You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
MySploofus
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message



Pages:  1    


smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:05 AM


smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:06 AM

Sure am sick of the media dragging her kids into the spotlight.

bigmama60
Bigmama60  (Level: 95.2 - Posts: 6648)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:07 AM

That's such a pity for Sarah and the future plans she has for herself and her children. Any concerned mother would want to THROUGHLY scrutinize that denial. Perhaps, Sarah couldn't read HR3200 p. 425.

allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 11:58 AM

There are far more people who want to hear sensationalism rather than just sit and get educated themselves. It is pretty easy to come to your own conclusions. I like many have had a call from a $9 per hour third shift health care worker asking why we don't have a living will on file. We were strong armed several times. Most have no idea what is needed. We, three times, saved the life of a 76, 79 and 85 year old who died at age 88 because he did not give permission to a partially trained nurse to NOT call a doctor. Read the bill yourself. NO need to listen to "non-partisan" hacks.

http://www.takepart.com/blog/2009/07/27/scare-tactics-page-425-of-the-healthcare-bill/

those that think a government panel is here to help you should ... nevermind

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 1:29 PM

The sky is falling!

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:16 PM

Did the Death Panel mandate that Sarah stop eating while pregnant with Trig, or was that just a personal choice?

I think I'd take my chances with the DP.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:19 PM

The Dr Pepper?



asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:27 PM

Oooooh, that would taste good right about now

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:27 PM

Oh, you little stinker, there you go again, pretending not to understand.

leenah
Leenah  (Level: 2.3 - Posts: 18)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:28 PM

It's cute how liberals dislike Sarah so much. You took the Governorship away from her, she has no power whatsoever, and yet they remain threatened.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:30 PM

Yes, that's right. I took the governorship from her. And then I made her post ludicrous paranoid stupidity on the internet.

Good grief.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:31 PM

The fact they won't leave her alone tells the tale. As long as they keep attacking her, she has them in the palm of her hand.

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:31 PM

Took...the...governorship...away...from...her?

Now that's an interesting take!

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:34 PM

Just to be clear, you're defending her claim that the president is readying a death panel to kill handicapped kids.

Never mind that I personally scared her out of office, do you agree with and support that statement?

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:36 PM

And just to be clear YOU are concerned about her children

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:36 PM

Eeeeeeeew! Now that's one palm I wouldn't want to be in. Lordy knows what else it's grasped. (Come to think of it, it seems to be the only part of her that actually grasps anything...)

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:39 PM

As I said in the other thread, it is Sarah Palin, not I, who is feigning concern for children, while using her own child's condition to feed her own ambition.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:40 PM

Allena, don't understand your post. Do you mean that a nurse's aide called you in the middle of the night, asking why you didn't have a living will? This would be grounds for termination in any hospital!

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:46 PM

Can't copy your exact wors but your first response to your own thread said you were sick of thedec media dragging her children sure sounded like you were "attempting" to express concern for her chhldren. Personally, have never been a big Palin defender but if anything she says gets folks vocal against this thing I say "You go, Sarah"

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:48 PM

Oh, I see. Your irony detector is on the blink, cupcake. SHE is the one who cries the big crocodile tears about the media dragging her kids into the spotlight. That was irony. Sarcasm. Smartassedness.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:50 PM

Should've used this. Or maybe this. Or this.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:51 PM

It is so much a part of who you are that I cannot always separate the ironic you from the real you-my bad

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:56 PM

Any time I say something you don't understand, just ask, I'll be happy to explain it for you.

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:57 PM



smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:57 PM

Seriously.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 3:07 PM

"We, three times, saved the life of a 76, 79 and 85 year old who died at age 88 because he did not give permission to a partially trained nurse to NOT call a doctor."

Sandy, they insisted upon calling a doctor three times (when the nurse did not want to) and the person lived 12 more years.

I agree with Jim. It's an illusion that government officials will make good medical decisions. Government in other fields does not make very good decisions. Their "reasoning" is often based on political influence.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 3:10 PM

Same nurse?

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 3:15 PM

If that goes for me too, then please explain your comment that progressives do not even think of Hillary as a progressive, even though she claims to be one.

bigmama60
Bigmama60  (Level: 95.2 - Posts: 6648)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 3:42 PM

Leenah

How did liberals take the Governorship away from Sarah? She willingly QUIT!!! I agree she has no power whatsoever.

I doubt if anyone is/ felt threatened by her . On second thought, maybe Putin and the Russian people did. I'll bet they're relieved now that she won't be snopping from her porch.


smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 3:57 PM

I should think it self-explanatory, no irony involved. True progressives are as disappointed with Hillary (and some with Obama) as true conservatives were with Bush. Clinton has tried to disown the "liberal" label by trading it in for "progressive" because it hasn't been as tainted and distorted by bile and venom - yet.

She's neither.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:00 PM

If I have a patient in the hospital who appears to be dying, it's my responsibility to call the family and ask them if they want "everything" done. Many people don't want to be kept alive on life support no matter what. Usually at that point the family is with the patient, so we ask in person. If not, we may have to call. It wouldn't be a nurse's aide that called though, it would be the patient's nurse.

tuzilla
Tuzilla  (Level: 134.1 - Posts: 3778)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:02 PM

Would you folks get off Sarah's back. She resigned to get away from the hounding. Besides, she has seen the health care bill from where she is sitting, and is therefore totally versed in it and capable of handling health care for the nation.

Andy! This is a polite, serious question, not a snide attack. America is the only industrialized nation in the world without some form of national health care. Our system is the most expensive in the world, yet ranks 37th overall in quality of care. France's nationalized system is also expensive, but not as expensive. It is ranked #1 in the world. Since you live there, could you explain the differences, and why we should not want to move in that direction away from our current overpriced, and less than top quality system?

Thank you in advance.

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:18 PM

I lost my high school class ring nearly 30 years ago. I wonder whether Sarah would consider letting me set a spell on her magical porch. One can see things so clearly from there, I'm certain to spot it!

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:27 PM

We should move in the DIRECTION of covering everyone, Steve.

But we do not need to spend a TRILLION DOLLARS to set up a government takeover when there are less expensive options that bring everyone else into the fold, esp when we do not have a TRILLION DOLLARS.

In France doctors earn 22€ per visit (about $31 - try that in the USA!), and the system still piles up huge deficits.

And once again, if you're really sick, the only place you want to be is in the USA. It is the only reason I would ever repatriate. And why I'd like to understand just how the USA came to be ranked 37th.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:37 PM

Donna, again there is not one thing in your answer that explains anything.

I worked for a woman once whose responsibility was to know how to do what we did and supervise us. I'll never forget a job she gave me.

She handed it to me (a job for which I had never been trained and had no idea how to even start it) with the words, "Here, do this one. Any moron could do this one.

Apparently not every moron could, because as it turned out the reason she didn't train me how to do that job is because she had absolutely no idea how to do it herself.

So again, you plainly stated in a past thread that the progressives do not consider Hillary a progressive, even though she claims to be (she did so loudly and proudly at one of the debates.)

It is not self evident in any way to people who are NOT progressives, which apparently you are since you would have to understand what progressives are to be able to say she is not one.

So since it is not self explanatory, please, as the person who made this statement (and I've never heard anyone else make it), explain why you say progressives do not consider Hillary a progressive.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:49 PM

As Donna said, "same nurse"? All those years?
If someone has a chance at all to live without brain damage, we (hospital workers) want to do everything possible for them. No one wants to be kept alive by artificial measures without a chance at that. Occasionally a family member does though....


goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:53 PM

"The fact they won't leave her alone tells the tale. As long as they keep attacking her, she has them in the palm of her hand."

Who attacked her? I see her making a fool of herself....again. Put a camera in front of her...and she is ON. She reminds me of Heidi and Spencer....no reason for them to be famous....they are just fame hounds.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:55 PM

I say progressives do not think Clinton is a progressive because many progressives say she is not. I've read it in columns and articles for years. I can't help what she says she is, George Bush said he was the "education president" but that didn't make him one.

I don't have time today to do your googling for you but you could easily find these things out for yourself if you really wanted to know.

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:56 PM

"The Uniter"....what a joke.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:57 PM

So in other words, that day you said it you were just worked up and spouting off, and you have no idea. You were just in the mood to argue.

Ok. I can live with that.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:58 PM

Andy, in Frane docs don't get sued much do they? Obama will not deal with the huge expense of malpractice insurance .

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 4:58 PM

The word "obtuse" comes to mind.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:01 PM

No, the day I said it, near as I can remember, I had the same information I have now - a general knowledge that progressives do not think she is one of them. I don't know why this is such a difficult concept for you.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:02 PM

Get outta my head.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:02 PM

Bait and switch. Sounds like a fishing procedure!

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:05 PM



goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:06 PM

The word could be "dense".

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:07 PM

I hope you all know, that if any kind of euthanasia thing was implemented (which this bill certainly doesn't suggest) that there would be a MASSIVE refusal by health care workers. Even the 9.00 per hr ones. ^0)

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:09 PM

that was supposed to be

bigmama60
Bigmama60  (Level: 95.2 - Posts: 6648)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:10 PM

What happened to your usual response. You know the negative one. Oh, I get it you really mean no; again.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:10 PM

You won't be allowed to refuse. Try it and you're off to the internment camp for "retraining."

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:14 PM

Geez, Smoke, please explain who Beverly is taklking to-want to

bigmama60
Bigmama60  (Level: 95.2 - Posts: 6648)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:15 PM

Sorry, that was a response to Andy. It's in the word thread. However, it really doesn't matter since the content is resoundingly redundant.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:46 PM

There is no answer now - and there was no answer then. You had written something a couple of days ago about finding something you said in another thread. You had said I mentioned Saul Alinsky and you googled him having never heard of him. Actually, I didn't even mention his name. You did. That's how I knew you already knew about him.

It's all on the same thread titled:

"What a Waste"

Smoke
Thu, 9th Jul '09 10:42 AM

Are you talking about Saul Alinsky? He wasn't a communist or a socialist either.

Smoke
Thu, 9th Jul '09 11:05 AM

I refer you to Rules for Radicals, Ethics of Means and Ends, Rule 4:

The fourth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that judgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point.

I think the progressivism Clinton claims is a little different that that envisioned by its 19th century proponents (and opponents), and I think she only grasped at that word because she's trying to run away from "liberal" and progressive is often used to mean opposed to conservative. Funny thing is, true progressives don't consider her one of them.

Jank0614
Thu, 9th Jul '09 11:16 AM

That is strange - and of course I had no idea.

What in Hillary's ideology do true progressives not believe includes her?

....................
.....................
...................

crickets

And the thread took a turn and you never answered my question then, either. I wondered why. Now I know.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:48 PM

What is it that you know??

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:51 PM

Already answered, 15 posts above you.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:51 PM

No, Beverly, I mean yes but in a less expensive but more effective way.

Linda, I'll have to ask about malpractice here.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 5:59 PM

This one? "So in other words, that day you said it you were just worked up and spouting off, and you have no idea. You were just in the mood to argue.

Ok. I can live with that."

If you chose to characterize my remarks as "worked up and spouting off," that's fine, but you are as wrong in that regard as you are in so many, many others.

What came before you picked up the thread to "prove" to me in your big GOTCHA moment that I knew about Saul Alinsky before you posted about him? What did you post earlier that I googled to come up with Saul Alinski? Something about "ridicule" and "rules for radicals"? Hmmm? Same ones you were blathering about the last couple of days?

I confess I'm skilled with a search engine. What else you got?

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:02 PM

OMG! Is this still about Church Lady?

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:11 PM

ok, let's don't talk about the subject. Anyone ever have a slinky? They were so much fun to watch go down the stairs.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:16 PM

Well, don't step on one, or you'll be down the stairs, and off to the emergency room.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:19 PM

Oh, wait. Were you being ironic?

Jank (or anyone) do you not think it is irresponsible and misleading for Ms Palin to be accusing the president of wanting to kill her baby? Was that fair of her, to couch the issue in such emotional terms?

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:19 PM

If I was slinky enough, I would survive unscathed. I'm not anymore though

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:24 PM

Donna - it seems that since you have no facts and still no answers, you have nowhere to turn but to call me names and mock me and hope that others will either join you or find you witty without noticing that................you can't answer my very simple question.


A simple answer weeks ago was all I asked then because you supported Hillary, and I could only believe that you knew what you were talking about and had facts to back up your words.

If it feels good to you to call me, or Palin, or anybody who doesn't agree with you, names, then........now we all know.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:33 PM

Ok, maybe I'm chopped liver, but why is no one addressing the actual bill?

bigmama60
Bigmama60  (Level: 95.2 - Posts: 6648)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:33 PM

Andy,
Let me get you straight you mean more profits for Robber Barons on Wall street and none for Main Street!
Unquestionably, Main street is the stock exchanged according to your answer.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:35 PM

Oh, yes, now we all know. You've exposed me for all to see my ... something.

I didn't call you any names. I voiced a casual opinion in a thread I don't even remember and you want to play gotcha about an old grievance instead of discussing the issue of this thread.



collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:37 PM

No, Beverly, I mean an effective and less costly reform of our medical system which will benefit the American people.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:39 PM

Sandra, there are two other threads where others have been addressing the bill. And both have Donna's link to the actual bill so it can be read online. I downloaded it onto my computer (my laptop is not happy with me) and I've been reading it as I can.

I'm glad the most important parts (to me) use language that's quite understandable, but my so far the absolute worst I read was page 246 (i apologize ahead of time if when this posts there are angels or who knows what emoticons inside it from the parentheses:

—Compute allowed expendi2
tures for the service category for 2010
3 by increasing the allowed expenditures
4 for the service category for 2009 com5
puted under subclause by the tar6
get growth rate for such service cat7
egory under subsection (f) for 2010.
8 ‘‘(ii) FOR SUBSEQUENT YEARS.—For
9 a subsequent year, take the amount of al10
lowed expenditures for such category for
11 the preceding year (under clause or this
12 clause) and increase it by the target
13 growth rate determined under subsection
14 (f) for such category and year.’’.
15 (4) APPLICATION OF SEPARATE TARGET
16 GROWTH RATES FOR EACH CATEGORY.—
17 IN GENERAL.—Section 1848(f) of the
18 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–4(f)) is
19 amended by adding at the end the following
20 new paragraph:
21 ‘‘(5) APPLICATION OF SEPARATE TARGET
22 GROWTH RATES FOR EACH SERVICE CATEGORY BE23
GINNING WITH 2010.—The target growth rate for a
24 year beginning with 2010 shall be computed and ap25
plied separately under this subsection for each service

Yep - that clears it right up! haha

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:41 PM

I don't like much Obama bring in his dying mother worrying about her health care coverage to pass his health care nightmare eith but guess that is politics-"reprehensible" and distasteful as it might be

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:42 PM

Trying to decide what chopped liver would say. Maybe ""Wish I wasn't chopped"? "Gee, if I was a kidney, I'd at least have a twin to carry on"? "Wonder why they called me a liver and not a deather?"

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:43 PM

We talked about the bill in another thread, Sandra, and about this provision specifically, started by Jank. I started this one really because I was struck by the hypocrisy of Palin using her little baby to make false, politically-motivated accusations, after all her crying about leaving her kids alone.

The LAST thing the opponents of the bill want us to do is talk about the bill. Their idea of a plan is to pore over it looking for things they can take out of context to scare people with.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:43 PM

Donna, you said above:

"Smoke (Level: 21.9 - Posts: 1956)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 2:56 PM

Any time I say something you don't understand, just ask, I'll be happy to explain it for you."

I took you at your word. I hoped maybe you just got busy that other day and overlooked my question for you. Now I know you didn't.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:44 PM

BTW, Donna, no one has to "gotcha."

You get yourself.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:44 PM

sorry Jank, couldn't make heads or tails of your post!

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:47 PM

Sorry I had the wrong post. Thought we were talking about forced euthanasia.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:48 PM

The FIRST thing opponents want is the people who are voting on it to read it-maybe they could someone to explain it to them too-as at least one says it takes several lawyers to understand it. That guy is a lawyer himself.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:48 PM

That was the point, Sweety. No one but an attorney could make heads or tails of it. I was showing you my least understandable page so far in my reading.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:49 PM

Jank, I don't know WTF you're talking about. I've tried my best to answer everything you've thrown at me, but sometimes it splatters in my eyes and I miss something. Ask me again in little tiny words and I'll try to be patient.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:50 PM

No different than any other bill. In lawyerese, I mean.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:51 PM

What in Hillary's ideology do true progressives not believe includes her?

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 6:55 PM

yes, it is in lawyer talk all the more reason NOT to rush

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:04 PM

Oh. Well, she's voted for and supported the war(s), is pro-free trade and pro-death penalty, supported some non-progressive banking legislation, and has never supported a single-payer health care system, for a few.

Do what I did when it first came up. Google "is Hillary Clinton a progressive?" Also, as I've said, I've read it several times in op-ed columns and commentary pieces. I never claimed the idea was original with me.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:09 PM

Thank you. That gives me ideas what to google.

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:14 PM



jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:18 PM

I don't know. It just seems odd to me to make claims so confidently without something to back it up first, and then when someone asks you on what you base your claims, your answer is to go google it yourself.

Now I know what particular points are important to you on which you made your claim.

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:22 PM



smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:33 PM

I don't know. All I said was that progressives don't claim Clinton as one of their own. She's not liberal enough. Maybe we all look like leftist radicals from over there where you are (watch out for the edge), but there's quite a lot of room between where Clinton is, firmly in the center, and where the people of the progressive movement are well to her left. I'm probably closer to them than to her, but I can't back that up with proof, so you may have to google if you want to refute me.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:39 PM

"She's not liberal enough" would have been a great answer. Weeks ago.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:43 PM

Well, I sure wish I'd known that then. I would apologize to you for missing the question previously, but I already know what you think of my apologies so I won't waste it. It should've been fairly simple for you to find that out, even though I didn't answer at the time. Really not worth all the effort you've put into it, is it?

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:46 PM

The problem was you didn't put any effort into your original statement. I was looking for truth with my question and figured you had it. You were just looking for a fight.

My only effort is in wading through your evasions and name calling and mocking to get to the truth.

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:52 PM

Smoke:
"I think the progressivism Clinton claims is a little different that that envisioned by its 19th century proponents (and opponents), and I think she only grasped at that word because she's trying to run away from "liberal" and progressive is often used to mean opposed to conservative."

I thought that was pretty clear.


jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:53 PM

"a little different" is clear?



goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 7:54 PM

She is running away from "liberal"....progressives are liberal. Pretty darn clear.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 8:15 PM

Really need to get my kids back playing Sploofus so we can be a team

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 8:30 PM

LOL!!!!! You never cease to amaze me Linda. You still think you are right about every single thing. I do have my own mind and can disagree just like everyone else.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 8:34 PM

My kids have their own minds too but I trained them pretty well on most issues

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 8:45 PM

I am soooooooooooo skerrid.

bigmama60
Bigmama60  (Level: 95.2 - Posts: 6648)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 9:32 PM

Andy,
It will only embellish American people (millionaires and multimillionaires ) who are in the top 1%. percentile. Unless you are one of them, I will contend your usual "No It's Not" is not popular withe masses.

allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 10:52 PM

Just to be clear ... different nurses called at very early morning hours from three different health care facilities requesting permission to let my father die. We did not ... each time he was fine within a few days. If he had had a living will he would have died because the nurses would have refused care. He was prone to congestive heart failure. All he needed was less IV's a diuretic and a doctor that cared. A nurse, thinking he needs paddles or a respirator is of course over her head ... but, they call and ask if he has a living will and why not? The next day, more strong arming.

If you want to die, sign a living will, go to a hospital and wait for someone to put you out of you misery with a Morphine shot. What an adviser will tell you is that you are prone to pay a lot for nothing without a living will. YOU make up your mind, not your insurance company ... So far.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 11:55 PM

Oh, he was in a nursing home. Of course the nurses there don't use paddles or respirators. If he had already signed something that said he wanted those things done, don't know why he wasn't shipped to the hospital immediately. Surely you found him a doctor that cared, eventually?

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sat, 8th Aug '09 11:59 PM

And Jim, a little lasix can go a long way, for sure

allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 3:21 PM

MKy father went from a independent living home to an assisted living home to a nursing home. He lasted happily for 18 years after his first heart attack. He was a finee father, grandfather and eventually a great grandfather. He earned a happyh retired life and no $9 per hour nursee has the ritght to kill him because she is afraid of her boss or a law suit.

The strong arming came by management requesting in no uncertain terms that we sign a DNR. We left. Nurses do use paddles. You can to. Buy the outfit, read the directions and remember, if he's already dead, you can do no harm. If someone more experienced is going be there in five minutes, do CPR. However, requiring a "Do Not Resuscitate" form is what everyone fears about Obama care. So far, no such provision seems to be in the bill. The issue is what does rationing mean? Are we going to to have one, two, three chances to be resuscitated. What bureaucrat will decide? As we look at the British and Canadian models we see long lines waiting for what we take for granted, from Cat scans to Chemotherapy.

Now ... what is the difference between chopped liver and a liberal. The liver is the ONLY organ that can heal itself.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 3:24 PM

You sure have a bad attitude toward the poorly paid.

allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 3:28 PM

It is the stupid management that thinks such a person on the night shift is adequate.
She was until something difficult happened. She was untrained by the management.
Many homes are fine ... some steal the rings off of sleeping patients.

You can have the last word, YRH Smoke.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 3:32 PM

Just thought I'd mention that during my sojourns in the UK I several times have had occasion to accompany friends to medical visits of one sort or another, ranging from routine checkups to emergency dentistry. On every occasion we were seen quickly and on our way in under two hours from the time we walked in the door. No lines. Not one. On one visit the doctor came in on Saturday morning when he had the day off specifically to see my friend on very short notice.

I can't remember the last time I even laid eyes on my doctor in less than two hours, and I've got a life-size technicolor picture of him meeting me at his office on his day off. As if.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 3:33 PM

And don't start with that "last word" crap, if you can't defend your position, just say so.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 3:34 PM

I'm glad your father had a long happy life Jim.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 3:42 PM

Beverly, it has very little to do with one's income level. It's about who is going to control the health care system and how good health care will or won't be.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:05 PM

I'm sorry to snap, Jim, I shouldn't have said can't, of course you can. I meant if you don't want to discuss something with me, just say so without taking the little shot, which I don't deserve, and certainly not from you.

Yes, I can be empassioned in debate, and I do try persistently to make myself understood and explain my positions. There are people who consider that a strength. I do not ever "have to have the last word," and any fair reader here will know that I often walk away from pointless discussions with unreasonable people.

I'm not the B-word some would have you believe. I'm not either of them.



1mks
1mks  (Level: 211.0 - Posts: 5883)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:16 PM



goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:21 PM

Operative word being "fair".

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:33 PM

Anyway, this is my thread, and I can have the last word if I want. So there.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:43 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/09/senate-democrat-open-health-care-public-option/ Progress of sorts-someone just might be getting it that people are really really ANGRY

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:47 PM

Why don't you want poor people to have health care?

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:51 PM

Stop playing games, please.

Should I ask why you want to cut Medicare?

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:53 PM

I don't. I'm going to be on it soon.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:57 PM

Well, there's a $500 million hit on Medicare right away to fund this monster.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 4:58 PM

But the monster is supposed to replace the services cut.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:02 PM

And it's not a hit right away, it's phased over 10 years.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:03 PM

Rasmussen will have a poll out tommorrow about whether people trust their health care to private insurance companies or the governmen-should be interesting. Medikcaid is a progranm for the poor. It differs from state to state and the current plans out there are making alredy broke states fear that the feds are going to shift costs to them. Unlike the feds-states cannot print money-personsaally think that is a good thing.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:05 PM

It's billion, by the way.

"Nobody is talking about reducing Medicare benefits," Obama said. "Medicare benefits are there because people contributed into a system. It works. We don't want to change it. What we do want is to eliminate some of the waste that is being paid for out of the Medicare trust fund that could be used more effectively to cover more people and to strengthen the system."

Rasmussen polls are slanted and prove nothing in my opinion.



collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:05 PM

Addl services? You've got to be kidding.

Same number of doctors, nurses . . .

but more patients

and run by the government.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:06 PM

Nobody said add.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:09 PM

Obama, I am sorry to say, is no longer credible on this subject. He wants single payer and this monster is a stealth vehicle to put everyone on single payer.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:12 PM

LOL don't let the facts gert in yiour way

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:13 PM

Oh, I'm sorry. You said the government was going to cut waste.

The govenrnment never cuts waste.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:15 PM

Not credible at all, Andy!!!

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:16 PM

Obama has proposed nothing even remotely like a single-payer. Here, inform yourself.

http://www.healthreform.gov/healthcarestatus.html

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:21 PM

Obama has NO plan!!!

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:21 PM

You can keep your current insurance, but when that ends for whatever reason you get folded into the public option.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:26 PM

And you wouldn't want to have a public option available if you lost your existing coverage?


collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:29 PM

It's not just an option then. It's mandatory.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:32 PM

Yes, you'll be required to be responsible for your health care if you can afford it. I thought conservatives were all about that. Or is it just the "if you can't afford it" part you can't go along with?

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:34 PM

Excuse me, but I'm not a conservative.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:48 PM

Whatever.

And it's not just homeless indigent bums who need help with health care. My husband has to work one week out of every month to pay for ours, and it's bare-bones, high co-pay with no eye or dental. I think that's too much. And he's in the struggling auto industry with job-dependent insurance we're lucky to have at all, and as the highest-paid technician in the shop in a flooded local job market, he could be replaced by two younger, cheaper workers at any time with no recourse. He could just as easily arrive at his workplace to find the doors chained, plenty of his friends have had that experience, and without income, being allowed to keep the insurance isn't much help. I'm still four years from Medicare, with or without advantages, and we both have serious pre-existing conditions.

Wonder why I want an affordable public option?

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:53 PM

Forgot to mention the cost of it nearly doubled during the Bush years.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 5:59 PM

But we do not need to have a complete government takeover of the health care industry to extend health care to all Americans. There are several simpler, less costly ways to get there. And w
BTW please do not raise the cost issue. No one has a complete answer to that although this administration has pretended to (until the CBO stepped in with some realities). Certainly we could get rid of excessive testing but the Democrats will not take the steps to permit that.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 6:02 PM

Then it's a darn good thing that a complete takeover is also nothing like what is being proposed.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 6:13 PM

What did insurance costs do during the Clinton years?

And the 1st Bush years?

and the...

and the.....

They have risen through every presidential term ... for as long as there has been insurance and presidents.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 6:14 PM

They ARE proposing a complete takeover, Donna.

We need to do something. We should have done it a while back.

However, Obama has chosen a partisan route instead of the bipartisan route. Could be a tragic mistake.

Because either we get a poor solution or none at all.

titansgal
Titansgal  (Level: 17.6 - Posts: 35)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 6:26 PM

This thread reminds me of 'Days of our Lives' : same characters, same opinions, same slant, same shit everytime I check in.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 6:29 PM

good to get you opinion for a change of pace then right after you were forced to read the thread

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 6:34 PM

No they're not, and I don't have any further interest in back-and-forthing about it. You're either misunderstanding or misrepresenting, not sure which, but you're wrong either way and you have made up your mind in any case, as have I. Let's move on.

Are you also of the opinion that it's acceptable to exaggerate, distort, and flat-out lie to push your agenda, as Ms Palin has done? Are her children still off-limits for comment, when she herself parades them before us in her never-ending hunger for the glare of the same spotlight she claims she doesn't want on them? No thoughts about that?


collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 6:37 PM

Whom are you addressing?

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 7:06 PM

Youm.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 7:14 PM

Sarah Palin, not my girl. She needs to get up to snuff on the issues before I could give her a look.

I haven't exaggerated. The Washington Post, the leading newspaper in the land, recently criticized the President's own misrepresentations about the health care proposal, noting that half of increases in health care cost are due to technological advances.

The approach is partisan. So we do not have a plan that instead of eliminating all those unnecessary tests, will encourage their continuation. And there has been an effort to cram it thru Congress quickly before anyone could learn the details, such as that is leads to single payer.

bigmama60
Bigmama60  (Level: 95.2 - Posts: 6648)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 7:42 PM

Collioure
Beverly, it has very little to do with one's income level. It's about who is going to control the health care system and how good health care will or won't be.
*************************************************************************************************************
I can't believe you said all that; Andy. If it it was so sad and selfish it would be funny. You sound like a multi millionaire . Does disgraced multi millionaire Rick Scott who scamed the hospiltal industry of millions ring a bell? Or how about Dick Army.or American for Limeted Government, Consevatatives for Patient (CFR), Americans for Prosperity, Right Principles; all thes ultra conservative groups represent the interest of rich fat Cats who don't want their dollars to go towards healthcare.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x341182

Secondly, Andy, This not euthanasia, and it’s not funny either. It's sounds more like the violent implications these people instigate is what will kill you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAii_MxDklw

Betsy McCaughey, Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, along with Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thaddeus McCotter misrepresents the content of page 425 of the bill by saying that “the Congress …
• would make it mandatory … that every five years, people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner,
• how to decline nutrition,
• how to decline being hydrated,
• how to go into hospice care …
• all to do what’s in society’s best interest … and cut your life short.



Read the bill Andy! Read the bill Andy !
H.R. 3200, page 425: Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:
An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.
(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning … .
(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.
(F) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders … .


As for the argument claiming that this is the first step on a slippery slope leading to government-encouraged euthanasia, that’s a stretch. The right to draw up an advance directive is federally guaranteed, but doctor-assisted suicide is legal in only three states. It would take a lot more than Medicare-funded counseling for voluntary euthanasia to become a standard government recommendation….SOURCE: fact check.org






smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 7:50 PM

Even voluntary euthanasia is far less available than legal pot or a lesbian wedding. To suggest the health bill includes provisions for forced euthanasia is a big steaming lie, and anyone peddling it or standing silent while Sarah does ought to be ashamed.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 7:54 PM

Sorry, Beverly, the way this is being handled, the partisan approach, the hidden clauses, the lies about cost reduction with which they planned to justify it - it smacks of something that requires more consideration and a bipartisan effort.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 7:54 PM

I am certainly far from rich, Beverly, and the plans out there SUCK and those who have the votes are starting to realize tht a whole bunch of people much like me think the same. Obama's alliance with a major drug group would in the past been referred to as in bed with a "special interest" group now it is a "PARTNERSHIP" Folks are on to the rename thing for the ame smelly pile of (BLANK)

allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 8:43 PM

Smoke ... you are out of line!

If you think Obama has proposed a health care program, you are grasping at straws. There are ZERO Obama proposals. All you are getting is what you want to hear from many speech writers who have never read the bill Pelosi got written. Wait until you see the Max Baucus bill ... another effort to hide stuff. Nothing as yet, has come from the White House. They are letting Congress do all of the writing.

The British system is so flawed, many folks are leaving. UK survival rates for cancer are the lowest in Europe and the US is far ahead of Europe.

"One of Britain's leading cancer hospitals will have to ration chemotherapy treatment because of a lack of funds, doctors warned yesterday.
The cash crisis means that patients could die waiting for treatment, they said."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-180874/Chemotherapy-rationing.html#ixzz0NjiNj0U5

Smoke, should you really leave the best health care system in the world, I hope you do not get ovarian cancer. You wait 6 months for the chemo while the disease progresses to your lympth system. So ... you get a BA flight to the US, pay for it yourself and return and you don't need the British Chemo. happy day. Look at the money the British Government saved by rationing.

I had first hand comments from the Mayor of Newquay. He was on the waiting list for a knee operation for two years. When his turn finally came up, he went to the dirtiest hospital where he had been assigned and refused the operation. He preferred to limp rather than risk dying of some infectious disease.

The decision to not let Congress railroad health care with a single payer system and rationed care is a no brainer. I do know there are many who think the government can run it smoothly. Those that do need to go to work for the government and see why they have too many expenses, too many political decisions and too many over paid political appointees who were good at campaigning to run anything cost effectively. If you want to drop productivity 50% and raise the cost 50% let the government take a crack at it. They can't even give away $4500 per car, efficiently. YOU know it in your heart ... stop your wishful thinking.



asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 8:56 PM

Such great ideas coming from the other side of the aisle. Oh, wait...

Just know that when people are making major life choices (where to work, how long to work, whether it's possible to quit a dreadful job, whether to have children, where to live...) based on fears related to medical coverage, *something* needs to be done. And it's not just coming from the consumer side. How many of you know doctors who are happy in their work? My fabulous former doctor (top of her class at Harvard, chief resident at a great hospital in NYC) first stopped accepting insurance, then left private practice, and now is considering leaving the field altogether. And both of the obstetricians who delivered my children have stopped doing the OB part in favor of the GYN part because of skyrocketing insurance premiums. It's easy to take potshots at someone who's trying to fix this enormous problem. A lot harder to come up with a comprehensive solution that will please everyone.

And as for the real topic of this thread: Yes, it sickens me that Sarah Palin parades her brood in front of the public when it suits her purposes and then criticizes anyone (flips out, actually!) who dares bring them up in anything but that carefully controlled context. I find it difficult enough to believe men take her seriously; I'm flabbergasted that there are women out there who could have watched that vice presidential debate and its aftermath and not be cringing that this person is now among the handful of most famous women politicians in the world. I find it so disheartening that people don't see the damage she is doing to women--and the cause of gender equality--everywhere.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:14 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/03/health-care-reforms-americans/ don't know how many times I have to post that to debunk the idea that Republicans and others have no plans. Jim is correct that OBama has no plan. Take a look at how well the insurance for "all" under plans similar to the ones out there have worked in MA and TN almost banrupt the states and in MA they are still showing up in ER because no primary care physicians. Personally don't give a hoot what anyone thinks of Palin includinfg you, Asor- cannot defend attack someone else -as she is not voting on changing my health care which I like just fine. This is another government takeover like the banks and the car companies.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:17 PM

I'm not out of line whatsoever. Our anecdotals cancel each other, every system has horror stories, including ours, and in any case, we are not talking about the British system or anything like it. Nor are we talking about a government takeover of the health care system. We are talking about the government managing a pool of insurance plans offered by participating insurance providers to people who are not eligible for other plans.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/guy-t-saperstein/the-only-good-option-for_b_253339.html

Why don't you want poor people to have health care?

allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:21 PM

Some say ... it is easy to criticize. Here is the best reform we could get behind if we want to keep the fine doctors, and have the great health care system we are destroying with too much government.

Eliminate in state only plans and let everyone get insurance from any state they please.

Make frivolous suits payable by plaintiff, charge court costs for losing, set standards for certain losses and make law suits with the lawyer getting a percentage, illegal. These reforms dramatically reduce malpractice insurance (the reason many leave the field). Run away juries cost every innocent doctor.

Provide health savings plans (let those that are healthy save for a rainy day and those that are hypochondriacs pay for their care.

Offer catastrophic loss insurance and let most people self insure up to their own limit choice.

Even the tax for those that get it from their employer and those that pay insurance themselves.

Lengthen patents for Rx break throughs. Loosen cross licensing restrictions on Rx's.

Pay for illegal workers health care out of the social security tax they pay. (Right now the government just keeps it and doesn't tell anyone about it. Congress knows) Rather than make the hospitals charge overboard to those that do pay. As of now, stolen Social Security numbers are a windfall for the government.

Right now, doctors get 9% of the fees. Most lawyers make 40% of the award, or more. Office staff, paperwork pushers and insurance salesmen get far more than the doctor. These reforms will keep doctors and keep the government out of the diagnostic and remedy business, the area where most folks fear.








smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:22 PM

Thanks for your post, Asor, your last paragraph is perfection and for all my fabled silver-tongued-devilness I couldn't have said it better.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:23 PM

You cannot talk to a rock...sigh..thought she said she was in the UK and marveled at how well the health care system functioned. My reading must be as bad as my typing

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:23 PM

Jim, our great health care system is the most expensive in the world and it's ranked 37th.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:26 PM

Yes, that's what I said I saw, Linda. Do you mean to say you doubt me?



allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:32 PM

smoke ... our health care system pays more for lawyers the next ten combined. However, we get results. The Japanese system gets results. Why aren't we looking at what they do to lawyers with frivilous suits. Trial lawyers cost you way too much each time you visit a doctor. How do you think John Edwards became richer than most Doctors at the Mayo clinic?

Some say ... it is easy to criticize. Here is the best reform we could get behind if we want to keep the fine doctors, and have the great health care system we are destroying with too much government.

Eliminate in state only plans and let everyone get insurance from any state they please.

Make frivolous suits payable by plaintiff, charge court costs for losing, set standards for certain losses and make law suits with the lawyer getting a percentage, illegal. These reforms dramatically reduce malpractice insurance (the reason many leave the field). Run away juries cost every innocent doctor.

Provide health savings plans (let those that are healthy save for a rainy day and those that are hypochondriacs pay for their care.

Offer catastrophic loss insurance and let most people self insure up to their own limit choice.

Even the tax for those that get it from their employer and those that pay insurance themselves.

Pay for illegal workers health care out of the social security tax they pay. (Right now the government just keeps it and doesn't tell anyone about it. Congress knows) Rather than make the hospitals charge overboard to those that do pay.

Right now, doctors get 9% of the fees. Most lawyers make 40% of the award, or more. Office staff, paperwork pushers and insurance salesmen get far more than the doctor. These reforms will keep doctors and keep the government out of the diagnostic and remedy business, the area where most folks fear.


jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 9:44 PM

Donna, one of most unjust things you ever say is 'why don't you want poor people to have health care."

So you jump right past that we are intelligent people who don't want socialism for this country to be that the reason we want that is because we are cruel to poor people?

Just because we want things to be done RIGHT instead of just FAST doesn't mean we don't want poor people to have care.

And the thing is - THEY ALREADY DO!

So the basic premise of your disingenuous question is flawed at best, an empty emotional ploy and mean accusation at worst.



cujgie
Cujgie  (Level: 173.6 - Posts: 754)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 10:39 PM

A doctor (internal medicine) who is a patron of our library says the biggest problem is escalating medicine and hospital costs. Also, his malpractice insurance is out of sight.

Why are those costs so high?

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 10:43 PM

The system HAS to change. My son cannot get health insurance since he turned 18 and his fathers insurance would no longer cover him. He has brain tumors and cannot get any medical since his job does not offer it.He had it for a while but when he lost his job at the dealership he lost it, then they offered him coverage....for 400+ dollars per month through the current act. The current system does not work. Is the new plan the way to go? Who knows...it will chopped up and disected before it ever gets approved, so all the fuss if for naught.

lucimoore
Lucimoore  (Level: 183.4 - Posts: 1684)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 10:55 PM

"And the thing is - THEY ALREADY DO!"

NO, they don't! Tell that to my friend Louise, oh, that's right, you can't because she's dead. No insurance, no kidney, no more life. Her husband Walter just lost their house because he couldn't pay the medical bills and his assets were taken. Early sixty year olds that fell through the cracks because they were poor. Dirt farmer and hay farmer all his life but an honest man who just couldn't pay his bills because they got too high. She was a diabetic who lost both legs below the knees and still tended her home and cooked all the meals. We collected aluminum cans and anything else we could do to pay for her dialysis. That worked for a while but her heart finally gave out. So don't tell me the poor people have insurance or health care. Many do not,

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 10:57 PM

It doesn't matter what anyone wants or dreams - there's no money for this reform.

And holding France up as the standard of great medicine? From the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124958049241511735.html which says

"France claims it long ago achieved much of what today's U.S. health-care overhaul is seeking: It covers everyone, and provides what supporters say is high-quality care. But soaring costs are pushing the system into crisis. The result: As Congress fights over whether America should be more like France, the French government is trying to borrow U.S. tactics.

In recent months, France imposed American-style "co-pays" on patients to try to throttle back prescription-drug costs and forced state hospitals to crack down on expenses. "A hospital doesn't need to be money-losing to provide good-quality treatment," President Nicolas Sarkozy thundered in a recent speech to doctors.

And service cuts -- such as the closure of a maternity ward... -- are prompting complaints from patients, doctors and nurses that care is being rationed. That concern echos worries among some Americans that the U.S. changes could lead to rationing.

The French system's fragile solvency shows how tough it is to provide universal coverage while controlling costs, the professed twin goals of President Barack Obama's proposed overhaul."

It's beyond rational thought that without enough money to support socialized health care here that there won't be rationing here, too. Most likely sooner, rather than later, because of our economic downturn.

Who's to honestly say that since they're trying to force the cost of abortions to be covered by this bill that if a woman is pregnant and they discover her child is challenged that the government won't try to force her to have an abortion - maybe by refusing to pay for her delivery or health care for the baby after birth?

And how in the world can anyone trust these people since so much has been promised then taken back?

There's no way to guarantee this government wouldn't refuse to pay for the care of an infant they knew was physically/mentally challenged from amniotic testing under socialized health care.


goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 10:58 PM

That is true. My sons medication costs me a fortune every month, he cannot afford it and he needs it. I am trying to find other resources for him since he lost his health care.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Sun, 9th Aug '09 11:08 PM

Jim, I can't say whether those are good ideas or not without more information, and I don' t have time to research right now; there is clearly something out of whack with the malpractice insurance situation, but I don't know enough about the players to dispute what you say or discuss it knowledgeably at this time. I will say that getting people medical coverage is the more pressing need to my mind. We've paid lip service to reforming health car since Truman's day and it always gets knocked down. If not now, when?

I have adequate but burdensomely expensive coverage I could lose at any time. The same is true for most of the people I know, and I know quite a few without any. Members of my own family are uninsured. I was talking to a young woman at the pub last week, a hard-working kid with a degree from a good school, a meaningful but not lucrative job she loves and is terrific at, and a modest mortgage. She looked tired, bad color, too much weight lost and dark circles under her eyes, and said she was recovering from an illness she neglected until she collapsed because she doesn't have insurance and couldn't afford an office visit and prescriptions. She was worried about her mortgage because a respiratory infection cost her over $600 out of pocket, not counting lost work. She desperately needs dental work she can't afford as well.

Another friend and her daughter are employed by a family business that does not offer insurance. They both ignore illness and walk around sick or just go to bed and hope they get better. Yet another friend works for a company that offers insurance they can't afford. Matter of fact, I know dozens of people with jobs that offer insurance that it is unaffordable for families struggling on tight budgets with the cost of everything rising.

Probably the most shocking story I can tell you is about the uninsured friend who works for a vet - she looks up her symptoms on the internet and finds a drug they can be treated with that is also used for animals and gets them from her boss. All real stories, real people. Millions and millions of them. All as real as any of you. There is a need. I don't understand how it can be denied and ignored, and it can't be for much longer.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:09 AM

Thank you, Jim, for explaining more succinctly the reasons against the partisan government takeover plan currently before us. We surely have a lot of Americans in need of some reform, but this power grab isn't it.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:31 AM

Yes, Jim, thank you. If you look at the powerful lawyer loby closely you will see why no one has tort reform on the table in any of the plans that are being proposed. They contruibute huge sums to both political parties but heavy on the Democratic side. Smoke, think you just addressed one of the main concerns for the ouutrage. No one has had the time to research this and those who have refuse to talk about the huge area where vastr sujms could be saved.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 7:12 AM

Although I'm very much for the passage of a health plan (which includes private insurance in the mix), I think tort reform would be an excellent idea. The insurance companies and the PI lawyers are taking the money that could be spent on patient care.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 7:57 AM

I'm sure they'll get right to work on it as soon as they pass this bill. Didn't a tort reform bill go down in a defeat just a couple of years ago? You had the congress then, why didn't you pass it? I don't, I'm asking.

My biggest fear is that they'll take the public option out, in which case they may as well drop the whole thing now for all the difference it will make.

Andy, I marvel at how your comprehension soars when you're reading a post from someone you agree with.

People are as ignorant about the actual health care reform bill as they are about tort reform, and far from researching it and trying to understand it, powerful forces are blocking the information and spreading misconceptions.

"After tort reform" is just another way of saying NO to people who need health care. If you can't go to a doctor you can't sue one for malpractice, right? Isn't that convenient?

bobolicios
Bobolicios  (Level: 118.4 - Posts: 1745)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 8:10 AM

Wow, it sure is nice to take a break from the Salty Dog. Geez, we need health care reform, PERIOD. Too many people without health care in this country. I was just talking to a woman at work, no insurance, working like a dog. She has been working for our company for 2 years, she is close to 40. She can't afford insurance on her own, our company does not provide it. Her teeth are bad and her dentist said she has gum disease which could effect her heart. She is over weight and has thyroid problems, she told me her heart is already damaged. So while our company gets richer (just opened a new hotel) their employees suffer. They have plenty of employees that would enroll in a company sponsored health plan. They choose not to offer one because they are cheap. I would be in favor of any plan that required companies that have over a certain amount of employees to have a health insurance plan that the company subsidized. The employee of course would have deductibles and would have to pay for some of the cost. Please don't embarrass yourself by arguing with me if you have insurance or are retired and have medicare.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 8:12 AM

A huge problenm is the vagueness of what is out there. If they pass this mess then some committees will fill in the details and everyone knows when a government program gets going it never gets smalller and costs less it grows bigtime even if it no longer serves any purpose. This plan out there has to be stopped until specifics are in place-not of particular inmport to me but it is to many that no specifics in there prohibiting tax payer money to fund aboortion. In MA $50 co pay wil, get you one. The devil is in the detail

oldcougar
Oldcougar  (Level: 220.4 - Posts: 1935)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 8:18 AM

In Hospital Deaths from Medical Errors at 195,000 per Year USA

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/11856.php

There are numerous credible sites with similar findings. While I'm sure there are frivolous suits for malpractice, obviously many are quite genuine. Some of the articles I read put medical errors as high as the 3rd largest cause of death in the US.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 8:32 AM

It attorneys were made to pay out of their own pockets when they lost a case, just would bet many of the frivolous ones would disappear. my family doc told me last week that his neuroligist friend has malpractice insurane whic costs him $125,000 per year-has been suee 3 times-costs the person suing not one cent. The doc has settled out of court all three times which is what the lawyers count on and consider that a WIN. Someone pays for the cost to practice by our doctors and hospitals-one guess who that might be

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 8:47 AM

One place they might start to control frivolous lawsuits is to stop the disgusting ambulance-chasers who advertise on TV for clients with come-ons that prey on peoples' grief and trouble. They sue doctors, insurance companies, trucking companies, hospitals, nursing homes, ANYbody! They say things like "We can't bring your loved one back, but we can help you get the compensation you're entitled to." They actually plant the idea to go have a fender-bender so you can score a big cash payout, and there are people who do it repeatedly.

There's one on the TV right now offering to lower his fee for people who are injured in auto accidents. They all have a pet doctor they send you to to build your case. We have another here who is both a lawyer and a doctor (talk about malpractice) - one-stop litigation shopping.

Start there.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 9:02 AM

http://www.mofopolitics.com/2009/08/07/video-democrat-union-thugs-beat-up-black-protester-at-carnahan-town-hall/ wonder idf Obama will have something to say on this one. Just watched the guy who was beaten and attorney on TV and they want it prosecuted aas a "hate' crime. 2 of the attackers were black men and one was white, They said to this man in effict what kind of friggin N are you passing out this (blank)? The blank was Ameican flags saying don't tread on me. The attackers might have looked better if they had not worn the SEIU shirts

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 9:11 AM

Think I'll wait on a report from a different source.

Passed on the "Should Obama be Deported" poll, too.


mrbojangles
Mrbojangles  (Level: 16.6 - Posts: 231)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 9:40 AM

OMG - not another Joe the Plumber.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 9:40 AM

Yes, I know there's a video, but I can't hear it. Still not much info on what's happening.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 9:54 AM

If something was tatootedon many of your butts you would't believe it as it is not in sync with your agenda-trust me folks are angry. Could you READ the SEIU logo on the shirts of the attackers? probably not

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 10:10 AM

Yes, I can read the logo. Anybody can wear a tee shirt. If I wanted to make it look like our concerns about violence are misplaced, I might circulate a viral video of what appears to be of "socialists" (prominently labeling themselves for easy identification) beating up citizens, and how better to deflect charges of racism than by having the innocent victim be black?

See, that may not be at all what happened. I don't know, and a You-tube video linked to a million treasonous wingnut websites won't tell me. I can't find a single reputable source for your story. But in looking at the links that come up if you google "russ carnahan town hall meeting" I feel like I need a shower.

No news anywhere that I can see. Got any journalism?

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 10:32 AM

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message857692/pg1 this guy was in disguise in a doctor garb gimme a break

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 10:37 AM

I don't want to look at any more of that stuff. You'd think the St Louis papers would have something.

I'll wait to find out what the real story is when it appears in a reputable source..

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 10:55 AM

Then by all means keep your head buried deep in the sand

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 11:07 AM

If the alternative is trying to get information from those horrible websites, gladly.

Here's something a little less hysterical:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/missouristatenews/story/0D082BFFE012C7CD8625760C000BCCBD?OpenDocument


caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 11:27 AM

Hope you are not waiting on MSNBC to cover anything in anything but a subjective way as they are owned by GE a real friend of Obama. Surprised me that the NY timeds ran a story today saying that GE was another Enron-imagine that

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 11:34 AM

I think I speak for many when I say I wouldn't believe a thing tattooed on my rear end. For one thing, I'd have the most difficult time reading it. For another, it would have to have been applied under extreme duress--or extreme drunkenness. (And, unlike some people, I tend to avoid extremes...)

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 12:04 PM

No videos to actually see for myself on your link, Smoke. When folks get beaten or told to shut up by a clueless congressman it tens to get a little heated. In the doctor video the only one who seemd to not have a clue why or what he was bound by his politics to vote for was the "hysterical' congressman Happy for you Asor!!

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 12:09 PM

And no reputable reporting to back up your interpretation of the video.

I'll wait to see if there really is a story here, and what it turns out to be.



caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 12:16 PM

Perhaps Keith will,l give you the unbiased story if you cannot believe what you see even if you ignore the commentary attached!

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 12:25 PM


smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 12:45 PM

Maybe I can listen to Keith and come down somewhere between him and your ugly extremist hatesites all on my own. fair warning, pretty sure I'll be closer to him.

Did I post a link to MSNBC, or did I post links to the local newspaper where the incident actually happened? You'll note the newspaper uses the word "alleged." That means they have reservations about the story. So do I. Even without Keith.

TV talkers don't tell me what to think.

I watched Huckabee last night because it was promoted as a discussion of the bill, and he promised balance but all the people he had speaking FOR reform were single-payer lefties who want this bill stopped because it doesn't go far enough. They spent the whole time promoting a single-payer system, not even addressing public misinformation about this one. Nobody spoke to defend the bill as proposed, nor to knock down the misrepresentations he made. The only guests who spoke directly about the bill itself were diehard Republican opponents. Huckabee thinks health care reform is a states rights issue. He used the word "afraid" at least 20 times. I doubt conservatives see any bias in the show.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 12:58 PM

It is difficult to find any mainstream coverage of the town halls just like it was the tea parties. Guess they figure if they don't report it not happening. :People are angry. The you tube videos are probably taken from someone's cell and people can watch if they can find them on any site hate or not that they chose and decide what they saw. Why wasn't the local newspaper covering the town hall complete with camera crew?-perhaps they don't want to see the anger either. They have pushed folks too far on the personal issue of changing their health care based on a vague dream

fudypatootie
Fudypatootie  (Level: 197.2 - Posts: 1302)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:04 PM

"I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There's going to be potentially some transition process. I can envision (single payer) a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out. That's what I'd like to see."
Obama to a March 24, 2007 SEIU healthcare forum.


"The best way we're going to get single payer, the only way, is to have a public option to demonstrate its strength and power." Barney Frank to SinglepayerAction.org on July 27.

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:05 PM

I take it "People are angry" is the approved soundbite of the hour? Can't wait to see the montage on Jon Stewart

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:08 PM

Also "people are afraid." Just what we need, bunch of scared angry people running things. Just had a gut full of that.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:13 PM

I'l wait for Colbert's take, Asor, thank you so much

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:14 PM

Wondering whether they've distributed some sort of high-tech, networked mood ring. People can look down at their finger to see what they're supposed to be feeling at any given time. Takes away the heavy lifting, I suppose

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:15 PM

Do we actually agree on something?? I love Colbert!

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:18 PM

Colbert?? Your irony detector is more broken than I thought.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-869183917758574879

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:43 PM

Sorry, Donna, but the plans in the Congress don't come near touching that.

They were written by the Party of Lawyers.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:48 PM

Touching what?

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:54 PM

Pelosi and Hoyer say people are afraid of the facts. That is the main issue-there are no facts in anything floating around out there. People have every right not to want some vague dream passed and then let some beuracrats get together and fill in the details to their liking. Not only are there no details to defend there is no one plan.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:57 PM

Have you read the bill?

tuzilla
Tuzilla  (Level: 134.1 - Posts: 3778)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 1:59 PM

Would that be the Party of Corporate lawyers (Republicans), the protectors of the rich, powerful and staus quo
or Trial Lawyers (Democrats) the pushers of lawsuits that challenge the above. I love neither, but you seem oddly partisan to the former and confrontational to the latter for a "non-partisan" person.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:11 PM

There are 4 current bills out there none with facts. Steve, please read Jim's suggestions - rational solutions to a huge problem. EXACTLY what solutions do you offer?

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:13 PM

Linda, don't be intimidated. Donna has clearly stated that she has no intention of reading the bill.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:16 PM

Why should she be intimidated by a question?

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:24 PM

Not to worry, Jan, I can just skip it and change the subject if I don't fell like answering it

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:27 PM

As long as you acknowledge that you're deliberately avoiding the question.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:28 PM

Touching this, Donna

"One place they might start to control frivolous lawsuits is to stop the disgusting ambulance-chasers who advertise on TV for clients with come-ons that prey on peoples' grief and trouble. They sue doctors, insurance companies, trucking companies, hospitals, nursing homes, ANYbody! They say things like "We can't bring your loved one back, but we can help you get the compensation you're entitled to." They actually plant the idea to go have a fender-bender so you can score a big cash payout, and there are people who do it repeatedly.

There's one on the TV right now offering to lower his fee for people who are injured in auto accidents. They all have a pet doctor they send you to to build your case. We have another here who is both a lawyer and a doctor (talk about malpractice) - one-stop litigation shopping.

Start there."

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:29 PM

Mom, don't feed the trolls!

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:29 PM

Because, Donna, you have a very visible history of trying to intimidate those who don't agree with you, especially when you don't have facts to back up your claims - like when you argue based on information you have no knowledge about further than having overheard "other people" say something.

Linda does more reading and studying and learning about the health bill and other political subjects than most of us, any day of the week.

She does read. And with cut and paste in her skills now, she can back up what she says.

There have been 2 times that you have written in SD that you would not read a bill - you didn't have time or (regarding the cap and trade bill) the numbers confuse you.

I challenge you, Donna. before you ask questions about other people reading the bill, maybe you should read the bill.

There are a couple of parts about which to genuinely BE afraid. I know all you see is what you hope to get.

But there are a lot of us very worried about what we're all going to lose.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:35 PM

I've read the parts you're afraid of, and I only ask because Linda decries a lack of "details" in something I don't believe she's read. How does she know there are no details if she hasn't read it to see?

That's all I'm asking. If I intimidate you, it's not intentional.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:36 PM

Sorry, Goddess, believe we need clarity on who the "TROLLS' might be...

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:37 PM

Oh - I didn't say you DO intimidate. I said you TRY.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:38 PM

Is that what you think? You've never seen me try. You just have no idea.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:41 PM

And you're bragging about that, right?

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:42 PM

Yes. Yes I am.

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 2:53 PM

Intimidate? seriously? coming from you, that is rich. I have seen her being attacked and bullied for defending her beliefs.
You think it upsets her when you post nasty stuff don't you? LOL. I know for a fact that she sits at her computer laughing at you. She enjoys watching you fall all over her every word.

Talk about someone who dismisses you for disagreeing with them, you need to get a mirror. You are deliberately obtuse just to try and incite an argument. Smoke posts just as many links to back her claims as Linda does

I am so happy that Linda decided to that she should suddenly learn about politics...good for her?



Sploofus Editor
(Editor)  
Mon, 10th Aug '09 3:32 PM

This is getting too personal. Please turn down the flames, or this will have to go away.

I am saying PLEASE.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 3:32 PM

Thank you.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 3:46 PM

Just for the record, Goddess when I was in HS everyone took a Civics class In that class we learned how government is set up and functions. So I did not just recently learn about politics-just haven't had much interest in them until now when I see one branch taking power not given to them. In my day we were more idealistic about politicians as were not able to follow their daily lives and evvey moves like we do today. Many of our history's politicians would not have survived such scrutiny I know. I haven't followed recent politics but am not ignorant on political issues.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 3:58 PM

Thank you Sploofusionist!

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 3:59 PM

Linda, I took the same course, and once I was done with school it didn't take long to discover that it doesn't really work the way they told us in class. It should, but it doesn't. Powerful lobbyists own our government and almost everyone in it, and they work hard at controlling what we think of it, to position themselves to the best advantage.

One purpose of the original post was to discuss the parameters of what is fair in public discourse, and whether one should defend or acquiesce to extremists because they're on your side.

goddess28
Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5236)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:04 PM

Yes, thank you!

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:06 PM

"No, a thousands times no!!" (If you would kindly picture Thomas Jefferson jumping to his feet and jabbing his finger in the air as he makes that statement, that would be very helpful. Thank you

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:07 PM

"Uh, you mean 'thousand times,' Tom, didn't you?"

"Why, yes, I did, Asor. Thanks for the correction."

"No worries, Tommy."

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:08 PM

And if you change "mean" to "meant" OR "didn't" to "don't" in my last post, that would also be helpful

Think I need a cold drink...or a nap.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:22 PM

I agree with you that government does not work the way it is supposed to work. I disagree with you on the purpose of the original post-but no purpose served in arguing about that.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:30 PM

I suggest to you gently that I know what the purpose of my own thread was. Please refer to the first post: "Has this gone far enough yet?" Meaning the gross distortion of the health care reform bill, and not at all coincidentally, the character of the president. I reiterate, one purpose of this thread was to discuss fairness and honesty and what is destructive to communication and to the social fabric in public discourse.

tuzilla
Tuzilla  (Level: 134.1 - Posts: 3778)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:32 PM

This thread is really interesting (ducks rock) in that it is a mirror of the content in some of the latest posts. It should operate (dodges flying turd) nice, neat, clean and efficient, like government does (avoids finger in the eye) in the academic arena of a civics class, but here in the real world...well just look at reality in action (j-u-m-p-s back from the flames). Isn't it grand?

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.3 - Posts: 21602)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:34 PM

Of course, only you know what your purpose was and everyone else is left to surmise

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:39 PM

Linda, I tried several ways to discuss it. I rephrased the question a couple of times. You may be aware of how hard it is to control the direction a thread takes once launched, even without disagreements. If as much effort is made at understanding as is made at "surmising," communication might improve dramatically.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:41 PM

The first distortions were authored by the President, Donna.



smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 4:55 PM

Jank, I honestly did not see this post until just this minute:

"What did insurance costs do during the Clinton years?

And the 1st Bush years?

and the...

and the.....

They have risen through every presidential term ... for as long as there has been insurance and presidents."

The short answer is yes, they did go up during previous administrations, but the rise in wages kept pace. That has not been the case for several years, while health care costs have risen by 88% and income has been stagnant or falling, meaning the cost of health care has been steadily eating into budgets in ever larger chomps and eroding savings and credit ratings.

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 5:13 PM

When I was laid off a few years ago, extending my health insurance under COBRA cost $1K/month. Happily, I was in a position to handle it for the few months needed, but I would imagine that would be impossible for many families--and it certainly wasn't any picnic for me! I have waaaay too many friends who make do without insurance, to the detriment of their children with chronic illnesses. When my son was in kindergarten, one of his friends would constantly ask to borrow my asthma inhaler. Obviously, I got permission from his mother, but it was heartwrenching to know this little boy saw my home as a place where he could go to BREATHE. They were one of those families who had no job-based insurance, made slightly too much to qualify for gov't aid, but made too little to afford private premiums. Obviously, something needs to change. I don't have all the answers and can't possibly know which aspects of which plans would end up working best. I'm just happy there's an adminstration that is willing to make reform a priority rather than simply a talking point.

tuzilla
Tuzilla  (Level: 134.1 - Posts: 3778)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 5:22 PM

"The first distortions were authored by the President" ????????????????????????????

That is a truly partisan assertion. You are implying this debate started on the day he first mentioned it? You want us to believe that all previous discussion has be fair, even-handed and strictly honest evaluations of the facts?

Now there is the laugh of the day.

This subject has been actively debate since Truman was in the house. It almost passed in the seventies under Nixon. Then there was a minor spike of attention during the Clinton years. But the distortion all started with Obama's first utterance???????

Meanwhile health care cost have been making more trips to the moon that Apollo. This is not a chicken or egg debate, or an exercise of the Harvard Debate Club. One side say something, the other side calls them a liar...and so it goes back and forth while people go broke on a daily basis trying to pay medical bills.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 5:46 PM

There is NOTHING partisan about it, Steve.

NOTHING PARTISAN AT ALL.

SINCE WHEN ARE FACTS PARTISAN, STEVE ?????

I WISH YOU WOULD STOP CALLING STATEMENTS PARTISAN THAT SURELY ARE NOT.

Earlier this year President Obama said we had to do health care now because it would pay dividends in reduced health care costs. That was the reason he gave.

The Congressional Budget office (hardly an opposition org) has scored the plan and it projects increased costs with the plan.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 5:58 PM

There's spittle on your chin.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:11 PM

Bad karma, Donna.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:20 PM

What? No sense of humor, Andy?

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:33 PM

Just bad karma, Donna - all yours.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:36 PM

Rather have bad karma than no sense of humor.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.9 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:49 PM

Seems you may have both.

asor
Asor  (Level: 156.0 - Posts: 589)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:56 PM

Wow. Way harsh, as the kids would say.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 6:58 PM

Oh, you stinker. Got anything of substance? Or interest?

Sploofus Editor
(Editor)  
Mon, 10th Aug '09 7:04 PM

I said PLEASE. I cannot say it, again.

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 7:09 PM

Hey! it's okay! We're kidding around. At least I am.

bobolicios
Bobolicios  (Level: 118.4 - Posts: 1745)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 7:34 PM

Andy, do you have anything positive ever to say? How is the weather in France, how is your lady love? Come on take a chill pill and stop insulting the ladies!

allena
Allena  (Level: 255.6 - Posts: 1391)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 9:30 PM

I agree with Sploofusionist! When facts are not relevant, it should not be discussed , period ...

smoke
Smoke  (Level: 96.7 - Posts: 12009)
Mon, 10th Aug '09 9:48 PM

When are facts not relevant, and what did Sploofusionist say should not be discussed?


Pages:  1    



Copyright © 2003-2016 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus