ObamaCare as a Moral Clunker
The moral arguments against Obama's health plan are overwhelming and need to take center stage.
Slowly but surely, the nation is waking up to the likelihood that the unwieldy state-run health care concoction known as ObamaCare will not achieve the cost savings the president and his supporters have promised.
That’s a nice development, but it’s not enough. In fact, at some point — and I believe we are there — it becomes a distraction.
Though a relevant consideration, cost is among the least of ObamaCare’s problems. Leading the argument against ObamaCare with cost considerations sells the American people short and betrays a moral insecurity that, if not addressed, will cause some future form of ObamaCare to sneak in — if not now, in the not very distant future.
ObamaCare’s supporters would love opponents to stay focused on cost, because, despite plentiful help from the Congressional Budget Office debunking the administration’s weak claims, the absence or presence of potential savings is not directly provable. As long as the focus remains on cost, important points about fundamental human rights that would be stripped away and handed over to the tender mercies of the state won’t get heard. That must change.
The moral insecurity emanating from ObamaCare’s Washington-based opposition (vs. many of us in the heartland, who see evil’s attempt to visit itself upon us for what it is) seems to revolve around two bogus ideas.
The first is that Obama and the statists in Congress somehow occupy the moral high ground because they promise to “insure” everybody.
But ObamaCare isn’t about insurance. If it were, every American would be insured shortly after it takes effect. But the CBO estimates that even when implemented, only 16 million more Americans would be insured, barely a third of the alleged total of uninsured. ObamaCare, as Investor’s Business Daily and many other editorialists have noted, is really about (eventually) eliminating insurance and devolving the entire system into a single-payer arrangement — something Obama himself enthusiastically supported in 2003 before he became concerned with electoral viability.
Health care should first and foremost be about whether those who need treatment get treatment. And guess what? In this country, those who need treatment not only almost always get treated, but they also almost always get treated timely. It is against the law for hospitals to turn away patients requiring emergency medical treatment regardless of whether they can afford to pay.
Yes, there are many who are not insured and who cannot afford medical care. And yes, they often delay doing something about very real medical problems until they become more serious. That is a real problem. But the answer, while elusive, most certainly should not involve jeopardizing the viability of everyone else’s medical coverage and access to care, as ObamaCare indisputably does.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Tom Blumer owns a training and development company based in Mason, Ohio, outside of Cincinnati. He presents personal finance-related workshops and speeches at companies, and runs BizzyBlog.com.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
144 Comments
1. carter beck:this is the first moral stepping stone to genocide. Once the socialists convince us to place the state’s needs in priority to the individual patient, work camps, death camps, and genocide become an easy transition.
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:04 am 2. Marc Malone:Red Pill means you live sick and in pain. Blue pill means voluntary euthanasia. “Why, oh why, did I not take the Blue Pill?”
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:54 am 3. Kazooskibum:The Democrat Party is a criminal enterprise.
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:01 am 4. tc:Tom:
Good job presenting the moral arguments. You are right in putting them forward and others should be so inclined to continue putting the “bricks in the wall.”
The amoral arguments used by Ezekial Emanuel to describe the “usefulness” of life existing between an age rage of 15-40yrs is a ghastly open gate to the treatment of people who fall outside that range.
These people have a lot to answer for and appealing to morality is right and proper in this debate.
Aug 7, 2009 - 2:49 am 5. Rham it.:good job.
Now Americans are slapping,
attacking each other and politicians,
call in the National Guard!
No wait!
they are all in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Democrats understand that they have to push this Universal health care through.
Little history-
Bill Clinton passed a law in January 1997 that opened up the VA for all Veterans not just service connected. That is approx. 25 million vets.
Of this 25 million vets many are retirement age and have dropped their 96.00 dollar per month Medicare coverages.
Other vets- baby boomers are not signing up for medicare because they can go to the VA.
More lost 96 dollar government monies per month.
This is free government health care with little or no payments.
Then President Bush passed the Medicare part D program with Ted Kennedy’s blessings that takes Medicares 96.00 dollar a month premiums and puts it into the hands of private insurers like United Health Care and they make billions of profits.
So we now have a perfect storm-
Two 2 government programs that are going broke because they no longer have enough funding and a Democrat congress that must pass this bill because if it comes crashing down no democrat will be elected for the next 25 years.
It will be Rhamed through but now you know why.
Obama needs to charge 500 per month for programs that are only 1/10 funded with the 96 dollars per month.
And I know a little something about things coming crashing down around you.
I used to be an AIG health insurance salesman.
Aug 7, 2009 - 3:01 am 6. InMideast:Well, even look at the way in which they want to shove the issue on us. The administration isn’t about reasoning, but bullying, as a recent (Tampa/Foxnews) quote put it:
“Top White House officials counseled Democratic senators Thursday on coping with disruptions at public events on health care this summer, officials said, and promised the party and allies would respond with twice the force if any individual lawmaker is criticized in television advertising.”
Aug 7, 2009 - 3:21 am 7. Boris:“Health care should first and foremost be about whether those who need treatment get treatment. And guess what? In this country, those who need treatment not only almost always get treated, but they also almost always get treated timely. It is against the law for hospitals to turn away patients requiring emergency medical treatment regardless of whether they can afford to pay.”
Don’t you see that we are already paying for other people’s health care? We just do it in a really stupid way–by waiting until somebody’s health becomes an expensive, life-threatening “emergency.”
Aug 7, 2009 - 3:25 am 8. LeighB:My objections to ObamaCare are pretty simple–under his plan, my mother would die of medical neglect or delay, because her care would become an exercise in cost-benefit analysis and take the focus away from putting together a treatment plan. Her chronic conditions are well regulated at this time but would not be with his plan.
If I had been covered under ObamaCare, I’d be dead too. The cost of my cancer treatment a decade ago would have put me on the wrong side of the cost-benefit analysis and instead of regaining my health, my parents would have had to bury a child because someone in DC would have reviewed my circumstance and said no.
It’s fair to say that Obamacare is a killer program.
When insurance companies are seen as more compassionate than ObamaCare and its sponsors, the President has a problem. If Obama, Pelosi, and Reid agree to be covered by this plan and no other supplemental insurance plan, then I will put aside my objections. Until then, get ready for some blowback and go ahead and add me to the “big brother” list.
Aug 7, 2009 - 4:15 am 9. Tom Blumer:#1, please elaborate.
Aug 7, 2009 - 4:26 am 10. sodacrackers:Just try to imagine all the new government workers that would be needed for Obama(lackof)care. If anyone in DC actually cares about the health of Americans, they would pass a law immediately saying that any new law and all old laws must pass Constitutional muster and sneaking pork into any bill is absolutely forbidden. All bills should be read in their entirety during a session of Congress. Any bills passed must be shown in their entirety online along with a list of all congressmen and how they voted. THIS would allow all Americans to take home most of the money they earn and pay for their own health insurance and care.
Aug 7, 2009 - 4:34 am 11. Deep Brain Diarist:Paranoia is one thing… it’s a psychiatric disorder. Paranoia combined with stupidity, however, is a dangerous brew.
You cats keep yelling “read the bill!” It’s obvious from the paranoid rantings that you haven’t, and that you’re merely parroting what Rush TELLS you to say… as usual.
Thank God the grownups are running things and America rejected YOUR vision.
Aug 7, 2009 - 4:35 am 12. don:Obamacare or whatever the nomenclature will be another (failed?) attempt to consolidate the power of the many into the hands of the very few. It is the embodiment of what we have been sowing over the past 30 years with unlimited lawsuits against any (and all), where it seems the majority want no “responsibilities” and want to “cash in” when anything goes wrong. When we take no ownership/no responsibilities for our choices and actions, why should we be “allowed” to make any? This is the grist being ground into the concept. The only tangent is tort law reform (the most destructive/expensive part of current healthcare costs is not addressed). So when OB talks about end of life “counseling” he’s making the point that the state should advise you (because you as an individual are not competent). When they discuss government “boards” or advisory “counsels” making medical decisions, it’s about Govthink being “better” than the decisions/choices made by individual healthcare providers (regardless of their experience). How long is it before the state begins wharehousing the aged and infrim (till they become Soylent Green)? After all, is the state not all knowing and all seeing? Why should we trust our own judgement (since so many of us have been avoiding taking responsibilities for anything)?
The bottom line is this is about the concept that the people can’t be trusted (they might make a wrong decision), so “we” will “take care” of them until their usefulness is ended.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:12 am 13. Paul -Indiana:http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/07/21/father-jonathan-morris-obama-health-care/
In this article, Fr. Morris destroys Obambi’s ‘arguments’.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:34 am 14. Pelaut:A need exists for succinct, concise, easy to understand LISTS of exeptions to ObamaCare on moral, cost and deception grounds.
Ditto on the tax supported Brownshirt programs ACORN, AmeriCorps, Organize for America and the legion other “corps” Obama has talked about forming.
Ditto on the backgrounds of the 30+ “czars” in the White House running the country as a shadow, uncontrolled government (e.g., Holdren’s Eugenics and Communist sentiments) exactly like the Nazi gang by 1934.
Without such bulleted summaries all is but carping from the sidelines which runs through the public mind like water into sand, and gets easily waved away by media obsequiaries.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:40 am 15. vivo:“Second, virtually without exception worldwide, state-run health care has led to denial of care on age-based and so-called quality-of-life criteria.’
And how is this DIFFERENT from private insurance, HMO’s and the like??
Do our legislators have any heart and brains?
How much is human life worth these days?
Are Christians really Xtians or CINOs?
What Century are we in?
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:40 am 16. cubedweller:11 – Deep Brain Diarist: It’s obvious YOU haven’t read the bill and are parroting the Kos/MoveOn/ACORN/DNC talking points. Once this is implemented, there is a 5-year sunset of choice, and private insurers will not be allowed to take on any more. If you change jobs (which means changing insurance), you will have to take the public “option” (so not an option at all). Plus, illegal immigrants (people who are in this country AGAINST THE LAW) will get coverage and will not have to pay a dime. The taxpayer will have to foot the bill for treating people who are here illegally.
This thing stinks to high heaven, and spin and Hope won’t change facts.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:40 am 17. InMideast:#11. OK, so we want our representatives to vote on something that they haven’t read? Good idea — especially since 60% of US citizens disaprove of the “grownups” in congress and more than 50% of the country are against this bill.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:54 am 18. Rusty:I wish that people would stay on message! Obamacare’s biggest fault is that it would put health insurance in the hands of the government. This would result in huge cost overruns and eventually large tax increases supported by either a) taxes on health insurance benefits, and b) a higher income tax (but probably both). Government intervention will also create greater inefficiency in how insurance is run including longer wait times for approval of coverage, and longer lines at doctor’s offices. Another point brought up here is personal responsibility – the government cannot and should not have to provide for everything – unless we all agree to a 70% tax rate on everyone’s income.
All this talk about health care rationing and letting old people die is pointless. Democrats believe that a state run system would be better and they cannot be convinced otherwise. The message should be simple, government does not create efficiencies and people need to be responsible for themselves.
Aug 7, 2009 - 6:12 am 19. sclemens:Graves for Grannies!!!!
Aug 7, 2009 - 6:34 am 20. larry j:Yes, based on the popular Cash for Clunkers, Obamacare will now buy a grave for your grandparents if you will simply bring them to the NPCRC (Non-contributing Parasitic Citizen Recycling Center). It is not only your patriotic duty to do so – the mileage is Tax Deductible and granny’s remains will be used to fertilize corn for ethanol!
Just try to imagine all the new government workers that would be needed for Obama(lackof)care.
Maybe this is how Obama plans to create jobs for all those college graduates with useless “studies” degrees. They were among his biggest supporters.
Aug 7, 2009 - 6:50 am 21. Now and Then:2. Marc Malone:
“Red Pill means you live sick and in pain. Blue pill means voluntary euthanasia. “Why, oh why, did I not take the Blue Pill?”
Easy. Don’t take the pill.
So what do you think would upset the town hallers more, getting Obamacare or getting Medicare taken away?
Aug 7, 2009 - 6:54 am 22. savage24:If you are over 65 take two cyanide capsuls and call me in the morning.
Aug 7, 2009 - 6:55 am 23. Tom Blumer:#14, How about this (essentially lifted from the column):
A. ObamaCare will, as state-run health care has elsewhere, cause rationing and long waits for even critical services, leading to needless deaths and suffering. This is wrong.
B. ObamaCare will, as state-run health care has elsewhere, cause denial of care on age-based and so-called quality-of-life criteria. This is wrong.
C. The people who Obama would have implement his plan are advocates of radical, repressive population-control measures, including forced abortion and involuntary sterilization. These positions are objectively evil, and have no place in any health care system.
If that’s insufficiently concise, you’re welcome to abbreviate further.
Aug 7, 2009 - 7:18 am 24. Now and Then:20. larry j:
“Maybe this is how Obama plans to create jobs for all those college graduates with useless “studies” degrees.”
What about the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies?
Aug 7, 2009 - 7:20 am 25. goy:Rusty is right. Whether or not they’re accurate (and they are, based on the evidence available), accusations regarding the Democrats’ end game are pointless, and far too easy to demonize.
The linchpin in defending ourselves against the government’s unconstitutional seizure of control over our health care is this: Demand to know the details of how they plan to pay for it.
The CBO has already provided plenty of information for this course, and the GOP are fools if they don’t hammer it relentlessly. Since they’ve demonstrated that they ARE fools, it falls to the Conservative rank-and-file to keep hammering this message home in every venue available.
Clearly, BHO’s cap-and-tax scam was intended, initially, to generate the funds needed for this usurpation. Health care isn’t going to magically become less expensive just because the government seizes control over paying for it. Cost control – through wage and price control legislation, “justified” using the greater good and for the children fallacies – will take time.
But cap-and-tax is no longer assured. And with each passing month, and each new revelation regarding the utter nonsense in all the “climate crisis” rhetoric, cap-and-tax becomes less likely. Congresscritters are already feeling major heat on the health care issue. Even with the unions and the entrenched, Fifth Column media running interference for them, they know what they’re hearing, and how strongly their so-called “constituents” feel about what’s going on. And that’s after only 6 months of BHO’s bullsh!t.
Clearly, the recent explosion of the deficit demonstrates that the government – especially as run by the current cast of criminal clowns – is incapable of sound financial management. There is No Evidence Whatsoever that we will see any better performance when it comes to paying for health care.
The bottom line: There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch, and there definitely ain’t no such thing as “Free” Health Care!
Tom also has a very important point, but doesn’t mention how we avoid another re-run of all this in the future, only that we must (and we must).
Do we see the government trying to take over control of paying for food? Clothing? Transportation? Housing? Well… housing…
The point is this: health care is the only commodity for which we foolishly use insurance to pay for something that – by and large – entails no financial risk. And Insurance is nothing more than a tool for managing financial risk!
As presently constructed, comprehensive health care insurance doesn’t manage risk, it’s just wealth redistribution, sideways (that is, instead of “forward”, like with SSI). And much of the wealth that’s redistributed, thanks to the broken system it has created, goes to pay bloated salaries at insurance companies, investment portfolios containing insurance company stock, bloated salaries for specialist M.D.s and overpriced drugs.
Before comprehensive health care insurance, everyone paid for health care goods and services directly, just like every other commodity. Expensive services were paid for via savings, a loan or catastrophic (i.e., “major medical”) insurance policies.
Health care costs have skyrocketed at rates higher than inflation for decades. And these increases have been directly proportional to the adoption of comprehensive health care insurance, which is now nothing more than a Ponzi scheme aimed at distributing the cost of health care over a larger population.
The problem? This system encourages cost increases because it’s open-loop. The insurance companies enjoy a proxy monopoly over health care. They determine the prices paid for services. They determine the availability (e.g., through ‘pre-existing conditions’ and other sophistry). They determine the cost of premiums. They determine the prices paid for drugs.
Nowhere is the consumer able to apply pressure to bring down the cost of health care – or the cost of insurance, for that matter. The result is a windfall profit for insurance companies.
The primary reason the Socialists in our federal government are fighting tooth-and-nail to pass Obamacare is that THEY WANT the profits – and, more importantly, the control over our lives – that CIGNA, Wellpointe, Anthem and the rest of the CHCIs presently enjoy. Unless and until we start to recognize this fact, we will fail to resolve the health care issue, and we’ll either be left stuck with the broken system we have now or we’ll lose our liberty to socialized medicine.
Unless and until we recognize this problem and start addressing the BLOATED COSTS of health care, we will see endless attempts by government to ’solve’ it by taking the system over ‘for the greater good’. Everyone knows they will only make the problem worse, but no one seems capable of coming up with an alternative that will address the cause instead of poking at the symptoms.
If you want to get the government out of your life and get health care costs back in line with other commodities, push for the elimination of comprehensive health care insurance. We need to go back to direct-payment for the vast majority of health care goods and services. Catastrophic (high-deductible) health plans will handle the expensive procedures.
The free market can fix this problem. Government never will. But keeping the government out of the mix will only allow the problem they’re exploiting to get worse, and worse, until it eventually bankrupts us.
For deeper discussion on this, please go here.
Aug 7, 2009 - 7:24 am 26. JED:Assuming that Obama is a pure idealist, then his agenda is as he says to help the American people. That debate centers on the question weither tax-payer based insurance is a right or an entitlement.
Aug 7, 2009 - 7:35 am 27. goy:Assuming that Obama is other than a pure idealist then the ulterior motives list is quite long and congress is in collusion. The image in my mind was the over the POTUS shoulder shot of congress cheering wildly when the list of new spending plans were announced.
Assuming that the voter public are not substandard intellects, it questions me that there exists the equation that having better insurance=having better health. Better health would lower and make more competitive insurance premiums and more production in the work place. How does having better insurance guarantee better health? What benefit does federal oversight have over the doctor-patient relationship? What is the moral imperative in redistributing the wealth/health?
The entire scheme reminds me of the plenitary indulgences of the middle ages whereby the middleman was payed so that he could bribe God to get his sinners to heaven.
Thanks for the edit, moderator, but it screwed up the post’s formatting, as well as the following post.
Aug 7, 2009 - 7:52 am 28. Paul -Indiana:http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/07/21/father-jonathan-morris-obama-health-care/
Check this site for a reasoned, clear, counter argument to Obama’s lies.
Aug 7, 2009 - 8:28 am 29. Delia:AMEN, Mr. Blumer!
0bama’care’ gives me the serious willies on every level.
*shivers*
Aug 7, 2009 - 8:51 am 30. Chuck Pelto:TO: Tom Blumer, et al.
RE: ‘Clunkers’
From another perspective, old folks—like old cars—will be considered the ‘clunkers’. And like the Obama program to eliminate ‘inefficient’ and/or ‘ineffective’ and/or ‘uneconomically repairable’ cars from the road….
…that mentality WILL, I repeat WILL, be used against US. And probably against those of US who disagree with the powers that be.
How can I say that with such certainty?
Take a look at pages 429 and the first section of 430 of HR 3200.
Here’s the text, thereof:
What’s my point?
This ‘consultant’ is going to write “orders”, as mentioned in page 429, on how people will be cared for. The nature of these orders seem to be rather nebulous in nature. Whereas the lines of the legislation express things that sound good, the verbiage says….
Some kind-hearted sorts might see this consultant as being a warm-hearted individual like themselves who will only think of the best interest of the individual.
However, in reality, they are nothing more than another government bureaucrat. And, as has been recognized on other threads about such people, all too many of them will be more interested in saving the government money than in saving people’s lives.
So. These ‘orders’ “may include” good things. That is if the federal bureacrat got a good nights sleep. But then again, they may include other things not quite so pleasant. Especially if they’re getting ‘over budget’.
[Note: I used to manage a $49M federal budget. For the Army at Fort Carson. I was informed, my first day in that duty position, that if I went "over-budget", without proper authorization, my next trip to Fort Leavenworth would be for what we called the 'Long Course'. Not good....]
Then again, if we want to get into the ‘dark side’ of these orders…..well….I think you can guess at it….
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:10 am 31. HonestJon:[What they are telling you may be important. What they are NOT telling you can be vital. -- CBPelto]
I’m with Goy and Rusty on this one, but goy missed something and wrote: “Do we see the government trying to take over control of paying for food?” I would contend that the gubmint already does to a certain degree with farm subsidies and through food stamps. But that’s off-topic.
Here are some possible suggestions that may help to reconcile this conundrum: 1 Obese people/smokers/alcoholics/drug addicts etc should pay more for insurance than fit, nonsmokers et al. (It’s all about personal responsibility for your choices). 2 If a person wishes to not have insurance coverage, then the gubmint should not be able to require it. 3 If a business doesn’t want to pay or can’t pay for coverage, see #2. 4 All insurance companies need to be non-profit entities. 5 Compensation for high-level management in the insurance companies should be disclosed to the consumer before (s)he signs up for a policy. 6 Illegal aliens who get ANY FORM of health care should be positively identified and the country that they are from should be billed 150% of the cost of any health care provided (before deporting them). 7 (in complete agreement with goy here) Insurance should be limited to “major medical” and catastrophic coverage (You have car insurance, right? Does it cover the cost of oil changes or tire changes? Nope, they’re EXPECTED expenses just like an annual physical). 8 People who drop out of high school and refuse to get a GED get no government-supplied health-related services (except birth control pills). 9 Criminals who are in prison and receive health care should be billed for it and/or have any assets they own auctioned off by the State/Fed gubmint.
This is a list compiled just off of the top of my head. I could be vastly more expansive if I had the time…
I think the American people are just starting to rebel against “CommieCare” at this point, and good for us!
regards
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:14 am 32. Moho:But the answer, while elusive, most certainly should not involve jeopardizing the viability of everyone else’s medical coverage and access to care, as ObamaCare indisputably does.
Give me a break Blumer. This has to be the smallest fig leaf ever created, not that there’s much behind it to obscure. Its obvious–Republicans have had 12 years in power since 1990, when the healthcare crisis began, and never, never, never has forwarded or advocated any plan to address it. No free market oriented plan, no single payer plan, no plan of any kind. This is exactly the way the financial crisis began, and Republicans are reacting the same way–sure, its a problem, but whatever the other side’s doing, is the wrong thing…veto what they suggest and then we’ll give you our own plan.
Except you don’t have a plan, nor do you want one. A real look at the polls reveals you’re losing this fight. Although only a slight majority of Americans support Obama’s version of health care, those who don’t support it are divided amongst people who don’t like anything about his plan, and people who don’t think the plan goes far enough. Republicans, however, have practically no support for their efforts.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hlTYMW3D6YD6cehWzTUWCJtIFe6g
* Only 28% view the GOP favorably, the lowest since at least 2005.
* A huge majority wants major changes to the health care system, and a plurality says Obama is reforming health care at “the right pace.” The public wants change now, meaning voters will probably extract a major price if it doesn’t get done.
* Voters blame Republicans, and not Obama, for obstructionism: Fifty nine percent say Obama is working with the GOP on health care reform, versus only 33% who say Republicans are working with the president.
* Fifty five percent says Obama has the right ideas for health care reform, versus only 26% — barely more than one-fourth — who say the GOP does.
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/president-obama/flipside-of-those-polls-republicans-taking-it-on-the-chin-on-health-care-too/
If you guys think that the sight of fifty middle-aged teabaggers with anger-management problems is going to win over anyone, you’re nuts. What people see is a solid reflection of the Republican party–rootless, unreasonable and crazed anger looking for a target–any target.
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:17 am 33. Chuck Pelto:TO: Moho, et al.
RE: Have You…
….asked your Congressional delegates if their healthcare will be identical with the rest of US?
I have.
They get rather ‘quiet’ about that aspect.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:30 am 34. Moho:P.S. But if you have a different report, I’d appreciate hearing it…..
Pelto. What the hell do I care what my congress person health care’s like? Why don’t you worry about yourself and your community first, then you can take other people to task. You people are so obsessed with calling out the hypocrisy of others, you’ve let your party run wild with the budget. Or did you forget that Republicans were running the show during the biggest slide into economic disaster in sixty years? What’s wrong with you people.
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:35 am 35. Boris:“This ‘consultant’ is going to write “orders”, as mentioned in page 429, on how people will be cared for.”
Can your really not read?
The bill says the order will:
“effectively communicate[] the individual’s
preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual.”
The patient decides what he or she wants? If you want to write, Soylent Green 2, by all means do so, just remember that it’s fiction, or, in your case, a lie.
As if insurance companies never try to save money.
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:41 am 36. Peter Berger:I hoped that this article would be a winner as I absolutely agree with the thesis “ObamaCare should be opposed on moral rather than political arguments”. That said, the article fails to get at the crux of the matter, which is:
Health Care is not a right!
Ever since the New Deal, Americans have been convinced that rights can include goods and services rather than simply freedom to act. This has been deadly to the cause of true liberty by allowing politicians to take from one to give to another under the guise of implementing these false “rights”.
Fighting the meme that men are entitled to health care is the primary battle being fought today and this article comes close but misses the point.
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:41 am 37. Chris L:To: Deep Brain Diarist,
Enough with the ad-hominem attacks. Please make an actual argument! If you would like to dissagree with points made here fine, but why don’t you try to defend your position rather than acting the way that people who attended the “tea parties” and other protest rallys have been accused of acting.
The President ran on a platform of sensible government and fiscal responsibility. Since taking office he has not shown any inclination toward fiscal responsiblity, but has instead pushed to increase federal spending on every front. Rates of government debt are skyrocketing with no end in sight, and many of us have begun to question the sincerity of his campaign statements and “promises”. If the President would lie to us about government spending then why should we believe him when he says that “no rationing would happen under his health-care plan”.
The very notion of government imposed cost controls without rationing is ridiculous. The only way government has to directly control costs is by mandating what can be charged. If this were to happen in any significant way, many health care providers would simply close up shop; thereby rationing the available health-care within the system.
All these lofty moral arguments are fine, but there should only be one argument that needs to be made against government run healthcare of any kind. It’s called the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. I know what you are going to say. “That old saw hasn’t been enforced in decades.”, but you will find that there are those of us who dare to dream!
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:41 am 38. Moho:Ever since the New Deal, Americans have been convinced that rights can include goods and services rather than simply freedom to act. This has been deadly to the cause of true liberty by allowing politicians to take from one to give to another under the guise of implementing these false “rights”
Peter–following this logic, doesn’t it also stand to reason that the military shouldn’t be using my taxes to fund a war that at least half of the population opposes? Had a sincere application of your point of view been tried ten years ago, we’d be having a completely different conversation about trillion dollar deficits today.
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:50 am 39. Steve DeMarcus:11. Deep Brain Diarist:”…You cats keep yelling “read the bill!” It’s obvious from the paranoid rantings that you haven’t, and that you’re merely parroting what Rush TELLS you to say… as usual.”
Here’s an overview http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf
Here’s the HR3200 bill as it now stands http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf
You also must understand that in addition to the 1018 pages contained that it is written in sections that reference existing law if you were to include the existing law referenced by the bill it would be over 5,000 pages.
There is the bill both in entirety and as an overview take note of page 4 (the overview) about End of Life Counseling for the elderly and tell me about paranoia!
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:54 am 40. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Moho Doan Care
Obviously, Moho is a plant/troll/disinformation specialist/propagandist who won’t answer questions honestly. Therefore there will be no honest discussion from him/her/it.
In other words, not worth the bandwidth to deal with.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:58 am 41. Chuck Pelto:[Propaganda must not serve the truth, especially insofar as it might bring out something favorable for the opponent. -- Adolf Hitler]
TO: All
RE: Boris & ‘Reading’ Skill
He does a good job of taking thinks out of context. Leaving out the rest of my observation about the totality of verbiage in pages 429 and 430 as cited.
Doesn’t he.
In other words, just another incarnation of Moho here.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:00 am 42. Chrs L:[The Truth will out....]
To: Moho,
The only thing worse than a person unable to defend himself who retreats into ad-hominem attacks is someone who hides behind polling data.
Some of the worst attrocities committed in the history of mankind have been committed with the tacit if not actual consent of a majority of the public at the time those attrocities were committed. Leadership isn’t about sticking your finger into a fickle wind and being blown about like a dandelion, it’s in seizing the reins of public opinion with a set of concrete ideas about governing, and then going out and shaping that public opinion.
The President’s problem is that his ideas were tried repeatedly during the last century in every socialist country on the planet. Those ideas were found to be lacking in every case. He can’t try to sell his ideas directly because the ideas themselves are bankupt. Instead he has to try to sell a bunch of goodies that the government can dole out to various interest groups. As Albert Einstein once put it, “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
The biggest problem with what the President and the Democratic party want to do is the very concentration of power that they seek. If we continue to build up the power of the federal government, it is only a matter of time before a dictator will come and take up the reigns of power that we are building today.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:01 am 43. Commuter:32. Moho:
‘Republicans have had 12 years in power since 1990, when the healthcare crisis began’
I laughed out loud when I read this. What a perfect indictment of the abysmally stupid foot soldiers for Obamacare.
The healthcare has been a ‘crisis’ for 19 years. ????
Makes the rest of the polls data you do not even understand blows your position out of the water anti-climatic.
Of course, the obligatory reference to teabagging to confirm that you are a vulgar little pissant without an mature coherent thought in your head is there too.
Sharper tools, please.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:02 am 44. adam:Could someone explain what will happen, under the bill currently under consideration, to people who just go to doctors outside of the existing system and simply pay them out of pocket? What would prevent insurance companies from selling real insurance (like goy #25 suggests) to people who want to opt out of the present system? That is, could doctors, patients, hospitals and even pharmaceutical companies form relations outside of the system? I assume you would be out the tax money that gets pored into the socialized system, but let’s say you accepted that and wanted good medical care on your own terms. Could, further, the equivalent of tort reform be constructed through private arrangements, in which doctors only took on patients who not only paid in cash or through private insurance, but who agreed to submit any disputes to some kind of arbitration or mediation (also privately arranged–say, a committee comprised of doctors and a few laypeople)? In the other words, the equivalent of an underground health economy–how possible would that be? Would it require civil disobedience?
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:04 am 45. Tom Blumer:#32, Moho aka Strawman Builder:
- The column isn’t about what some other political party has or hasn’t done.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:09 am 46. Moho:- But, since you mention it, which side of the aisle has advocated and to an extent implemented Medical and Health Savings Accounts and flat-rate Medicaid spending allowances (with coverage for catastrophes)? And which side eventually admits to wanting single-payer health care in every time they break down and get honest about it when they think others aren’t watching, or won’t remember?
- The AFP report’s poll data you cite is from July 9-13, almost 4 weeks ago, and BEFORE the text of the health care bill was released on July 14. Can you come up with anything more pathetic than that? (But thanks for linking me to a potential NewsBusters post. :–>)
- The Democrats could pass this with their own people and no help from the other party. So regardless of how people have been conditioned to respond, how can the other party be seen as obstructionist?
- The so-called generic Congressional ballot has the other party up by 5. So even if your claim about 28% other party approval is accurate, it would appear to be even less for Dems.
- Direct polling on the plan has it opposed by a heavy plurality or a majority, despite weeks of establishment media treatment ranging from kid-glove to flat-out lying.
Chuck,
Thank you for displaying so perfectly the paranoia and intellectual deafness that exemplifies your movement. Obviously, anyone who disagrees with you is an agent of malfeasance. You’re welcome to come to my house and bang on my windows with your soft little hands.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:11 am 47. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: The Bill — HR 3200
For those who want it, HERE it is available in down-loadable and serachable PDF form and, via a link there to THOMAS, you can see it on the web.
Enjoy,
Chuck(le)
P.S. I have a bone to pick with our federal friends at GPO….
….they locked the PDF document so that while you CAN search it. You cannot mark-up, highlight or comment on the document.
I’ve told them about it. And told them I think it an egregious ‘oversight’, if not something MUCH worse, to inhibit the ability of the rest of US to read, remember and communicate our thoughts with each other. A stumbling block. A hobble.
P.P.S. There may be some difficulty opening the PDF form of the document as it has various ’security’ locks on it. Just keep at it…..
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:14 am 48. Lily:15 vivo:
“Second, virtually without exception worldwide, state-run health care has led to denial of care on age-based and so-called quality-of-life criteria.’
And how is this DIFFERENT from private insurance, HMO’s and the like??
It’s different because if the insurance company says no, you can get a different insurance company or you can pay for the treatment your own darn self. And yes I know it can be too expensive and you may have to get a second job or find some other way to fund it. You are paying for a service from your insurance comany if you don’t like the service, go elsewhere. However, once the government says NO there is nowhere else to go. That’s why Canadians and other people come here, because they can. Even if they have the money, they can’t get it in their country because the government said NO you can’t have that treatment. Or you can have it, after it’s too late.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:20 am 49. Eric:Screw the moral arguments. I want to hear many more voices make the Constitutional argument, i.e. the one that the government is NOT Constitutionally empowered to do anything regarding health care. And yes, Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP are ALL unconstitutional.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:24 am 50. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Ah-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha…..
…..Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-aaaaahhhhhh…..
Another example of the propagandist in Moho.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[A well-trained sense of paranoia keeps a soldier alive on the field of battle. -- Army soldier axiom]
P.S. And if THIS isn’t a ‘field of battle’…..
….especially when they ARE “out to get you”. After all, why do you think Obama set up ‘flag@whitehouse.gov’…..
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:25 am 51. Moho:“to inhibit the ability of the rest of US to read, remember and communicate our thoughts with each other. A stumbling block.”
More like inhibit your ability to alter the PDF and send it around as the original. Invest in some printer paper and a highlighter, and you’ll be fine. Or does the government need to do it all for you?
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:27 am 52. Lily:35: Boris
You forgot the “may include” part when selectively quoting. It MAY include your wishes and requests, which is another way of saying it MAY NOT.
I’m guessing the people who decide who lives or dies will have the same reading skill and selective attention to detail that you have.
May heaven help us all.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:28 am 53. Eric:Before reading Jonah Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism, I would have ignorantly called Obama and the leadership of the Congressional Democrats “fascists”. After reading the book I can confidently call Obama and the Congressional Democrats leadership fascists.
So much of what Jonah documented regarding what Mussolini, Hitler, Wilson, FDR, and a whole bunch of other leading Progressives advocated and actually accomplished is right out of the Obama/Pelosi/Reid playbook. These people are dangerous to our liberties and must be defeated at every turn.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:28 am 54. Eric:-Before reading Jonah Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism, I would have ignorantly called Obama and the leadership of the Congressional Democrats “fascists”. After reading the book I can confidently call Obama and the Congressional Democrats leadership fascists.
So much of what Jonah documented regarding what Mussolini, Hitler, Wilson, FDR, and a whole bunch of other leading Progressives advocated and actually accomplished is right out of the Obama/Pelosi/Reid playbook. These people are dangerous to our liberties and must be defeated at every turn.
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:32 am 55. Maximum Power:35. Boris:
“This ‘consultant’ is going to write “orders”, as mentioned in page 429, on how people will be cared for.”
Can your really not read?
The bill says the order will:
“effectively communicate[] the individual’s
preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual.”
The patient decides what he or she wants? If you want to write, Soylent Green 2, by all means do so, just remember that it’s fiction, or, in your case, a lie.
As if insurance companies never try to save money.
the patient gets to decide very little …since the options will be none existant.
OF COURSE THE INSURANCE COMPANIES TRY TO SAVE MONEY. Duh !>#@>$%$^&%#*& …why is it that libertards on’t understand anything about free market.
that is where choice comes in …where competition comes in. Look in Canada …no choice no options. wait ..lots of waiting, and for what is substandard care. No private clinics allowed …just like the government is stopping the vouchers program in education. off topic …not really the government doesn’t like competition and always works against it.
why jump off a cliff? DO YOU REALLY NOT UNDERSTAND ?
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:37 am 56. adam:Another question, for anyone who is interested–given the enormous length and complexity of the bill, it must have numerous gray areas and clauses open to interpretation, not to mention plenty of unworkable parts and sheer contradictions. My question is–shouldn’t it be possible, assuming it does pass, to obstruct it in significant ways through law suits, challenges to constitutionality, etc.? Not to mention the corruption and malfeasance it will undoubtedly produce on a gigantic scale, which could lead to prosecutions and wrongful death, etc., suits against ogvernment bureaucrats.
I’m trying to think of how the struggle against socialism could continue even given the worst case scenario. It seems to me that the other places where socialized medicine has been imposed have been less free and have possessed populations who are, shall we say, better behaved than unruly Americans. If there are, at minimum, 35% of Americans unalterably opposed to socialized health care (along with, of course, plenty less unalterably opposed), could we make it pretty much impossible, regardless of what passes in Washington?
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:45 am 57. JED:Whenever these massive spending and taxing bill are conjured in either house, we can be reasonably sure that they will contain last minute amendments and riders that plump them porky. We may ask well ask, “does corruption and inefficiency follow big money?” What is the morality of the hogs at the trough?
Aug 7, 2009 - 11:25 am 58. goy:@56. adam: - …shouldn’t it be possible, assuming it does pass, to obstruct it in significant ways through law suits, challenges to constitutionality, etc.?
What you describe here is pretty much how FDR’s unconstitutional programs were repealed in the ’30s. That was done via judicial review of the legislation. Ultimately the majority of the so-called “New Deal” was declared unconstitutional – including the National Recovery Act (NRA).
FDR’s response to this was interesting. He attempted to change the number of Justices on the SCOTUS bench and, while at it, pack the Supreme Court with justices that were sympathetic to his socialist agenda (not much different from BHO’s nomination of activist judge Sotomayor).
Still trying to find a high school or college in the U.S. that uses a textbook which discusses this shameful aspect of FDR’s socialist agenda, or which mentions the know-widely-known-fact that the “New Deal” exacerbated the economic problems of the Depression and caused it to last years longer than it might have without federal meddling. Don’t think I’ll find one.
Aug 7, 2009 - 11:40 am 59. Paul -Indiana:#35, Boris. ““effectively communicate[] the individual’s
Aug 7, 2009 - 11:44 am 60. goy:preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual.”
===
Desired by the individual does not mean ‘received by the individual’.
=
I’ve already advised my Senators that a ‘yes’ vote on this bill is a career ending choice.
@57. JED: - What is the morality of the hogs at the trough?
Funny you should ask, JED. The answer is: adolescent. This has been clinically demonstrated.
And at some point we’re going to have to face the cause of the left’s love affair with suicidal social policies like Obamacare, cap-and-tax, “affordable mortgages”, wealth redistribution, hypertaxation of the “rich”, collectivism, socialism and communism in general. These ideas all appeal to people with stunted moral growth, i.e., moral adolescents who appear mature in many or most other ways. That’s not an idle observation, it’s a clinically demonstrated fact.
Leftism is not a political ideology, it is a facet of human development that asserts itself when individuals fail to mature morally. That’s why it keeps popping up despite decades of proof that it is a flawed approach to addressing social issues. The danger is that moral adolescence is self-replicating and self-amplifying, which explains how we as social human beings keep electing fascist and socialist “leaders” like Mussolini, Woodrow Wilson, Hitler, FDR, Stalin and Obama.
Aug 7, 2009 - 11:50 am 61. Moho:Face it. You dumb!!!!@ never gave a crap about reading a bill until a black man was president. Do you think the rest of the country didn’t notice?
Aug 7, 2009 - 11:54 am 62. adam:“61. Moho:
Face it. You dumb!!!!@ never gave a crap about reading a bill until a black man was president. Do you think the rest of the country didn’t notice?”
Music to my eyes! The Left in the beginning stages of full scale implosion–the beauty of it is, this is the way their elected officials are starting to sound!
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:23 pm 63. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Moho & Adobe Acrobat
It’s pretty obvious, based on THAT statement that Moho lives in the previous millennium and not the current one.
The author of a document in using Adobe Acrobat Pro, like what I have, can secure a document against tampering and STILL allow for mark-up, highlight and commenting thereon.
Another bit of prima facia evidence that Moho is either totally ignorant—and proud of it—or much, much worse.
I suspect BOTH.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:40 pm 64. Steve DeMarcus:[Stupid, adj., Ignorant and proud of it.]
61. Moho: “…never gave a crap about reading a bill ..”
Actually in 1993-4 as I was recovering from a broken ankle I read the now known as HillaryCare Bill which was over 3,000 and was as bad or even worse than this one and this was under Bill Clinton I was also against the Medicare Prescription Drug Modernization Act plan of George Bush as many other were or since have become against.
The problem here you see is that until 1995 few people had a computer and if they had internet access it was quite expensive and it was not interactive until 1996 with the introduction of Javascript. Prior to that you would basically send email via a very slow dial up connection with a speed of 400 then 1200 baud (not very fast or reliable) a 56K modem was only a dream. It was a lot like playing chess by mail only a little faster but not much.
Now you can read an over view of this bill at the following link, but I am sure that as a liberal that supports Obama (who also does not know what is in the bill and is not writing it, the congress and senate is) that you will not because it will show you do not know what you are talking about. —>http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1015 and the entire bill is here –>http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf
So now go and try to disrupt and cause trouble at townhall meetings somewhere, I am sure you have nothing else to do! BTW !Procurez-vous la tête de votre âne vous connard
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:42 pm 65. goy:Point made…
@61. Moho: - You dumb!!!!@ …
Ad Hominem. Adolescent.
- …never gave a crap about reading a bill…
Straw Man fallacy. Adolescent.
- …until a black man was president.
Projection (racism). Adolescent.
- Do you think the rest of the country didn’t notice?
Appeal to the Majority fallacy. Adolescent.
Moral adolescence on display. Times four.
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:42 pm 66. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Heh
Well….
….in the case of those who never DID read legislation before Obama became president….
….at least THEY are reading the bills.
Unlike the members of their congressional delegations.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:48 pm 67. Anonymous:[CONGRESS.SYS corrupted: reboot Washington DC (Y/n)?]
34. Moho:
“Or did you forget that Republicans were running the show during the biggest slide into economic disaster in sixty years? What’s wrong with you people.”
Actually the Democrats took control over Congress in 2006 Moho, and it was then that they promised to “do something” about rising gas and energy costs. Gas went from 2 around $2.50 to over $4.00 a gallon. They “did something” all right, all the wrong somethings and are still doing them. Along with the high energy costs that were one of the catalysts for the economic disaster it was the policies of Carter, Clinton, and corrupt Democratic politicians like Barney Frank that were the real cause of the economic meltdown. Government meddling, which sadly some Republicans who should have known better supported, was the cause of the increase of “toxic assets”.
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:58 pm 68. Hankelvis:Spiritual health is a necessary component of human well-being. Healthcare under government aupicies invites establishment clause litigation. The Vetaran Administration has already been sued by the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF). The copay for medication under a national plan will be a golden goose for the government, GE, and DIGA. We may end up trading “unneeded procedures” for “unneeded medications”. If this were a national housing bill, we would all end up in a trailerpark.
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:59 pm 69. AThinkingPerson:Moho: Voting for someone BECAUSE of their skin color is just as evil as not voting for them because of their skin color. Therefore, you are as guilty as those you condemn.
Why not vote policy next time.
Aug 7, 2009 - 12:59 pm 70. Steve DeMarcus:Moho I forgot to add
“Moho vous êtes un con, sans la direction de votre propre vie, allez-vous trouver un emploi et paient des impôts idiot de revenir.et de se plaindre”
Now go and learn something useful and if you will excuse my French “Blow it out votre arrière.“
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:10 pm 71. Boris:“that is where choice comes in …where competition comes in. Look in Canada …no choice no options. wait ..lots of waiting, and for what is substandard care. No private clinics allowed”
No one is saying you can’t purchase additional insurance or pay for the procedure out of your own pocket.
But saying you have a “choice” in a free market system is flat out ignorance. If you are ill, you don’t have a choice. Sure, you can terminate your policy with your insurer, but as a person with a pre-existing condition, where are you going to go? No one will cover you.
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:29 pm 72. Scott:Moho again:
“Peter–following this logic, doesn’t it also stand to reason that the military shouldn’t be using my taxes to fund a war that at least half of the population opposes?”
Ummm lest your crazed liberal brain forget Obama is CiC now and can order the troops home if he really wanted to thus ending the “funding of a war that at least half of the population opposes” with your tax dollars.
Interestingly enough Moho I opposed going to Iraq, I even wrote my Congress critters about it, but probably not for the reasons you opposed it. I opposed getting into two wars and stretching our men and material thin and being unable to react to other threats like NK and Iran. Interestingly enough I was both right and wrong, I was right in that both are taking advantage of both our tied up resources and a “war weary” population. I was wrong in that intentionally or unintentionally it was strategically smart to move the war from Afghanistan to Iraq. Afghanistan is notoriously difficult to fight in & its their home turf, compound that with safe havens in Pakistan where the Taliban and Al Qaeda could rest, re-rearm and recruit it would have likely been a disaster to fight there.
Iraq separated them from their “home field” advantage, safe havens based upon tribal ties, and caused Al Qaeda to suffer defeat and a loss of status among jihadists gained in the 9/11 attacks. I think they have realized this and Obambi’s war in Afghanistan is not going to go well. Our troops and their families sadly will pay the price. Not the 4330 over 6 years, which by the standards of warfare for the last 150 years is minuscule, but rather Vietnam type casualties. For reference, there ware an average of 17 American casualties a day in Vietnam, Iraq works out to be just under 2 a day. He lacks the will and fortitude of Bush, he’ll look at the polls and roll over as real casualties pile up. The long reaching implications of this will not be good for America.
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:31 pm 73. Scott:34. Moho:
“Or did you forget that Republicans were running the show during the biggest slide into economic disaster in sixty years? What’s wrong with you people.”
Actually the Democrats took control over Congress in 2006 Moho, and it was then that they promised to “do something” about rising gas and energy costs. Gas went from 2 around $2.50 to over $4.00 a gallon. They “did something” all right, all the wrong somethings and are still doing them. Along with the high energy costs that were one of the catalysts for the economic disaster it was the policies of Carter, Clinton, and corrupt Democratic politicians like Barney Frank that were the real cause of the economic meltdown. Government meddling, which sadly some Republicans who should have known better supported, was the cause of the increase of “toxic assets”.
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:33 pm 74. Steve DeMarcus:I can not take it anymore with me an honorably discharged Vietnam Vet or veteran of any conflict being considered a terrorist or looked upon as one that might be dangerous to a country that I volunteered to fight for is unimaginable.
I have a service connected disability and have in the past used the VA medical system some was good but as you will note I use it only as a last resort, fortunately I am in fairly good health, my ex wife does not and at age 58 after surviving lung cancer now she has 17 brain tumors and is in Hospice and is on Medicare until she dies and who knows when that will be.
While you are still young these matters do not concern you and you will choose to not have health insurance opting for a new car or television or computer or home. When you get above 50 years of age though I hope you have some sort of financial plan that will help you survive not being able to get or keep a job (even if fit) and I am in that position after being layed off after 37 years in my field.
So my health care plan is not get sick and never ask for health care because the ramifications might cause my demise, and the same for those over 65 (social security costs, which is going broke).
Yes the bill currently in the congress HR3200 is wrong on moral grounds and should be defeated simply because it is such. Obama is also wrong on many moral grounds aside from lying to you constantly.
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:33 pm 75. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: More Lies from Boris
Only Obama and everyone else on THIS video.
Enjoy,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:52 pm 76. Rob:[The Truth will out....Boris is a liar.....]
Chuck, the version at Thomas is not the new revised version. The revised version is available via the government printing office at gpo.gov they are the ones that print everything that comes out of Washington.
Aug 7, 2009 - 1:52 pm 77. seriocomic222:Why does anyone here pay any attention to the troll? Nothing he says is of consequence. His purpose is not to exchange opinions, to have a good dialogue, to show us the other side. His purpose is to push our buttons, to bait us and watch us bite. When we do, he’s pleased.
I don’t think the troll is “impervious to empiracal evidence,” as Krauthammer said of Obama the other day. I don’t think he’s an ignoramus, either. He’s a contrarian, a provocateur from the left who loves being the center of attention here. I suggest we deny him what he craves.
This is the first and last comment I will make that has anything to do with the troll. I will pass over his posts from now on because they do not merit attention.
Aug 7, 2009 - 2:23 pm 78. Chuck Pelto:TO: Rob
RE: The Thomas Version
Thanks for that insight.
I believe I got the PDF with the official GPO seal-signature in the upper left corner of the first page.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 2:55 pm 79. Tom Blumer:[Don't steal. The government hates competition.]
#49, Eric — valid points on constitutionality.
That brings us to a quote from John Adams — “Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”
My instincts tell me that statist health care is America’s moral Rubicon. We’d best not cross it.
Aug 7, 2009 - 3:21 pm 80. Moho:Seriocomic–
His purpose is to push our buttons, to bait us and watch us bite. When we do, he’s pleased.
I didn’t really see any other post worth responding to, in the many who accused me of being stupid because I knew something they didn’t. Par for the course, and why so much of the “activism” we are seeing right now involves people trying to prevent dialogue, trying their hardest not to have their questions asked, or let any answers be asked or answered. Or my favorite line–which you guys should use as your tag line–”I don’t have your sophisticated words, but I recognize a liar when I see one”. Yes, no need to listen, because you have a Jedi-like ability to know the truth whether you understand the issue or not!
As far as pushing your buttons–you idiots have had your buttons permanently pushed since 1967, and now you finally have a group in control of the Republican party stupid enough to set you free. Much like hyperactive children running around the room with scissors, your little rampages may harm some other folks along the way. But you’ll hurt no one more than yourselves. They’ve always used you this way, and always convinced you to undermine your own well-being and future by hitting your well-worn antagonized feeling of grievance. Black people, feminists, college educated people, city people. So many buttons for your handlers to push; you’re literally serving yourselves on a silver platter.
Aug 7, 2009 - 3:22 pm 81. Calvin Ball:Chucky, Boris means you’ll still be able to get private care in Mexico. Que?
Aug 7, 2009 - 4:27 pm 82. Lily:Boris 71.
But saying you have a “choice” in a free market system is flat out ignorance. If you are ill, you don’t have a choice. Sure, you can terminate your policy with your insurer, but as a person with a pre-existing condition, where are you going to go? No one will cover you.
The choice you have is not to be stupid when you buy insurance in the first place.
You can’t buy house insurance this week and expect them to pay you for a house fire you had last week. But somehow, people seem to think that medical insurance should cover already existing conditions or things for which they are not even paying premiums. If you happen to get some expensive medical condition but didn’t buy the kind of insurance to cover it, well that is the chance you took when you bought that kind of insurance. But even then, you can still get insurance. Many times people just go with the insurance they get from their place of employment without even knowing what it covers. It is NOT the insurance company’s fault that you are uninformed about your coverage. And if the insurance company is refusing to cover for services for which you did pay, you can ask for review of the case.
It is also your right to pay for services you get yourself. But, of course, no one wants to pay for their own medical bills. But the fact of the matter is, we, the regular citizens in the US, get medical care that the richest people in the world could not buy if they wanted a mere 50 years ago.
Aug 7, 2009 - 4:32 pm 83. adam:The convergence of the language of leftist blog trolls and Democratic elected officials is remarkable, and encouraging–they both feel equally free to show how dripping with contempt and condescension for their political opponents. What Moho says here is almost identical to Obama’s “we wish the people who made the mess wouldn’t do so much talking” and the call to report “fishy disinformation” to the Administration. The majority of Americans, I suppose, need to be reminded every few decades why the Democrats are much more suited to being a whiny minority than a governing party; but it also seems as if the Democrats themselves prefer things that way–that is, they prefer haranguing Americans, accusing them of racism, fascism, and so on, then actually trying to make a case respectfully.
No one needs to read a 1,000 page bill to know that bills shouldn’t be 1/10 that length; and no one needs a PhD to realize that the point of the public option is to drive out private insurance and force everyone into reliance upon the state. And that’s really all anyone needs to know. As for alternatives–well, enough people are happy with their employer provided insurance so that the real solution, the de-linking of insurance from employment and its transformation into genuine insurance on a much more open insurance market, with ordinary costs paid out of pocket, must be gradual. But you also don’t need to read over a dozen studies to know that panic over “cutting costs” is a pretty pathetic reason for surrendering our freedoms.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:13 pm 84. Chuck Pelto:TO: Calvin Ball, et al.
RE: Say WHAT??!?!?!
That would go far explaining why so many people I know have been retiring there.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:26 pm 85. Moho:P.S. Will they offer ‘medical marijuana’? The really stickie stuff?
If you happen to get some expensive medical condition but didn’t buy the kind of insurance to cover it, well that is the chance you took when you bought that kind of insurance. But even then, you can still get insurance [absolutely positively untrue, by the way]. Many times people just go with the insurance they get from their place of employment without even knowing what it covers. It is NOT the insurance company’s fault that you are uninformed about your coverage. And if the insurance company is refusing to cover for services for which you did pay, you can ask for review of the case.
My god, when you put it that way, this sounds like the worst system imaginable.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:36 pm 86. Moho:Adam:
No one needs to read a 1,000 page bill to know that bills shouldn’t be 1/10 that length; and no one needs a PhD to realize that the point of the public option is to drive out private insurance and force everyone into reliance upon the state.
Indeed, that’s what you keep saying. But anyone who knows anything about running a country knows that for legal reasons, you’ve got to cover a lot of issues. You’ve got to cover things that have come up, things that haven’t yet. And then you’ve got to go back and add the things that you didn’t really imagine could happen. This is why you need to have a certain level of intelligence to understand a bill or run a country. And this is why you people don’t read the bills and can’t run for office. Listen, people of below average intelligence only make up about 28% of the electorate–so despite their current surge through the community centers of America, there’s not a real chance they’ll be able to affect things. The good news is that there’s less stupid people every day. I mean, that’s good news for the rest of us. But you’ll find yourself increasingly lonely over here.
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:41 pm 87. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: A ‘Thought’
One of my favorite axioms is….
There are advantages and disadvantages to every possible situation.
In the case of HR 3200, we’re gaining more and more understanding of the disadvantages.
However, some people….not necessarily me….might see some advantages of passing this legislation. Things like….
• Senator Ted Kennedy might be considered ‘uneconomically repairable’.
• Senator Byrd, the same.
• Vice President Biden, ‘inefficient’, ‘ineffective’ and the same
• Certain governors the same.
Now….
….the question is, would they get ‘preferential consideration’, i.e., an exemption, that the average citizen might not be given because of their positions in government?
If so, where is the decision making matrix so ALL of US can see and ‘appreciate’ it.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 5:48 pm 88. adam:[Some animals are more equal than others.]
Under the pressure of even very moderate opposition, the basic assumptions not only of the Obama administration but of the Progressive theory of government itself spring right up to the surface. Look at Moho’s response in #86–he (or she) doesn’t say a thing. “For legal reasons, you’ve got to cover a lot of issues.” What? “You’ve got to cover the things that have come up, things that haven’t yet.” This seems more (insofar as it is, through a generous reading, intelligible) like an argument for briefer bills, that lay out the basic responsibilities of eixsting institutions, so the unanticipated can be dealt with by those most directly involved. “And you’ve got to go back an add the things that you didn’t really imagine could happen.” Presumably Moho and his comrades imagine that they can imagine what can’t be imagined in advance. Which means they’re stupid enough to believe they can anticipate all contingencies in advance (like, say the “Cash for Clunkers” program running out of money in–what, 3 days?)
Then, the brilliant moho, who hasn’t yet articulated a single coherent thought (although he may have linked to one or two along the way) lays down the super brilliant Progressive argument: we’re smart, you’re dumb. (More proof of this brilliance: the discovery that people of below average intelligence comprise 28%, rather, then, say 49%, of the electorate). And he/she is even about a half step away from drawing the eugenic consequences.
Well, we’re going to find out very soon about “affecting things.” 28% are not the numbers I’m seeing opposed to Obamacare (or Obama himself, for that matter); nor do the numbers seem to be shrinking. Like I also keep saying, I am extremely happy that Democratic elected officials are now sounding pretty much like moho here–for some reason, they seem unable to anticipate that they will alienate support they might need by claiming those protesting are a bunch of stupid, racist, albeit well dressed Nazis. (One last thing: I would love to see where moho ranks Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi, for starters, in his/her intelligence rankings).
Aug 7, 2009 - 6:15 pm 89. elvis:What does moho mean?
Aug 7, 2009 - 6:33 pm 90. Calvin Ball:87, you’re getting closer. Here’s the the pill that they’re really going to choke over:
1. They’ll control costs by denying health care to smokers. They caused their condition.
2. They’ll control costs by denying health care to the obese. They caused their condition.
3. Etc.
Sooner or later, they’ll control costs by denying health care to AIDS patients. After all, they chose to engage in behaviors that caused it.
You trolls listening?
Aug 7, 2009 - 7:12 pm 91. Chuck Pelto:TO: Calvin Ball, et al.
RE: Indeed
And all the other ‘vices’ that the politically correct ‘hate’.
We’ll end up in the sort of hell that these people—these atheists—think Heaven is like. [Note: Why am I reminded of the situation in Las Vegas as described in Stephen King's The Stand.]
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 7, 2009 - 8:04 pm 92. elvis:[He who hates vice hates mankind.]
yes .. but can we get our MOHO workin’?
Aug 7, 2009 - 8:07 pm 93. Moogie:1. The healthcare reform bill IS NOT ABOUT REFORMING HEALTHCARE. It’s about using the vehicle of healthcare to drive in yet more socialism. Period.
2. About that “47 million uninsured” number: it’s a false number that completely misrepresents the number of people in America who are truly in need of health care coverage. That number includes illegal immigrants and folks who make enough money to purchase private coverage but choose not to.
3. There is no reason to dismantle the entire car and rebuild it into a completely different car if there are only a few broken parts. Rebuilding the entire healthcare system – with the government at the controls – makes no sense whatsoever.
4. The entire bill as it is written needs to be thrown on the floor and doused with gasoline and set on fire. It is a worthless mind-boggling tome of legislation that follows in the footsteps of its predecessors: full of pork and pet projects and poor planning.
No one in their right mind would deny medical costs are too high and that insurance companies are sticking it to the regular folks, but to believe – really, to trust – that our corrupt, inept government can or even should assume responsibility for such a huge and intensely private industry is ludicrous.
Aug 7, 2009 - 9:03 pm 94. Berlet98:Muzzling the “Mob,” Or How Democrats Handle Dissent
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (The First Amendment to the United States Constitution)
Seriously, now, are Americans so oblivious as to what’s going on in our country that they don’t even suspect that we are in process of seeing our most basic rights under our Consititution being trampled by the Democratic Party? Why can’t we see what’s happening at the hands of this radical Democratic regime?
Those are dumb questions. Regrettably and obviously, many are oblivious.
Indeed, thousands nationwide have been registering their dissent at townhall meetings which precisely relates to my point. There should be millions, not thousands massing at every available public venue demanding, not asking for, straight talk from their leaders on this atrocity labelled healthcare change.
Redress grievances? Good grief! We merely want information which they are reluctant to supply in fear that the American sheeple discover the machinations and subterfuges in progress to foist Obamacare on the nation.
It’s almost as if the Obamians have somehow succeeded in slipping mind-numbing drugs into our drinking water! How else to explain the sheepish acquiescence to the abnegation of their God-given and Constitutionally-guaranteed rights?
Time was, way back in 2008, that Americans who cared about our country felt free to, noisily if necessary, voice their opposition to our government infringing on their rights.
This administration, the congress, and the left wing media, acting as Obama’s puppets, have consistently and relentlessly ridiculed and attemped to reduce to nonentities those proponents of the First Amendment.
At his inauguration, President Barack Hussein Obama, who was elected to that highest office in the land and as putative leader of the Free World by virtue of an all but unanimous Black vote, and the obsequious votes of self-hating, Whites acting out of White Guilt, pretended to be the moderate he was painted to be by the mass/liberal media.
For a “legal scholar,” Obama seems to have little familiarity with the First Amendment.
Since his election, Obama and his congressional lackeys have shown their true colors, nowhere more vividly than in their reactions to the righteous protests to this horror of Obamacare.
The healthcare bill, multiple bills, actually, would use taxpayer funding to pay for abortions, transgendered sex changes, and a whole host of other irrelevant-to-healthcare, wasted programs while forcing people into a program that few want.
See “Queer News . . .” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1151 and “Can Ya Smell the Fear . . .” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1150.
The government reaction to legitimate protests? Just as with the “tea party” tax protests of April 15th, Democrats have ridiculed, dismissed, and have again pumped up the volume of their invective by demonizing the dissenters as mobs, Nazis and brownshirted Fascists in an attempt to de-legitimize all opposition.
A photo, compliments of Moonbattery.com and Dana Loesche, of some of those Nazi mobsters who look suspiciously like peacefully dissenting senior citizens:
AARP . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)
Aug 7, 2009 - 10:18 pm 95. vivo:48. Lily:
15 vivo: “Second, virtually without exception worldwide, state-run health care has led to denial of care on age-based and so-called quality-of-life criteria.’
And how is this DIFFERENT from private insurance, HMO’s and the like??’
“It’s different because if the insurance company says no, you can get a different insurance company or you can pay for the treatment your own darn self.”
You sound like you can buy health insurance as if it’s groceries. You can’t switch to another company because they don’t accept pre-existing conditions. If you pay for the treatment yourself, why have insurance at all? Not many people have that kind of money.
“And yes I know it can be too expensive and you may have to get a second job or find some other way to fund it.”
Yes, get a second job when you’re sick. You need a second brain.
“You are paying for a service from your insurance comany (sic) if you don’t like the service, go elsewhere. However, once the government says NO there is nowhere else to go.”
Who says the private insurers are going to be eliminated? Have you heard of supplemental insurance?
Aug 8, 2009 - 2:48 am 96. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Heh
I guess I missed this part while addressing HR 3200 in my post at item #
The point here being that this ‘consultant’ can “limit some or all specific interventions”.
I read that as to indicate that they can “order” that you NOT receive a treatment. In other words. THEY can “order” that you not be revived if you fall over.
I can see the scenario now. There’s a call to 911 for medical care at a residence.
The EMT folks arrive and find the emergency involves a woman in her 80s who has fallen and broken her hip. The EMT people call in and find out that her ‘consultant’ has written an ‘order’ that she is not to receive a hip replacement.
The splint her. Give her a pain killer and leave her on her bed…..
It’s a scenario RIGHT OUT OF J.R. Halderman’s The Forever War.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. By the way….
….barring assistance from family or friends, she’ll be dead in a few days, as she can’t walk. That’ll save the government money…..
Aug 8, 2009 - 5:47 am 97. medical skeptic:This nurse has had an ongoing series of well-referenced articles examining the medical ethics of healthcare reform. Medical professionals are able to more clearly see what is being proposed, I suspect, because they know the actual meaning of the verbiage being used. Most of the public, for instance, doesn’t realize that making end of life counseling a “quality measure” means it’s a pay-for-performance measure that doctors have to follow or pay the price.
Aug 8, 2009 - 6:15 am 98. Boris:Latest article: here.
Chuck, you are a moron. You can buy private insurance even in single payer systems. No one is proposing that people cannot buy their own insurance now or EVEN IF a single payer system is adopted.
Aug 8, 2009 - 7:40 am 99. Boris:“The point here being that this ‘consultant’ can “limit some or all specific interventions”.”
This is a lie. The consultant must abide by the desires of the patient in coming up with end of life procedures. The patient may limit the procedures. This is clear to honest people who can read.
Aug 8, 2009 - 7:42 am 100. Boris:By the way, these consultations that Chuck Pelto is flogging are not mandated. But funding is available if people want such a consultation.
But, you know, quote the part of the bill that mandates them and prove me wrong.
Expecting silence,
Aug 8, 2009 - 7:49 am 101. Chuck Pelto:Boris
TO: All
RE: Well….
…I COULD be a “moron”. But at least that’s MUCH better than being an outright liar….like Boris is. Especially a liar who can’t follow a link, as provided at item #75 (above), an comprehend the spoken words of his own ‘leaders’.
But then again, I’m not a ‘moron’. At least according to a card I’ve got in my billfold.
Instead, I suspect Boris is projecting, again…..
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 8, 2009 - 8:35 am 102. Chuck Pelto:[Stupid, adj., Ignorant and proud of it.]
TO: All
RE: Can Boris EVER….
…stop lying?
Well. His being a sociopath, by his demonstrations here, I suspect not. He’s behaving like a classic, clinical pathological liar. Everything he seems to say is one form of lie or another.
How can I say that about this particular post? This claim that ‘consultations’ are not “mandated”?
Probably by reading pages 424 and 425 of HR 3200, wherein the germane parts read as follows:
Most people with a good understanding of English will notice that there is no such word as “may” or “could” or even “should”.
That makes this item in the legislation “mandatory”.
Notice how when the legislation talks about what the government is supposed to do, it uses the word “may”. But when it talks about what the rest of US should do, it doesn’t use such terms?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 8, 2009 - 8:45 am 103. Chuck Pelto:[The Truth is coming out......]
TO: medical skeptic
RE: The Public Doesn’t Understand
True.
As I mentioned at item #30 (above), most people think the government intends kindly towards them. Kind-hearted souls that they are.
However, after years in the military. Years as a volunteer lobbyist at the state level. And NOW, years of experience as a commissioner at the city and city-county levels…..
….I’ve learned that you have to read between the lines and especially look for what they are NOT saying. I.e., look for the pit and pratfalls built into the proposition.
Most of these propositions are written by lawyers. And as Ambrose Bierce so aptly put it in The Devil’s Dictionary….
Lawyer, n., One skilled at circumventing the Law.
So they build in traps or loopholes, depending on their intended purpose.
HR 3200 has them a plenty…..and some of them are down-right DEADLY!
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Nobody's fortune, liberty or life is safe while the Congress is in session. -- Benjamin Franklin]
Ain’t it the truth….especially with this one….
Aug 8, 2009 - 8:52 am 104. Eric:Boris,
Since the Constitution expressly disallows the federal government from setting up a health care program (including Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP) all of your points are moot. The federal government is NOT ALLOWED to do what Obama and the Democrats are attempting to do.
Claiming that the free market cannot address most or all current problems is disingenuous and any problems out of reach of the free market should be addressed at the proper level of government which is the state, not federal, level.
The Founders never intended for the states to be subservient to the federal government. Louis Brandeis said that the states should be “laboratories of democracy” and he was absolutely correct. Let each state experiment with different systems, or none, and see what works. The problem with a top down federal program is that there is no learning from failure. There is just failure which will never be admitted to. What is that saying, “Success has a thousand fathers but failure is an orphan”?
So, if you advocate a government program, fine just work for it at the state level which is the only Constitutionally authorized route.
Aug 8, 2009 - 9:13 am 105. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Hmmmmm
Here’s an interesting thought…….from days of old….
I thought I’d seen “Constitutional Crises” in the past. But if my understanding of HR 3200 is correct—and so far there has been effective evidence that it is not—we’re going to see the grand-fater of ALL such, where a Constitution-passed law is in direct opposition to the Declaration of Independence.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 8, 2009 - 10:25 am 106. Cyberray:[Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. -- Abraham Lincoln]
I am skeptical of anything the government does. When my parents got old their assets were confiscated under the guise of a “Guardianship” my father died shortly because if the stress of the situation and in order to save my mother from being chemical restrained and kept against her will in a nursing home while an army of government sanctioned attorneys stole their money by charging outrageous sums for things her family did for years out of love for free.
Aug 8, 2009 - 10:31 am 107. Chuck Pelto:I had to ultimately spend most of my retirement egg to pay for attorneys to end the guardianship ( Looting) and take my mother out of the country in order to save her.
This tyranny went unnoticed till now when the same tactics are being applied to younger people, in more subtle ways.
Like someone once said” You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all the people all of the time”.
TO: All
RE: ERRATA
That second sentence of the paragraph after the citation SHOULD read….
Need more coffee….
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 8, 2009 - 10:40 am 108. Eric:[The greatness of America lies not in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather in her ability to repair her faults. -- Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, c. 1835]
Chuck,
I’m eager for AZ to pass this initiative: http://www.azhealthcarefreedomact.com/
And all, visit the 10th Amendment center: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/
Aug 8, 2009 - 10:49 am 109. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Heh
It seems that PJM does not recognize html-code for underlines.
The second sentence of my citation of the Declaration of Independence should have had emphasis as follows:
Sorry about my ignorance that PJM doesn’t allow for underlining.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 8, 2009 - 11:09 am 110. Ray:[I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless prairies, and it was not there; in her rich mines and her vast world commerce, and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. -- Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, c. 1835]
I am skeptical of anything the government does. When my parents got older their assets were confiscated under the guise of a “Guardianship” my father died shortly after because if the stress of the situation and in order to save my mother from being chemical restrained and kept against her will in a nursing home while an army of government sanctioned attorneys stole their money by charging outrageous sums for things her family did for years out of love for free.
Aug 8, 2009 - 12:46 pm 111. Boris:I had to ultimately spend most of my retirement egg to pay for attorneys to end the guardianship ( Looting) and take my mother out of the country in order to save her.
This tyranny went unnoticed till now when the same tactics are being applied to younger people, in more subtle ways.
Like someone once said” You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all the people all of the time”.
“That makes this item in the legislation “mandatory”.”
Chuck,
You are quoting a definition. Did you notice what law is being amended? Let me help you out here. The passage being amended to include an Advance Care Planning Consultation is section 1861 of the Social Security Act, subsection (s)(2).
Here’s a link to the section being amended.
Now, notice that the Advance Care Planning Consultation, when added, will be letter FF in a long list of things that the SSA considers “medical and other health services.”
Let’s see what else is on the list!
“(D) outpatient physical therapy services and outpatient occupational therapy services;”
Well, I guess everyone is also required to go to physical therapy. Let’s go on!
“(L) certified nurse-midwife services;”
Obama is going to force old people to have babies!!!!!!!!!!!
“(P) prostate cancer screening tests (as defined in subsection (oo));”
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! OBAMA!
So, your claim that people will be forced into these consultations makes no sense unless you believe they will also be forced to have a certified midwife attend to them.
Aug 8, 2009 - 1:58 pm 112. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: More Boris Lies
That’s not the definitions section, being quoted by myself.
HR 3200 has not been amended. It MIGHT be amended. But the amendment for that section has not been unveiled yet. And, indeed, as this looks like the big ‘money saver’ for this monstrosity, I doubt if it will be amended into some non-effective manner. It may be amended, just to bury it elsewhere. And that is the more likely amendment.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 8, 2009 - 5:26 pm 113. Chuck Pelto:[The Truth keeps coming out.....]
P.S. If this is just the ‘definition’, why is Boris blowing smoke about amendments?
Aug 8, 2009 - 5:27 pm 114. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Additionally……
….I doubt if the section Boris is pointing to will modify the lines about what the ‘consultant’ can ‘order’ with regards to an ‘aging’ or ‘ineffective’ or ‘inefficient’ or ‘uneconomically reparable’ or ‘enemy of the state’ patient will or WILL NOT receive.
As I’ve pointed out time and again—and yet Boris keeps attempting to slip away from—the bill as it stands says the ‘consultant’ may order interventions. It does not say the consultant MUST order.
There’s a singular difference in the approach. An difference that Boris wishes everyone would overlook.
But I won’t until I see it written otherwise in the legislation.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. I greatly appreciate Boris’ efforts at disinformation. They quicken my mind and help me to (1) prepare a retort to the local paper’s article about a TEA Party event last Thursday and (2) formulate my queries to my Congressional Delegates about this legislation.
Indeed. This whole thread was of great assistance as I questioned my Junior Congressional Senator at a Town Hall meeting just an hour ago. My question prompted two other from the audience regarding the same matter. And whereas he is a Senator and not my Congressman, he was made well aware of our deep concern over this particular point in HR 3200.
He thinks it is going to be struck. However, as I said above, I think it will just be ‘moved’ about as to avoid further scrutiny by the public…..
Aug 8, 2009 - 5:37 pm 115. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Oops….
Forgot the tag line…..
As iron sharpens iron, so does one man sharpen another.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away? -- Ripley, Aliens]
Reminds me of Boris…..
Aug 8, 2009 - 5:40 pm 116. ER White:http://www.bloggybayou.com/2009/08/end-of-life-counseling-intensifies.html
We don’t need bureacrats to help us die.
Aug 8, 2009 - 6:49 pm 117. AdrianS:If you’ll recall Obama’s position on abortion, even third trimester abortions that extract unborn boys and girls and leaves them on tables or closets to die. Obama favors these type of abortions. And thus, it’s not much of an extrapolation for us to believe that Obama wants to cultivate socialist attitudes that educate youngsters in schools to think that “end-of-life counseling” and “taking a pill for pain” and, in short, euthanasia, is acceptable. Just consider the “modern” attitudes regarding abortion. Rather than practice prophylaxis, an abortion is simply a prophylactic after-thought.
I wonder if in the future that’s how the government will cull the welfare, medicare and health care rolls; trim the population of elderly, useless individuals from state mandates to fund more important projects like war and political perks.
If Obamacare is not evil, as Sarah Palin sees it, it is most definitely some type of sinister, socialist manifesto for control of the masses.
Reject it. Reject Obamacare. Let Obama’s popularity fall all the way so we can bring our country back to its fundamentals of free-enterprise and capitalism; those things that have made, from the very beginning, America great!
Aug 8, 2009 - 8:06 pm 118. Boris:“HR 3200 has not been amended.”
You are dense, aren’t you? The section of H.R. 3200 in question amends section 1861 of the Social Security Act.
So you don’t even understand that this section is amending a current law? And yet you come on here and act as if you know something?
As I said before, the new item FF adds to a long list of services in the SSA. None of those services are mandatory.
Aug 9, 2009 - 6:46 am 119. debrarae:Actually Tom, in the Children’s healthcare reform act (which by the way has already been made/signed into law by the great Obamasan) it erroneously states that Autism is a untreatable illness and will NOT be covered.
In short with this one law (when in 5 years according to hr 3200 (and the senate alternative) private health care insurance is no more, my CHildren along with millions of children with Apsergers and Autism will be DENIED ANY CARE.
In short in accordance with HR 3200, they’ll pay for my kids to abort their children; they’ll pay for my kids to kill theirselves (as mandated by the Quary (in HR 3200 as pulled from congress.gov).
But they won’t cover any illnesses my children or I will have (for no other reason than my children live with Aspergers).
And still according to the exact text of the leglislation I and my children will have to pay a yearly FEE for ‘not having insurance’ that the FACISTS deemed US unworthy to have in the first place.
It turns my stomach to have to PAY for OTHER PEOPLE to have HEALTH CARE, when they are taking away our basic LIBERTIES in HR 3200, the senate alternative, the Children’s health care reform act, HR 2413 & S 819 (the ataa)
Aug 9, 2009 - 9:37 am 120. debrarae:Deep brain DIARIST ….. I ‘have’ read The children’s health care reform act (which erroneously states that Autism is a untreatable illness), HR 3200, the senate alternative, HR 2413 and S 819 (ATAA – Autism treatment accelerated act) that calls for all people with AUTSM to REGISTER and SUBMIT to being under constant survielence …
So INSTEAD of personal ATTACKS (via trying to libel and slander people because they disagree with YOU), why don’t you JOIN ME in going to CONGRESS.GOV and READING the FACTS for yourself?
Aug 9, 2009 - 9:43 am 121. Thomas:Liberals better think it over:
1. The plan is to add 12-50 millions of new patient – both legal and illegal – to the existing medical network.
How is going to be tackled this overnight influx of that many people?
2. Every citizen’s medical record will be digitized and kept at a central location: after each doctor visit my doctor will have to update my file; – most likely will need a computer handler to do that.
3. Next is the Dr. Ezekiel Auschwitz inspired idea about “useful” and “useless” categories of individuals: the doctor will send a computer query to the data bank asking permission to dispense a treatment he thinks I might need.
4.The data bank administrator – now inflated with 12-50 million new data, – will have to perform a statistical analysis on my cost/age benefit and send back a file to the doctor’s office with the permission or denial.
Care to follow the impossibility of these steps invented by absolute idiots?
How many new computer programmer needed at each and every doctor’s office to create and update these files?
Not even the bank computer system can deal with such a huge task than the entire population medical history which is in constant flux….
So far only the politicians spoke: why not the technicians whose job will be the care-taking of this huge network.
Aug 9, 2009 - 2:45 pm 122. vivo:How much will cost to the doctors the constant digitalization of the daily traffic?
121. Thomas:
“Liberals better think it over:
1. The plan is to add 12-50 millions of new patient – both legal and illegal – to the existing medical network.
How is going to be tackled this overnight influx of that many people?”
One by one. Who said it’ll work overnight?
“2. Every citizen’s medical record will be digitized and kept at a central location: after each doctor visit my doctor will have to update my file; – most likely will need a computer handler to do that.”
All doctors I visit already do that. Job can b shared by receptionist, techs, nurses and the doctors themselves (mine does it when I talk to him)
“3. Next is the Dr. Ezekiel Auschwitz inspired idea about “useful” and “useless” categories of individuals: the doctor will send a computer query to the data bank asking permission to dispense a treatment he thinks I might need.”
HMOs do that now.
“4.The data bank administrator – now inflated with 12-50 million new data, – will have to perform a statistical analysis on my cost/age benefit and send back a file to the doctor’s office with the permission or denial.
Care to follow the impossibility of these steps invented by absolute idiots?”
Administrators will buy supercomputers and upgraded software, they provide solutions.
“How many new computer programmer needed at each and every doctor’s office to create and update these files?”
Have you heard of off-the-shelf software?
“Not even the bank computer system can deal with such a huge task than the entire population medical history which is in constant flux….”
How do you think BANKS work?
“So far only the politicians spoke: why not the technicians whose job will be the care-taking of this huge network.”
Is up to the legislators to be smart and ASK the questions.
“How much will cost to the doctors the constant digitalization of the daily traffic?”
See #2.
Aug 9, 2009 - 4:12 pm 123. Bear:Seems to me there is more fraud around the government programs (HC) than others. There are real issues that aren’t being talked about. While all of you argue. At least they delayed this thing for now. Giving the government too much power over these things will usher in a Brave New World either in this or the next administration(s).
Pay attention to the eventual convergence of all these policy issues.
Origins of 21st century totalitarianism…coming soon to a theatre near you.
Remember the emergency powers act is a terrible thing to waste.
Aug 9, 2009 - 8:21 pm 124. Thomas:@122. vivo:
Ha, ha, ha, you the Bolshevik Commissar usher us into the New World where everything works like clockwork in a Swiss watchmaker’s kitchen. The proletariat marching – heads held high – to the glorious future were the Great Leader (Jocker) puts everything in its proper place with an elegant gesture of his sacred hand for he knows no obstacles.
For these leftist idiots there are no problems that Acorn, under the guidance of the Great Leader (Jocker) cannot resolve…
The sheer, inane demagoguery of the leftists is mind boggling: similar aggrandizing blabbering was last heard at the Soviet Union Communist Party Congress by Brezhnev. And by Hugo the illiterate buffoon.
Just wait when the first crop of seniors will be denied Medicare treatment, doctors refuse to treat old people because Medicare budget will be reduced yet the work load will increase and the overall chaos descend on the nation. Acorn and SEIU people at the central data bank will not comprehend Latin medical terms and will convert them to Ebonics.
Nothing happened yet but your comrades are getting into hiding for fear of the MOB, the NAZIS, the Counter-revolutionaries, the KGB collecting “subversive” statements from grandpa, neighbors encouraged to denounce each others even though nothing happened yet!
Aug 9, 2009 - 8:58 pm 125. vivo:124. Thomas:
Got you! You don’t know anything about anything. Just name-calling, clichés, misspellings, subject-changing, paranoia. I really didn’t expect that.
Buy yourself a Understanding Software for Dummies book. Your life will change for the better.
Also, visit a doctor’s office and get an annual physical checkup. Observe the office environment and ask questions. Hopefully you are insured . . .
You’re welcome.
Aug 9, 2009 - 10:18 pm 126. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: There Are Actually….
….TWO questions at play.
[1] Does the medical-drug-insurance industry need to be reformed?
[2] Is HR 3200 the vehicle for doing that?
I doubt if any more than 1 person in 10—OUTSIDE of said industry—will disagree with question #1.
The big question seems to be whether or not HR 3200 is the proper way to change it.
As I doubt if HR 3200 will REALLY change the medical-drug-insuarnce industry in ways better than what we have NOW, I don’t think so. And based on what has been going on for the last few weeks. I get the impression that a majority of Americans are feeling the same way.
Especially in light of this ‘administrations’ response to said dissent.
There are many ways to reform the medical-drug-insurance industry. And some of them could be very simple. Presentable in a piece of legislation less than 100 pages. Indeed. It could be done with a piece of only 10 pages.
• All insurance companies will accept all American citizens and legal aliens for insurance coverage.
• There will be NO EXCLUSIONS on the coverage.
• Anything approved by the FDA and HHS for use in medical care can be applied to the patient.
Words to that effect.
Simple. Easily understood by just about anyone. And I’m certain it would make just about everyone, except the insurance companies and their shareholders, happy. Furthermore, there would be no government bureaucrat having direct charge of someones medical treatment.
The only part I cannot see clearly is how to keep the medical part of this complex from thinking each patient is a ‘blue-sky project’, which is part of the reason for our current state of affairs.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 10, 2009 - 2:13 am 127. Ed Wallis:[The devil is ALWAYS in the details.]
FROM: http://gladlylernegladlyteche.blogspot.com/2009/08/gold-for-geezers.html
“A clunker: $4500 max
That’s the kind of thinking that has made “Cash for Clunkers” such a success. The beauty of it is that the model can be applied to the Medical Whatever at the slight cost of a few modest adjustments of vocabulary.
Everyone agrees that the killer cost in health care is geriatric medicine. But “geriatric medicine” is merely a euphemism that may disguise rather than identify the problem.
Let’s call a spade a spade. The real problem here is geezers. First they get old. Then they get sick. Then they expect to see a doctor. Give them an inch, they take a mile.
The suggested plan to create a special group of thanatological shrinks (commonly called the Kevorkian Corps), while undoubtedly well intentioned, is actually an inadequate response.
The health care crisis demands something more fundamental. The solution is obvious, though it may at first seem a little startling. Eliminate the last car on the train. Get the geezers off the road in the same way you are getting the clunkers off the road. Give the program a snappy title: “Grants for Gramps,” perhaps, or better yet “Gold for Geezers”.”
Aug 10, 2009 - 4:30 am 128. Thomas:@125. vivo:
Care to cut your leftist crap and read Dr.Ezekiel Emanuel study (from Auschwitz) titled: (.PDF)
“Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions”
The Lancet ^ | 31 January 2009 | Ezekiel J Emanuel
“[This article in "The Lancet" describes the system under which Obama's health-care system would allocate medical resources]
Please note you are not dealing here with semi-illiterate Marxists ACORN goons – your favorite companies – who regard your primitive, uppity stance as the Oracle of Delphi – but with people who actually READ those documents that the Jocker’s servants cobble together.
Why don’t you address those premises that Dr. Ezekiel – bro of the “Dead Fish” – puts forward in writing – for all to read?
Why not?
Go to the source comrade, read it and cut the Commie talking points on the Greatness of Fidel’s health care.
(On a personal note: I grew up in a Communist, Eastern European country where your kind of geniuses ran the show so we are inoculated against your type of Commie crap. Many Americans are still naive so you can feed them but not the more experienced travelers.)
Aug 10, 2009 - 8:11 am 129. The Shadow:Poor Thomas – He is bad need of a dose of prozac.
Vivo – you cannot convince the parnoid with facts. It is like waving a red flag in front of a bull. Oops I said red. That will set them off for sure
Aug 10, 2009 - 9:04 am 130. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:18 pm 131. Chuck Pelto:RE: More Projection, Anyone?
TO: All
RE: ERRATA
Oops. That was The Shallow. And I forgot the sign-off/tagline.
Maybe I’ve had too much lipton ice-tea…..getting ahead of myself.
My apologies to vivo.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 10, 2009 - 2:03 pm 132. Thomas:[There's too much caffine in my blood system.]
129. The Shadow:
You said:
“Poor Thomas – He is bad need of a dose of prozac.
How interesting, reflexive answer from the Commie poster- back to his roots:
Aug 10, 2009 - 2:42 pm 133. Anonymous:All the opposition memebers and dissident were considered “insane” and the KGB locked them up in mental asylum in the Soviet system and heavily drugged them over. Either Gulag or mental asylum – the Leftist panacea to all social problems. Coming to your neighborhood soon.
You can see the “Obama youth” practicing on youtube, get ready for the “death panel”.
128. Thomas:
“Care to cut your leftist crap and read Dr.Ezekiel Emanuel study (from Auschwitz)”
You are obviously demented. I’m not insulting you, it’s a serious observation. You act like someone with ‘battle fatigue’.
“(On a personal note: I grew up in a Communist, Eastern European country”
That explains some things. The American system is too strong to go the Eastern European way. The leaders of this country are way to smart to change to a substandard system (I don’t mean politicians, but industrialists, businessmen, intellectuals and professionals).
Obviously you don’t understand Americans and you miss the old country too much, no matter what you say.
129. The Shadow:
131. Chuck Pelto:
“Maybe I’ve had too much lipton ice-tea…..getting ahead of myself.
My apologies to vivo.”
I love iced tea. Maybe you should try some other brands. Arizona sells gallons in several flavors that are convenient and flavorful.
Aug 11, 2009 - 2:58 am 134. Chuck Pelto:TO: Thomas
RE: Well….
….actually, that’s for the aged.
For those who do not have to go to the mandatory Advanced Life Care Consultations—where some government crat writes an ‘order’ on what sort of care we are allowed to get—there’s internment/resettlement. A la Bill Ayers, et al.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 11, 2009 - 4:07 am 135. Chuck Pelto:[Don't you just LOVE IT when a 'plan' comes together?]
TO: All
RE: This Administration….
….is beginning to look more and more like The Alliance from Firefly.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 11, 2009 - 4:09 am 136. Thomas:[If you think things are bad now, just wait until they've tried to "improve men".]
@133. Anonymous:
You said:
“You are obviously demented.
Fine.
I bet you Bolsheviks call everybody whose head is not in the Jocker’s **** is RACIST! NAZI! FASCIST! DEMENTED!
I am demented along with the millions of raging people at the town-hall meetings – am I correct? Just say so.
Did you read Dr. Ezekiel (bro of “Dead Fish)- essay on the “useful” and “useless” group of people: why don’t you read about the Auschwitz selection process instead of regurgitating chapters from Das Kapital?
Why don’t you look at the graph in Dr. Ezekiel’s study where he delineates those age groups which deserve most of the care and – watch the red curve descends after 55 – those who are the less worthy people.
Can you or can’t you comprehend a written document?
500 billion less for older people (Medicare cuts) and 500 billion more to the illegals and the healthy young…
@134. Chuck Pelto:
You are mistaken: the “death panel” according to Dr. Ezekiel’s graph starts at very early age akin to the ancient Greeks:
“Defective children were mercilessly put to death — thrown off a cliff in the Taygetos… (WIKI).
Aug 11, 2009 - 8:08 am 137. Boris:Only the old should follow the Auschwitz systems, the infants go for the Greeks….got it?
Chuckle says:
“For those who do not have to go to the mandatory Advanced Life Care Consultations”
I like how you pretend that my last few posts didn’t completely devastate your argument that these consultations are mandatory.
I mean you just ignored the last one where I showed you which law was being amended. I even bolded the words for you.
I will admit that ignoring it is your best strategy (apart form disappearing) considering how many embarrassing posts you’ve made on this thread.
Aug 11, 2009 - 9:58 am 138. Thomas:@137. Boris:
Я говорю на русском языке:
I explain to you in proletarian English:
500 billion less for Medicare = rationing for the old, because less money is available for cure. Someone at he “Office” – supposedly an other affirmative action employee – will decide who gets the steak and who gets the ax.
Regardless whether the guy goes or doesn’t go to the Consultation: Jimbo got the key to the Funeral Home.
No way out Tovarish Boris: Jimbo has my medical file, his computer – akin to Jocker’s teleprompter – will tell him what to do, NOT my doctor. If this is not the truth, then why they want to keep everybody’s digitized medical file at the “Office”?
This the gist of matter; – the rest is only sweetener and filler for the less imaginative folks.
Aug 11, 2009 - 11:44 am 139. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: I’ve Got….
…more important thinks to do than chase Boris’ untamed ornathoids without good cause. After all, he’s been proven a liar so many other times. After a while allowing some sociopath a ’shadow of a doubt’ for veracity gets to the point of becoming their fool. Which I will not do….
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 11, 2009 - 12:35 pm 140. Boris:[Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. -- Euripides]
Classic dodge when you’ve been proven wrong. But as I said, running away is your best strategy at this point anyway.
Aug 11, 2009 - 2:27 pm 141. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Speaking of ‘Clunkers’
Today, at the New Hampshire Town Hall meeting, Obama laid more eggs in a shorter period of time than Biden has in the last seven months.
I’ve only seen a few of them reported so far but they’re truly interesting:
[1] Private enterprise works better than government run entities. See THIS!
[2] He’s not FOR ‘Single-Payer’ plans. See THIS!
It’s was a bad day for Obama when he was forced to talk extempo, i.e., without the TOTUS.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 11, 2009 - 3:36 pm 142. Boris:P.S. Who is the ‘man-behind-the-curtain’ who feeds Obama his lines via the TOTUS. Maybe HE should be in the Oval Office…..
Chuckle is waring his Wonder Woman bracelets today.
Aug 12, 2009 - 7:52 am 143. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Heh
And beating the everlov’n you know what out of him.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Sep 1, 2009 - 4:44 pm 144. EmpFab:[Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.]
There was an interesting article on this subject (moral case for health care) in today’s American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/the_moral_case_for_health_care.html
Oct 20, 2009 - 10:15 am