder so many offshoots and versions of Christianity exist including your non-institutional one!

Just tell me one thing, Box, how can it be that one so blessed with knowledge and certainty is so obviously unhappy?Hey, you scripture in your own way to us, as do your other like minded friends here in off topic.

Only you preach from the pulpit of Obama and the hardcore leftists currently in charge...is it any better or worse than what Boxcar does?

It's all the same stuff when you get down to it...we find it hard to believe to, just like you find Boxcar hard to believe...now you know where we're coming from when it comes to your Obama's gonna save the world gospel.

[david botsford]

Move to Mass. as soon as possible or take any job that offers health insurance.
Those premiums are pure insanity. You've had continuous coverage and should not be penalized for losing your job/cobra.
This is a case where government regulation is the only solution.You got two to respond.Seriously I would like to contact them if you care to share. Every application I've submitted has been DENIED.Maybe you could send me a PM.

[highnote]

It's all the same stuff when you get down to it...we find it hard to believe to, just like you find Boxcar hard to believe...now you know where we're coming from when it comes to your Obama's gonna save the world gospel.

PA,

You hit the nail on the head. This is why bi-partisanship is hard to find in this country. Seems as if neither side wants to admit the other side has some good ideas. And neither side wants to admit they have some bad ideas. Each side would rather their own bad agendas get pushed and the country be damned.

The only way things seem to get done is when a party in gov holds enough of a majority to get their agendas passed. This is not always best for the country in the short term, though. But this is the way our democracy works in this age.

It might be the case that this is the only way to run the country. When the next administration comes in the bad laws are repealed or refined and hopefully the result is a better system.

One thing that bothers me is all the name calling. I don't see where that is constructive. I do think dialogue is important and criticism is important -- as long as it is constructive and not mean-spirited.

I would love it if everyone would put all the name calling behind them, start fresh, and have a conversation. I am not overly optimistic, but hope springs eternal.

[NJ Stinks]

Stop it...you're making me pass out from all the laughter I'm forced to produce from this nonsense...

As if health care reform is the most important thing to make sure gets done at this exact moment in time....

It's only the most important thing if one really wants meaningful health care reform for a number of most legitimate reasons. Once Republicans are back on top, forget it.

Deny it all you want, PA. The truth is you couldn't get a line on who is going enact health care reform first - Republicans or Democrats? No bookie in his right mind is going to back a bet that relies on Republicans coming through for him. (Although it is fun imaging a bookie pulling his hair out trying to find a line that gets action on both sides though! :D )

Why's that? Let's see now. Which of the following presidents going back to 1981 led the fight for health care reform?

Reagan - no
First Bush - no
Clinton - yes
Second Bush - no
Obama - yes

Shocking? Hardly.

[boxcar]

Mr B,

[quote]You're getting desparate. No one used the term "free".

Good grief! Does anyone on this forum actually know how to read!? :bang: :bang: I'm beginning to think very, very few people do. Sir, did I not use quotation marks around the term "free"? :bang: :bang: Do you not understand what the use of "..." means?

I said Govt subsidized with tax payer money.

And did I not in the same paragraph use the phrase "funded entirely with taxpayer money"? :bang: Didn't this further clarify the above quotation marks? :bang:

Have a nice night, Mr. SL. Go out and stuff yourself with a bunch of food or something -- maybe on the government with food stamps or bought and paid for with your own green - whatever floats your boat. :faint: :faint:

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

It's only the most important thing if one really wants meaningful health care reform for a number of most legitimate reasons. Once Republicans are back on top, forget it.I thought Republicans are dead in the water...you have plenty of time...what's the rush?

Try getting it right first...

Or, better yet, just ram home the first bill that comes along...I'm sure that will work out just fine...just like Social Security and all the other massive gov't spending giants you can think of the past 40 or 50 years...

[PaceAdvantage]

I so want to close this thread...is there any reason to keep it going?

[Indulto]

Hey, you scripture in your own way to us, as do your other like minded friends here in off topic.

Only you preach from the pulpit of Obama and the hardcore leftists currently in charge...is it any better or worse than what Boxcar does?

It's all the same stuff when you get down to it...we find it hard to believe to, just like you find Boxcar hard to believe...now you know where we're coming from when it comes to your Obama's gonna save the world gospel.Let's take another look at the post that triggered my participation in this thread:Obama is evil.
He is not stupid.
He is not naive.
He is evil, rotten to the core.

I called him the Anti Christ and I still believe it.

The new Axis of Evil - Obama, Pelosi, Reid, they are enemies of America.
Top of the list - above Bin Laden.

BTW, libs, your boy murdered another one in Pakistan.....was he read his rights?

Barry Obama - mass murdering serial killer.
He is of the same class and caliber ( calibrate?) as Jeffery Dahmer.
Maybe lower.My opposing the non-stop hate rhetoric, and advocating greater political cooperation and participation from the right, is hardly preaching the gospel of Obama. Your acceptance of the preceding post and efforts to misrepresent my position are just more smoke blowing.

[slewis]

Stop it...you're making me pass out from all the laughter I'm forced to produce from this nonsense...

As if health care reform is the most important thing to make sure gets done at this exact moment in time...OUR BOYS ARE STILL DYING....OUR ECONOMY SUCKS...OUR SPENDING IS OUT OF CONTROL....all these things the left cried about during Bush and during campaign '08.

And here we are, wringing our hands over something that is simply going to destroy this country because the government will never be able to administer this kind of massive program effectively or economically.

This is flying by the seat of your pants at its best...it's truly frightening that anyone in their right mind could get behind a behemoth like this, after screaming at us these past eight years about how Bush is spending us to death....

What a monstrous, scary joke this has quickly become.

PA,

Although I respect your opinion that a drastic overhaul will destroy our country, I ask you why has it not destroyed other major countries that employ a system of medical coverage which, dollar for dollar, has been proven to provide more effective coverage for the costs and been able in many of these countries to insure most if not all it's citizens?

I think the reality here is that if you dont overhaul this juggernaut now, the problems get exponentially worse in 5, 10, 15 yrs.

Many actuaries and experts were saying back in the 80's that the system needed to be revamped as the projections were bleek.
Many politicians have no problem passing the buck on to the next generation, especially when their own agenda's and special interests are financially swaying them to do so.
But PA, you cant deny that with 20% of the pop. uninsured, and getting older, we ARE in a crisis.....
So Ill make this prediction:
If the hard line right wingers are successful in stopping a serious overhaul of the health care system, it will absolutely be the end of the GOP as we know it.
That would really be sad and put this country on a serious crash path.

A complete overhaul of the system, although costly at first, will eventually set it on a sustainable path... anything short of that and your just prolonging the inevitable.

[boxcar]

I so want to close this thread...is there any reason to keep it going?

Entertainment value? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

PA,

Although I respect your opinion that a drastic overhaul will destroy our country, I ask you why has it not destroyed other major countries that employ a system of medical coverage which, dollar for dollar, has been proven to provide more effective coverage for the costs and been able in many of these countries to insure most if not all it's citizens?I question the timing, the IMMEDIACY of it all. The gov't has been handing out money like it's going out of style with all these bailouts and stimulus programs.

Social Security, we are constantly told, is simply a disaster waiting to happen.

Now, at this moment of time, with many prediciting we have only begun to see the crisis that is about to unfold in our economy, we want the added burden of creating and funding a massive gov't-run healthcare program?

Is that the prudent thing to do? Is that the change we (well, 53% or so) voted for?

Do you know how the U.K. national healthcare system came about?

I'll let that now famous Member of European Parliament Daniel Hannan tell it:

Listen, our system, our NHS came out of a peculiar time, we were basically under full mobilization when we invented this, right? It was.
It's Word War II, 1944. So, it was a time when we had food rationing, when everything had been nationalized, when he had hugely high taxes, you know, because everything had been conscripted into the war.
That was the product — that was the thinking that led to the state health care system.

I find it incredible that a free people living in a country dedicated and founded in the cause of independence and freedom can seriously be thinking about adopting such a system in peacetime and massively expanding the role of the state when there's no need.Emphasis mine of course.

But the man makes a helluva good point in my opinion.

[slewis]

I question the timing, the IMMEDIACY of it all. The gov't has been handing out money like it's going out of style with all these bailouts and stimulus programs.

Social Security, we are constantly told, is simply a disaster waiting to happen.

Now, at this moment of time, with many prediciting we have only begun to see the crisis that is about to unfold in our economy, we want the added burden of creating and funding a massive gov't-run healthcare program?

Is that the prudent thing to do? Is that the change we (well, 53% or so) voted for?

Do you know how the U.K. national healthcare system came about?

I'll let that now famous Member of European Parliament Daniel Hannan tell it:

Emphasis mine of course.

But the man makes a helluva good point in my opinion.


Point taken...

We'll see how things unfold....


Guess you can put this puppy to sleep:ThmbUp:

[highnote]

I so want to close this thread...is there any reason to keep it going?

I swore off of Paceadvantage for 30 days -- it turned into at least a 2 month hiatus. I was using up way too much time on arguments that seemed to lead to nothing.

If you close this thread down you'll be doing me a big favor because once this thread is dead, so is my posting on PA off-topic.

I enjoy a good debate, but can do without all the name calling, put downs and other negativity that oftentimes shows up in these threads.

Shut her down.

[boxcar]

I question the timing, the IMMEDIACY of it all. The gov't has been handing out money like it's going out of style with all these bailouts and stimulus programs.

Social Security, we are constantly told, is simply a disaster waiting to happen.

Now, at this moment of time, with many prediciting we have only begun to see the crisis that is about to unfold in our economy, we want the added burden of creating and funding a massive gov't-run healthcare program?

Is that the prudent thing to do? Is that the change we (well, 53% or so) voted for?

Do you know how the U.K. national healthcare system came about?

I'll let that now famous Member of European Parliament Daniel Hannan tell it:

Emphasis mine of course.

But the man makes a helluva good point in my opinion.

And one that I've been trying to make for quite a while now. This is precisely why I staunchly oppose socialized medicine in principle. If we, as a people, want to remain free, we will not empower the federal government any further at the costly expense of our individual liberties -- especially, this godless, corrupt government! I wouldn't trust the government for a nanosecond. How anyone in their right mind can trust proven thieves, liars and crooks and, yes...even thugs is beyond the powers of my comprehension. It defies my reasoning capabilities. I'll take my chances in the free market place any day over the U.S. government because at least there, I'll have more options available to me.

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

We gotta hurry up and get free healthcare for those 12 million illegal immigrants.........about 3 million of them are expected to actually vote next time and 2012 is coming fast.............

85 percent of the country has healthcare......let's **** it up over the other 15%, of which half are illegal...........that makes sense

[Lefty]

slewis, firstI was trying to be honest as I haven't read the plan, just seen and heard a couple of summaries. But logic tells me if they are gonna ration it for seniors, pre-existing conditions probaly won't fare so well either.
secondly, it's not working all that well in other countries. They have denied certain cancer drugs in the UK and you hear tales of canadians coming here and paying for healthcare cause they can't take the wait.
85% of us are satisfied with our healthcare plan. Last I heard only 47% in UK satisfied with theirs.

[Indulto]

In a nutshell, Indulto: The bible doesn't support socialist principles; for, among other things, the emphases in the bible are on personal responsibility, a strong work ethic and charitable giving ("loving your neighbor") but on a personal level.

Fine. Explain the difference to me. Give it your best shot.

People of genuine faith don't ultimately rely upon other men to meet our needs -- spiritual or temporal. The bible teaches that all good things come from God. And scripture is replete with promises that he will meet our needs. Therefore, we look to him to meet our needs. I realize that this would be extremely difficult if not impossible for you to truly understand because the popular secular thing today is to look more and more to the state. But regardless...the God of the bible is a theistic God. He is very concerned about his people -- his family. Having said this doesn't mean that he doesn't use secondary means to answer prayer and to meet our needs. The members of my little congregation are very tight nit and we watch over one another. We are personally involved (to one degree or another, of course) in each other's lives and we try to minister to one another as God leads.

And, no, we're not some weird cult that doesn't believe in medical treatment.
But because we, generally, tend to be resourceful, productive and responsible, God has blessed us for the most part and we have all managed to get the care we need when we have needed it, apart from applying for any assistance by any government.

BoxcarA reasonable description of one path toward self-sufficiency and community, but I sense that you doubt the same objectives are sought by most Americans, regardless of where they fall on the political or religious spectrum.

In any event, it isn't acceptable to try and opt out of the wider community to which one also belongs when a collective response by the entire community is necessary to solve a problem affecting that community.

The concepts of wartime and peacetime have changed since 1944. We are always engaged in military action somewhere now, and we are currently being wounded economically in ways that cripple us physically and psychologically as a nation as well as individually.

We didn't allow profiteering in war time, and we shouldn't now. It will take personal sacrifice as well as personal responsibility from now on to get out of the financial mess we're in, but the finger-pointing in Congress has to stop, and it should here too. Waste and fraud can be contained and minimized if both parties choose to make that happen.

Perhaps an issue more pressing than health care is how to incentivize Congress to act in the interest of the voting public rather than those represented by lobbyists.

[Tom]

Im 40 yrs old with a serious pre-existing condidtion.

I lost my job last yr and cobra ran out. I've priced ins. privately and have been turned down by every major insurer I've called with the exception of two.

Quoted premiums per yr are as follows:

Co A) $34,350

Co B) $29,375

See for every dumb example (including your very own) you can come up with I can give you a 100 REAL stories like above.

There are ways to get those cost down that the gov will not consider, like allowing us to shop all the states - 50 or 57, depending on your political persuasion - for policies, like we do for car insurance. Competition.
Many things could be done right now, if they were truly interested in helping people.

We could 100% underwrite all catastrophic bankruptcies through govt bail outs" with the money Barry has said was "minor" pork in the stimulous bill.

The Obamanation bill is NOT the only answer.

[Tom]

I so want to close this thread...is there any reason to keep it going?

Side-splitting banter and thoughtful suggestions?

:rolleyes::lol:

[david botsford]

slewis, firstI was trying to be honest as I haven't read the plan, just seen and heard a couple of summaries. But logic tells me if they are gonna ration it for seniors, pre-existing conditions probaly won't fare so well either.
secondly, it's not working all that well in other countries. They have denied certain cancer drugs in the UK and you hear tales of canadians coming here and paying for healthcare cause they can't take the wait.
85% of us are satisfied with our healthcare plan. Last I heard only 47% in UK satisfied with theirs.If 85% are satisfied with their health plan it's only because they haven't had to use the product.I sold that sh-t for about six months before I just could not bear to look a customer in the eye and tell him he's in GOOD hands. It is the biggest rip off in America.Well it is if you don't have to use a lawyer that thinks making a single phone call is worth another $500.

[Tom]

Maybe the policy YOU sold was, but you cannot talk for the rest of the plans.
Mine is EXTREMELY good - very generous, covers everything I need and then some.

I do not find it at all upsetting to have to make co-pays. I just picked up a prescription the other day - the total bill was $245.00. I handed them $10 and walked away on the verge of good health! :rolleyes:

[DRIVEWAY]

Maybe the policy YOU sold was, but you cannot talk for the rest of the plans.
Mine is EXTREMELY good - very generous, covers everything I need and then some.

I do not find it at all upsetting to have to make co-pays. I just picked up a prescription the other day - the total bill was $245.00. I handed them $10 and walked away on the verge of good health! :rolleyes:

That sounds like terrific coverage. Who's the insurance carrier?

[Tom]

Blue Choice.

[cj's dad]

Maybe the policy YOU sold was, but you cannot talk for the rest of the plans.
Mine is EXTREMELY good - very generous, covers everything I need and then some.

I do not find it at all upsetting to have to make co-pays. I just picked up a prescription the other day - the total bill was $245.00. I handed them $10 and walked away on the verge of good health! :rolleyes:

Yeah, and I'm on the verge of picking 10 in a row ar Saratoga.:eek:

[david botsford]

Maybe the policy YOU sold was, but you cannot talk for the rest of the plans.
Mine is EXTREMELY good - very generous, covers everything I need and then some.

I do not find it at all upsetting to have to make co-pays. I just picked up a prescription the other day - the total bill was $245.00. I handed them $10 and walked away on the verge of good health! :rolleyes: They are Extremely good as long as your healthy and paying high premiums get a condition and see how fast they drop you or raise your premiums through the roof. Live long and prosper I'm out of here.By the way continue to keep your hands over eyes it's really fitting.

[boxcar]

A reasonable description of one path toward self-sufficiency and community, but I sense that you doubt the same objectives are sought by most Americans, regardless of where they fall on the political or religious spectrum.

In any event, it isn't acceptable to try and opt out of the wider community to which one also belongs when a collective response by the entire community is necessary to solve a problem affecting that community.

Why isn't acceptable? Why? I don't need or want the state's intrusion into my personal life. The less government there is, the happier we'll all ultimately be. What you're overlooking in your quest for government deliverance (because your worldview won't permit you to see it) is man's sin nature. Man is not this paragon of good or virtue or righteousness or holiness, despite the occasional bright rays of genuine good works that break through the darkness -- thanks to the common grace of God. Man, generally, is everything but. The bible, human history and even reality as we currently know it teach us this. Sadly, what primarily characterizes man in this dark, forlorn world is our inhumanity toward each other, generally speaking. Another of our rather dubious characteristics, as I have previously pointed out many times on this forum, is our untrustworthiness as clearly seen by the universal assumption, among all nations, peoples and tribes on this earth, that all men are untrustworthy until proven otherwise. Yet, despite these irrefutable proofs of the fallen condition of all mankind, man irrationally persists in putting his trust and confidence and faith in men and women who he does not or cannot know on a personal level. And this is particularly true of governments, which is why the Founding Fathers very wisely wrote the Constitution the way they did -- why they wanted to restrict the federal government's power, not expand it!

Having said all this, I have also suggested very early on during these discussions on health care that the best way to approach a "communal", humanitarian response to genuine human needs is to take to heart the wise, old adage that says, "Charity begins at home". Charity should not begin hundreds or thousands of miles away from us in Washington D.C. This national, long distance attempt at administering social programs has proven over and over again how inept, inefficient and wasteful such endeavors have generally been (as witnessed by over 60 Bil in Medicare fraud!). The best approach is a local response because the "locals" would stand a much better chance of getting to actually know those who have genuine needs. Locals would be in much better position to more accurately assess the extent of the needs, monitor ongoing progress, etc. Also, the people's voices would be better heard by their elected officials at the local level. Their concerns would carry more weight. People in disagreement with some local public policy probably wouldn't be subjected as much to be called "Unamerican" by the likes of D.C. elitists like Pelosi, for example. In short, the advantages to local solutions to community problems are manifold -- I haven't even scratched the surface.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

My father was covered by health insurance for the 35 years he worked at an aerospace firm in S. California. The insurance was used TWICE in all those years, First for a heart attack in 1977. No problem - covered.

When he died in 2004, the same company refused to pay for his hospitalization (claiming that he was not taken to the RIGHT hospital 25 miles away but instead went to one 2 miles away since it was, well, a medical emergency) and my sister had to go to court and sue them before they would come forward.
Never missed paying a premium in all those years but some BEAN COUNTER was practicing medicine,

A classical, TYPICAL story. It works AS LONG AS YOU DON'T GET SICK!!

[boxcar]

My father was covered by health insurance for the 35 years he worked at an aerospace firm in S. California. The insurance was used TWICE in all those years, First for a heart attack in 1977. No problem - covered.

When he died in 2004, the same company refused to pay for his hospitalization (claiming that he was not taken to the RIGHT hospital 25 miles away but instead went to one 2 miles away since it was, well, a medical emergency) and my sister had to go to court and sue them before they would come forward.
Never missed paying a premium in all those years but some BEAN COUNTER was practicing medicine,

A classical, TYPICAL story. It works AS LONG AS YOU DON'T GET SICK!!

And this little anecdote is sufficient reason to justify government takeover of the health care industry? :bang: :bang:

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

And this little anecdote is sufficient reason to justify government takeover of the health care industry?


Dr. Linda Pino was one of the first to come forward and expose the SHAM that is the health care insurance FRAUD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Peeno

and it continues as hundreds and hundreds of people are denied care all the time over phantom "pre-exisitng" conditions. Get this SCUM out of the picture and things will improve.

[Tom]

They are Extremely good as long as your healthy and paying high premiums get a condition and see how fast they drop you or raise your premiums through the roof. Live long and prosper I'm out of here.By the way continue to keep your hands over eyes it's really fitting.

Your ignorance about my HC is amazing. YOU fleeced people and can't imagine others do not. Nice.

The hands over eyes reflect the lefties here and the hipocrisy they post.
It represent the IGGY zone.:lol:

[Tom]

A classical, TYPICAL story. It works AS LONG AS YOU DON'T GET SICK!!

Typical?

Please cite 2500 more examples. This year.

Should be easy if it is typical.


and it continues as hundreds and hundreds of people are denied care all the time over phantom "pre-exisitng" conditions. Get this SCUM out of the picture and things will improve.

Then you agree that there is no need to go to Obamacare as long we have so much low hanging fruit right now that will improve things.

THANK YOU for your professional opinion in favor of NOT going to socialized HC.




:lol:

[46zilzal]

Typical?

Please cite 2500 more examples. This year.

Should be easy if it is typical.
the movie SICKO is full of them as is DAMAGED CARE (the story of Dr. Linda Pino)

one of my favorites, shown in Sicko, was when a lady was knocked unconscious in a car accident the insurer refused payment of the ambulance because she didn't call them to PRE-AUTHORIZE IT!!

[Lefty]

David, haven't used the product? Yeah, right. americans really do get all incensed on demanding to keep a product they haven't used. Your opinion on the matter is flat wrong. My wife and i have used the product plenty the last few yrs. She has had 3 operations the last 2 yrs and I can't count the tests we've racked up in those yrs. There has been almost no wait for those services. You think the govt can do better? Why? they are now proposing a 500 billion cut in Medicare and you think they can run National Healthcare?
One of Obama's healthcare advisors believes seniors should get minimal healthcare if at all.
The bill itself says if you change jobs or your private healthcare changes in any way, you can't renew it. You have to go on the public plan.
The bill says the govt will have access to everybody's bank accts for e-transfers from your acct to pay for healthcare.
Do you really want any part of that?
If so, you and everybody on this board should listen to Glenn Beck's TV show today or in rerun tonight.

He's going to show you what dems really want right out of their own mouths.

Don't miss it.

[slewis]

And one that I've been trying to make for quite a while now. This is precisely why I staunchly oppose socialized medicine in principle. If we, as a people, want to remain free, we will not empower the federal government any further at the costly expense of our individual liberties -- especially, this godless, corrupt government! I wouldn't trust the government for a nanosecond. How anyone in their right mind can trust proven thieves, liars and crooks and, yes...even thugs is beyond the powers of my comprehension. It defies my reasoning capabilities. I'll take my chances in the free market place any day over the U.S. government because at least there, I'll have more options available to me.

Boxcar


Lets see BOXY...you wouldnt trust the GOVT for one nanosecond, especially this corrupt GOVT.

You fool. I guess you have no power in trusting the the GOVT with running the military. You know the one that protects Putin from firing a missile into your living room.
The same inept GOVT that cant do anything or run anything, like I keep hearing that jerk at one of the Town Hall meetings screaming.

So come out and call a spade a spade and I'll respect your opinion.

A) you dont feel YOU should have to contribute tax dollars to someone else's well being.

b) Our Govt can run ANY type of program effectively and BETTER than any other country's on the planet... IF they choose to and they avoid the "job for political payoff" and incompetent hiring bullshit that drags down most GOVT agencies.

So I ask...

How is it our military's sophisticated applications are THE BEST in the world???

It's not by accident.

Please take more than a nano to think about that one.

[BenDiesel26]

Lets see BOXY...you wouldnt trust the GOVT for one nanosecond, especially this corrupt GOVT.

You fool. I guess you have no power in trusting the the GOVT with running the military. You know the one that protects Putin from firing a missile into your living room.
The same inept GOVT that cant do anything or run anything, like I keep hearing that jerk at one of the Town Hall meetings screaming.

So come out and call a spade a spade and I'll respect your opinion.

A) you dont feel YOU should have to contribute tax dollars to someone else's well being.

b) Our Govt can run ANY type of program effectively and BETTER than any other country's on the planet... IF they choose to and they avoid the "job for political payoff" and incompetent hiring bullshit that drags down most GOVT agencies.

So I ask...

How is it our military's sophisticated applications are THE BEST in the world???

It's not by accident.

Please take more than a nano to think about that one.

Doesn't the government contract out to private companies to build all of that sophisticated military equipment? Just asking.

[Tom]

How is it our military's sophisticated applications are THE BEST in the world???

Reagan
Bush 41
Bush 43

All the more amazing considering the bastardization of the military during Billy's reign.

[46zilzal]

Reagan
Bush 41
Bush 43

All the more amazing considering the bastardization of the military during Billy's reign.
Ronnie beat up on the DANGEROUS and world dominating Grenada and a few Central America POWER houses.

Daddy destroyed an outdated,outgunned undermanned army as did the Rutabaga. BIG DANGER

Kind of like the old boxing "Chump on the MOnth" club

[Lefty]

Slewis, our military is great. that's because when R's are in we spare no expense to defend the country. Without a country all other things are moot.
But, ALL the Dem prgms have failed. War on Poverty, Medicare/Medicaid, SS.
Do you want the govt to have access to all your medical and bank records?
Answer that please. And name one prgm that the dims have insituted that has been successful and cost less than the private sector could do it.

[slewis]

Slewis, our military is great. that's because when R's are in we spare no expense to defend the country. Without a country all other things are moot.
But, ALL the Dem prgms have failed. War on Poverty, Medicare/Medicaid, SS.
Do you want the govt to have access to all your medical and bank records?
Answer that please. And name one prgm that the dims have insituted that has been successful and cost less than the private sector could do it.


Yeah,

When the R's are in they're the ones that spiff up the military, then the Dems tear is all down.
And medicare and SS have failed??? Really??? Where?

Save this speech for you're grandkids. It has NO truth.

Our military is CONSTANTLY being improved. CONSTANTLY.

I was an Engineering major in college... I took several night courses.

This was back in the 70's. One course was Microwave technology. It was a new state of the art course. Wanna know who my evening professor was?
A Military applications engineer.
He was gracious throughout the semester to answer any questions he could about the apps they were working on. (obviously much is classified).
He told us they recruited him right out of college and the BEST STUDENTS are swayed to the military side as opposed to the consumer electronics end.

This is ALL GOVT coordinated regardless of WHO IS IN OFFICE. It's done correctly to insure the safety and sovereignty of this country. These programs reside REGARDLESS of Political BS and which party is in control of what.

If we are going to implement a health care system, it better be run in a similar manner (and it will be) because the system now will bankrupt us.

BTW... the Govt already has access to ALLLLLLLL your records... EVERYTHING. We are no longer a private society.
They just cannot legally keep certain databases, BUT, they can contract privately to do it and BUY the info from the private sector. LEGALLY.

If you google around you can find the names of the two most prominent companies doing this work for not only Uncle Sam, but every jerkoff entity that wants to find ANYTHING that exists about us.
The days of true privacy in the USA have been over for well over a decade now.

[Lefty]

slewis, they have fail because they are both going broke. You haven't heard that? It's not a speech but fact. I guess you also haven't heard that the dems are about to cut medicare/medicaid about 500 billion.
Faith and hope doesn't cut it. facts are facts and wishes are wishes.

[Tom]

Ronnie beat up on the DANGEROUS and world dominating Grenada and a few Central America POWER houses.

Daddy destroyed an outdated,outgunned undermanned army as did the Rutabaga. BIG DANGER

Kind of like the old boxing "Chump on the MOnth" club

Once again, you reply has ZERO to do with the topic at hand.
Can you read?
Does your great HC system provide you "zoomers?" :lol:

[JustRalph]

We gotta hurry up and get free healthcare for those 12 million illegal immigrants.........about 3 million of them are expected to actually vote next time and 2012 is coming fast.............

85 percent of the country has healthcare......let's **** it up over the other 15%, of which half are illegal...........that makes sense

Oooops!!! I stumbled into another one.......

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/25986

Under fire from immigration reform supporters who say he’s not moving fast enough, President Barack Obama said Monday he expects to have a draft immigration bill in Congress by year’s end — but that lawmakers wouldn’t begin to seriously debate the issue until next year.
He acknowledged that the fight for comprehensive reform would be difficult, saying, “Am I going to be able to snap my fingers and get this done? No. . . . There are going to be demagogues out there who try to suggest that any form of pathway for legalization for those who are already in the United States is unacceptable.”
Obama also predicted that Congress would pass his health reform bill later this year when more “sensible and reasoned arguments will emerge” — a clear reference to the increasingly heated attacks being leveled against his overhaul plan by opponents.
Obama brushed back a suggestion from a New York Times reporter that the “blows” he’s suffering in the health-care debate would weaken him too much to take on another massive legislative fight on immigration reform heading into the 2010 midterm elections.

more the link

[Tom]

He said today that we have a broken immigration system and no one can disagree with that.

I do.
Our LEGAL immigration system has worked for years.
The only problem we have with immigration in the USA is the government's total failure to enforce the laws.

Mine filed, attack dogs, snipers.
Problem reduced by 50% overnight.

[ddog]

the legal system has been used to import "legals" and to undercut the wage structure in this country.

Not totally the fault of the legal system, but it's part of it.

The legal system is broken as well.

The country has long since passed the point of needing tons of legals to come in.

A few of the best and brightest from other countries, the rest, nope.

[Indulto]

Why isn't acceptable? Why? I don't need or want the state's intrusion into my personal life. The less government there is, the happier we'll all ultimately be.I would argue that -- given our huge population with such diverse backgrounds and resulting cultural and communication barriers, combined with out-of-control societal ills, all in the light of the shift of power from individuals to corporations -- more government functionality and regulation is needed; with much greater transparency and oversight.What you're overlooking in your quest for government deliverance (because your worldview won't permit you to see it) is man's sin nature. Man is not this paragon of good or virtue or righteousness or holiness, despite the occasional bright rays of genuine good works that break through the darkness -- thanks to the common grace of God. Man, generally, is everything but. The bible, human history and even reality as we currently know it teach us this. Sadly, what primarily characterizes man in this dark, forlorn world is our inhumanity toward each other, generally speaking. Another of our rather dubious characteristics, as I have previously pointed out many times on this forum, is our untrustworthiness as clearly seen by the universal assumption, among all nations, peoples and tribes on this earth, that all men are untrustworthy until proven otherwise. Yet, despite these irrefutable proofs of the fallen condition of all mankind, man irrationally persists in putting his trust and confidence and faith in men and women who he does not or cannot know on a personal level. And this is particularly true of governments, which is why the Founding Fathers very wisely wrote the Constitution the way they did -- why they wanted to restrict the federal government's power, not expand it!As wise as they were, they did not foresee all the future developments they would have addressed had they been aware of them. Fortunately, they gave us ways to change things if our collective will is strong enough. Hopefully we won’t have a full-scale depression before that happens.Having said all this, I have also suggested very early on during these discussions on health care that the best way to approach a "communal", humanitarian response to genuine human needs is to take to heart the wise, old adage that says, "Charity begins at home". Charity should not begin hundreds or thousands of miles away from us in Washington D.C.Apparently the Bible can’t deal with communities taking up that much physical space. Modern technology and communicaton devices overcome such distance restrictions.Even if you could get all This national, long distance attempt at administering social programs has proven over and over again how inept, inefficient and wasteful such endeavors have generally been (as witnessed by over 60 Bil in Medicare fraud!).We should now know how to avoid repeating such mistakes.The best approach is a local response because the "locals" would stand a much better chance of getting to actually know those who have genuine needs. Locals would be in much better position to more accurately assess the extent of the needs, monitor ongoing progress, etc. Also, the people's voices would be better heard by their elected officials at the local level. Their concerns would carry more weight.Of course such programs have to be administered locally, but they can be funded and jointly supervised nationally.People in disagreement with some local public policy probably wouldn't be subjected as much to be called "Unamerican" by the likes of D.C. elitists like Pelosi, for example. In short, the advantages to local solutions to community problems are manifold -- I haven't even scratched the surface.

BoxcarSo you dismiss certain religious teachings that the highest form of charity is to help those one does not know personally?

[slewis]

He said today that we have a broken immigration system and no one can disagree with that.

I do.
Our LEGAL immigration system has worked for years.
The only problem we have with immigration in the USA is the government's total failure to enforce the laws.

Mine filed, attack dogs, snipers.
Problem reduced by 50% overnight.

Well why not enforce them??

Is it the left libs again? The reality is TOM that BOTH sides eat shit on this issue.

When I worked on Wall st I had two foreigners on my desk. One sat on my left and one on my right. They both had nothing more than HS diplomas.

They were good guys, hard working, friendly, happy to be in America....

At $200k plus per yr.....

I could get a HALF MILLION American kids to do that job. Kids whose fathers fought in our wars, who paid into our tax structure and system.
American kids with college degrees that cant earn that money.

When Bill Gates gets up on capital hill and wants more legal immigration to get the "best and brightest" I want to puke.

Everytime I hear politicians ON BOTH SIDES say "But we are a nation of immigrants" I cant keep the hysteria in check.
Like the jobs, opportunity and prosperity just overflow at every street corner in the USA.
These guys in DC need a reality check...but its hard to get a reality check when every lobbyist (legal and illegal) is throwing millions in your direction.

Our weak policies over the last 20 yrs. have made us the laughing stock of of the world.

[slewis]

the legal system has been used to import "legals" and to undercut the wage structure in this country.

Not totally the fault of the legal system, but it's part of it.

The legal system is broken as well.

The country has long since passed the point of needing tons of legals to come in.

A few of the best and brightest from other countries, the rest, nope.


:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[JustRalph]

Well why not enforce them??

Is it the left libs again? The reality is TOM that BOTH sides eat shit on this issue.

When I worked on Wall st I had two foreigners on my desk. One sat on my left and one on my right. They both had nothing more than HS diplomas.

They were good guys, hard working, friendly, happy to be in America....

At $200k plus per yr.....

I could get a HALF MILLION American kids to do that job. Kids whose fathers fought in our wars, who paid into our tax structure and system.
American kids with college degrees that cant earn that money.

When Bill Gates gets up on capital hill and wants more legal immigration to get the "best and brightest" I want to puke.

Everytime I hear politicians ON BOTH SIDES say "But we are a nation of immigrants" I cant keep the hysteria in check.
Like the jobs, opportunity and prosperity just overflow at every street corner in the USA.
These guys in DC need a reality check...but its hard to get a reality check when every lobbyist (legal and illegal) is throwing millions in your direction.

Our weak policies over the last 20 yrs. have made us the laughing stock of of the world.


I just hate it when I agree with you on something............but I gotta call it.....you are right on this one.........

[NJ Stinks]

I just hate it when I agree with you on something............but I gotta call it.....you are right on this one.........

I agree with Slewis too, JustRalph. But now that I see that you do.... :)

[46zilzal]

Funny how those yelling the loudest are usually a generation or two removed from being in the SAME Boat; Immigrant families of the second generation conveniently forgetting their own familial history.

I know a lot of them tried to hide it by name changes or rellocation bu that doesn't alter a thing.

[boxcar]

[color=black]I would argue that -- given our huge population with such diverse backgrounds and resulting cultural and communication barriers, combined with out-of-control societal ills, all in the light of the shift of power from individuals to corporations -- more government functionality and regulation is needed; with much greater transparency and oversight.As wise as they were, they did not foresee all the future developments they would have addressed had they been aware of them. Fortunately, they gave us ways to change things if our collective will is strong enough. Hopefully we won’t have a full-scale depression before that happens.Apparently the Bible can’t deal with communities taking up that much physical space. Modern technology and communicaton devices overcome such distance restrictions.We should now know how to avoid repeating such mistakes.Of course such programs have to be administered locally, but they can be funded and jointly supervised nationally.So you dismiss certain religious teachings that the highest form of charity is to help those one does not know personally?

The only "religious" teachings that matter to me are those in the bible.

And I would also suggest, sir, that there are values and principles that are so valuable, so wise, so good that they transcend time -- they trump "human development", technology, etc.. There are things in this world that should never change because of their inestimable value.

Boxcar
P.S Enjoy your enslavement to increasing government regulations. Just make sure you don't piss off the Plantation Owner and you should be okay.

[boxcar]

He said today that we have a broken immigration system and no one can disagree with that.

I do.
Our LEGAL immigration system has worked for years.
The only problem we have with immigration in the USA is the government's total failure to enforce the laws.

Mine filed, attack dogs, snipers.
Problem reduced by 50% overnight.

The immigration system is "broken" because the government broke it by breaking its own laws! :bang: :bang:

Surely, no one is going to me the Almighty, All-Knowing, All-Wise, All-Powerful State invented laws that where impossible to enforce!? Anyone?
Some pathetic god you statists bow to.

Boxcar

[slewis]

Funny how those yelling the loudest are usually a generation or two removed from being in the SAME Boat; Immigrant families of the second generation conveniently forgetting their own familial history.

I know a lot of them tried to hide it by name changes or rellocation bu that doesn't alter a thing.

Hey Zil,

Whats your take on this one:

I have friend who is a Franchise consultant in Miami, FL.

He CONTINUOUSLY finds businesses for wealthy South and Central American successful businessmen who migrate to the USA with large sums of $$$$.

Why? Because in their homeland, they are sick of hiring bodyguards to protect themselves and their families from being kidnapped and ransomed.
They are sick of the Govt corruption and the constant payola to do business.


One story in particular gave me a different spin on things.
This one gentleman had a manufacturing plant in Columbia. He had over 250 employees.
One day they almost got his daughter, so he was fed up and cashed in his chips.... set up bank transfers..... went to US embassy and got the OK to come to the US (providing he brings his millions of $$ with him).

He shuts the plant down and says bye bye to his homeland... as we welcome him with open arms....

Tell me about the 250 plus workers and how you think THEY feel about the USA and THEIR DREAMS.

No one ever mentions the fact that when we in the USA bring in Doctors and engineers and businessmen how it weakens the places they left and stagnates the growth of those nations.

I love listening to a clown like Vincente Fox state that the border should be open for Mexicans to work in the US so money can flow BACK into his country.
This is the paramount of leadership... this piece of shit ... who couldn't run a ferris wheel at a carnival let alone a sovereign country.
So while hard working, sometimes desparate Mexicans seek a better life, sometimes at the expense of the American taxpayer, Mexico loses valuable assets. That young man or woman who has such a drive and desire to live, they are willing to leave their homeland in desparation will never contribute to their country of origin in a way to make that country great.
Continuing to allow this to happen makes us, the USA, no better than Vincente Fox.

Another reason for contempt and hatred of Americans throughout the world.

[NJ Stinks]

Funny how those yelling the loudest are usually a generation or two removed from being in the SAME Boat; Immigrant families of the second generation conveniently forgetting their own familial history.

I know a lot of them tried to hide it by name changes or rellocation bu that doesn't alter a thing.

Here's my take on illegal immigrants or anyone else visiting the USA legally and health care, 46zilzal. If you need it, you should pay for it. In an emergency, you get medical help but you should be billed later. (I do know people from the UK usually buy travel health insurance before they come here or some other country for a visit.)

I've seen doctors in England (non-emergecy) and I had to pay for it. Can't see Canada being any different for an American there although I could be wrong. So why should it be any different for a foreigner coming here? :confused:

[highnote]

I just picked up a prescription the other day - the total bill was $245.00. I handed them $10 and walked away on the verge of good health! :rolleyes:


I wonder how many people actually have paid the full $245 for the prescription?

[Tom]

Well why not enforce them??

Is it the left libs again? The reality is TOM that BOTH sides eat shit on this issue.




Did I say it wasn't?
I was against Bush's inaction all along.

Politics has nothing to do with it.
The entire government is corrupt, inept, and our enemy.

[robert99]

"Do you know how the U.K. national healthcare system came about?

I'll let that now famous Member of European Parliament Daniel Hannan tell it:

Quote:
Listen, our system, our NHS came out of a peculiar time, we were basically under full mobilization when we invented this, right? It was.
It's Word War II, 1944. So, it was a time when we had food rationing, when everything had been nationalized, when he had hugely high taxes, you know, because everything had been conscripted into the war.
That was the product — that was the thinking that led to the state health care system.

I find it incredible that a free people living in a country dedicated and founded in the cause of independence and freedom can seriously be thinking about adopting such a system in peacetime and massively expanding the role of the state when there's no need.

Emphasis mine of course.

But the man makes a helluva good point in my opinion."


Mike,

Daniel Hannan is almost completely unknown in UK. He is a Conservative Member of European Parliament for SE England.

The man "would make a helluva good point" in my opinion if anything he said were true. His account is completely false.

The facts were that before and during WW2 there was zero health care plans for any UK citizens. Nothing was nationalised in WW2. Everyone was expected to pay full whack to a private doctor/ dentist /optician. With huge numbers out of work in the Depression they could afford zilch let alone save for any medical emergency - so went without any health treatment or used quack remedies. Kids had rickets from malnutrition, kids with bad eye sight lost schooling as they could not read without glasses, people lost all teeth to untreated gum disease, tuberculosis spread untreated from family member to neighbour and so on. Many kids were not even fit enough for military service of any kind. The citizens of the UK would no longer put up with a country that exploited them so badly that the rich never had to raise a finger their whole lives whilst the majority lived in slums and squalor. This was why the Conservatives under Churchill were kicked out of office in 1945.

When UK won the war in 1945 we were totally bankrupt, our houses bombed, factories bombed and burnt out - all had to be rebuilt from scratch to a national plan - not a free for all. There were no high taxes but there was food and petrol rationing right into the mid-50s. There absolutely was a need and the UK Health Service which started in 1948, despite the vested interests, was to ensure that the next generation was strong and healthy in order to rebuild the country - that worked absolutely fine, we recovered, paid off the debts and made it to the 4th largest economy from point zero.

UK citizens will never surrender the freedom from fear and debt that care to all at the point of need gives. Note well we started a "free" health service from zero at a time of bankruptcy.

Americans may not ever realise how lucky they are never to have had their cities and homes bombed and burnt out night after night and ample supplies of good food in their stomachs.

[boxcar]

Last night, I didn't have ample time to respond properly to this little gem below, so permit me to do so now.

As wise as they were, they did not foresee all the future developments they would have addressed had they been aware of them. Fortunately, they gave us ways to change things if our collective will is strong enough.

This is a fallacious and lame defense of statism -- something to which the Founding Fathers were adamantly opposed. But they were not opposed to the state having supremacy of power simply because "they did not foresee all the future developments", as you claim. Your excuse for them rings quite shallow. Their opposition to state supremacy found its ground in far more profound reasons than this. For starters, how about their miserable political experiences with the king of England? And with the church of England? Then we could move on next to their general knowledge of biblical teachings, of which they were in general agreement, especially as those teachings spoke to the the fallen, sinful nature of man. These are some of the major reasons they crafted the Constitution the way they did. They knew that the general, natural, sinful tendencies of human government was to continually accrue power for itself, with which it would progressively use to abusively regulate and control their subjects or citizens, at the horrible expense of individual liberties. The way the U.S. Constitution was written had nothing to do with the Founding Fathers' shortsightedness, as you suggest. But It had everything to do with their general biblical knowledge of human nature.

All the "future developments" of the entire human race from Adam to now -- all human history of all those "developments" -- teaches us that man's development (spiritually or morally) has not improved one iota. Today we are in the same fallen condition as Adam! Just as the leopard cannot change its spots or the Ethiopian the color of its skin so, too, man, apart from being redeemed by Christ (being born again), cannot change what he is. The Founding Fathers had a pretty good sense of these kinds of timeless truths, and this plus their own experience with political abuses, is why they gave the supremacy of power to The People. This is why the Bill of Rights is a "negative" (to borrow a BO's term) statement of rights that puts strict limits on the power of the federal government.

Boxcar

[highnote]

Health care debate has long history in this country...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090812/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_health_care_long_haul_analysis

[david botsford]

How about this part of the bill............Congressman and their families can opt out? Why do you think that part is in there? Huh?

Because it is such a good bill huh?This not nothing(use of double negative so a certain member could respond about my lack of education) to do with congressmen it's about the good the people.

[david botsford]

This not nothing(use of double negative so a certain member could respond about my lack of education) to do with congressmen it's about the good the people.Thought you would at least call me out on the omission OF a preposition.

[Tom]

It has nothing at all to do with the good of people.

[david botsford]

It has nothing at all to do with the good of people.Ecth-a-sketch....the Amish laptop! Tells me all I need to know about you

[Tom]

45 posts and you are out of ammo already?:lol: