PDA

View Full Version : Healthcare Bill Proves...


Whatfur
11-16-2009, 08:41 AM
...to be nothing but a political power grab. (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/67791-cms-house-health-bill-will-hike-costs-289b)


Hugh Hewitt's clarity:

"In A Sane World, This Report Would Kill Obamacare

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 12:34 AM

The chief actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services --a non-partisan oversight agency of the federal government-- has analyzed the Obamacare bill passed by the House. The Hill links to the full report and you should wade through it.

Key takeaways from the auditor's report:

*After 10 years under the new regime, 23 million Americans would still be without insurance;

*The bill cuts $570 billion from Medicare; and

*The bill does not stop the exploding cost of health care.

In a nutshell, Obamacare uses massive new tax hikes and massive cuts to Medicare to give health benefits to some of the currently uninsured, but does nothing to contain health costs. The Democrats spin on this devastating report cannot conceal that Obamacare fails every test of genuine "reform." It is being pushed solely for political reasons, primarily to expand the size and reach of government and with it the public sector employee unions that power so much of the Democratic Party machinery."

graz
11-16-2009, 11:55 AM
Key takeaways from the auditor's report:


*After 10 years under the new regime, 23 million Americans would still be without insurance;

Glad to see you recognize the value of single-payer Medicaid for all

*The bill cuts $570 billion from Medicare;
Getting rid of the fraud and waste will leave a surplus.

*The bill does not stop the exploding cost of health care
Right, the watered down bill (re:repub obstructionists and cowardly dems) does not go far enough and remove the middle-man insurance profiteers. Let's fight to change that.

Whatfur
11-16-2009, 12:23 PM
Glad to see you recognize the value of single-payer Medicaid for all


Getting rid of the fraud and waste will leave a surplus.


Right, the watered down bill (re:repub obstructionists and cowardly dems) does not go far enough and remove the middle-man insurance profiteers. Let's fight to change that.


Why bother responding when you can just add the bleating of sheep which would be less hollow?

[added] graz are you really handle's sock puppet?

nikkibong
11-16-2009, 12:40 PM
Why bother responding when you can just add the bleating of sheep which would be less hollow?


graz's point - which I agree with - is that the critique of the plan you are offering can be interpreted as a chiding of what the Republicans and "blue dogs" have done. In a sense, without realizing it, you are a forwarding a criticism of the health care plan from the left. So, I guess, welcome to the team.

It reminds me of the Republicans and "moderates" who did their darndest to water down the stimulus to the point of irrelevancy, and are now crowing - or, sorry, "bleating" - "the stimulus didn't work !"

Whatfur
11-16-2009, 01:31 PM
graz's point - which I agree with - is that the critique of the plan you are offering can be interpreted as a chiding of what the Republicans and "blue dogs" have done. In a sense, without realizing it, you are a forwarding a criticism of the health care plan from the left. So, I guess, welcome to the team.


First, read the whole study.

Your logic is a bit weak. Criticising the inability to reach a goal does not align anyone with the goal itself. But I will play the game if you wish... I, like many conservatives, personally would like to do something about some of the uninsured, but this study shows that YOUR bill does not do it. Why would YOU or I get behind it then? Spending over a trillion dollar's to insure 7 million people. My god man, wake the fuck up.

The fraud angle I won't bother addressing as the concept graz paints is itself a fraud.

Lastly, to already start blaming Republicans and Blue Dogs for the watering down of this Bill is a farce (as is your Stimulus analogy). Republicans were iced out of this bill and the Blue-Dogs caved. Or do you have some actual details you would like to share (On either?) You are just like the college football coach of a failing team that during the season stands behind his players but who when his job is on the line at the end of the season starts pointing at his under achieving quarterback, injuries, and then fires his defensive coordinator.

[added] Do liberals/Democrats ever own up to ANYTHING?

Whatfur
11-18-2009, 02:45 PM
...to get a failing grade from the Dean of Harvard Medical School. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539581994054014.html)

Whatfur
11-23-2009, 11:37 AM
New Low. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform)

Whatfur
11-27-2009, 03:55 PM
New Low. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform)

And along with that people have become increasingly satisfied with their current healthcare. (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Amid-ObamaCare-debate-Americans-increasingly-satisfied-with-US-health-care-76237882.html)

Wonderment
11-27-2009, 07:18 PM
Progressive Democrats wanted a Medicare-for-all single-payer plan. This American dream was destroyed by the right and the special interests.

The plan could have been quite simple -- immediately extend eligibility to the poor and near-poor (raise the ceiling) and gradually phase in Medicare over 30 years (or some time frame like that): 2015 (everyone 55 or above has Medicare) 2020 (all over 45) 2025 (all over 40), 2030 (all over 35) 2040 (everyone).

Whatfur
11-27-2009, 09:20 PM
Progressive Democrats wanted a Medicare-for-all single-payer plan. This American dream was destroyed by the right and the special interests.

The plan could have been quite simple -- immediately extend eligibility to the poor and near-poor (raise the ceiling) and gradually phase in Medicare over 30 years (or some time frame like that): 2015 (everyone 55 or above has Medicare) 2020 (all over 45) 2025 (all over 40), 2030 (all over 35) 2040 (everyone).

The American Dream is not built on a foundation of socialist programs nor buttressed by them. One would have to be both blind and delusional to believe that more than maybe a handful of all "Progressive Democrats" are working for increased Government involvement in our lives based on morality or charity. How many again got behind the Republican proposed ammendment to the House bill that would force the onto the Government insurance roles, again. This is a power grab and done so at a very inopportune time and undemocratic way.

This President and HIS Congress were given a huge opportunity to reform healthcare in ways that would be the envy of the world. To have been (to be?) successful they needed to indeed follow the President's own allusion to bipartisanship and transparent, prudent deliberation. Instead, he, his congress, you and yours chose a path of deceit, heavy-handedness, and partisan bigotry and hence has reaped what was sown. To blame anyone but those running the show is classic projection.

graz
11-27-2009, 09:52 PM
This President and HIS Congress were given a huge opportunity to reform healthcare in ways that would be the envy of the world.


He (whatfur) sometimes likes to point out "oddities", but I find it particularly odd that someone who attempts to project the image of a reasonable, thoughtful, educated, well-read man of the world, should be such a sucker for, and purveyor of, the most extreme health-industrial propaganda. This just doesn't add up.
I could be wrong, but I am of the (naive?) opinion that someone possessing such qualities might be more inclined to formulate their own views through the use of independent critical thinking


Whatfur:Instead, he, his congress, you and yours chose a path of deceit, heavy-handedness, and partisan bigotry and hence has reaped what was sown. To blame anyone but those running the show is classic projection.
Ha-haa (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo&feature=related)


Because you and yours provided?
... the Republican proposed ammendment to the House bill that would force the onto the Government insurance roles, again.

Whatfur
11-27-2009, 09:59 PM
graz, thank you for everything you add here...

Ha-haa

Because you and yours provided?

Whatfur
11-27-2009, 10:08 PM
...
This President and HIS Congress were given a huge opportunity to reform healthcare in ways that would be the envy of the world. To have been (to be?) successful they needed to indeed follow the President's own allusion to bipartisanship and transparent, prudent deliberation. Instead, he, his congress, you and yours chose a path of deceit, heavy-handedness, and partisan bigotry and hence has reaped what was sown. To blame anyone but those running the show is classic projection.

Wow...a link from heaven? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/25/AR2009112503607.html)

graz
11-27-2009, 10:11 PM
graz, thank you for everything you add here...

You're welcome.
You've made strides lately towards civility... good on you.
But the self-regard and the lame-ass 'fur tales are a joke, right?

Please let us know when you'll consider posting original or thought provoking ideas... or simply attempting civil conversation with posters that reject your b.s.

Whatfur
11-27-2009, 10:21 PM
Thought provoking?...and am I to use yourself as an example of that?...not to be confused with your most recent "example of that" (see above). Oh and when does your civility start? If memory serves you were insulting me from day 1 here. Care to go down memory lane?

graz
11-27-2009, 10:32 PM
Thought provoking?...and am I to use yourself as an example of that?...not to be confused with your most recent "example of that" (see above). Oh and when does your civility start? Care to go down memory lane?

...Off to eat a wild turkey I got with my bow. Yum Yum.



Bring it on, wild turkey killer! Or is that death by Wild Turkey... of your memory cells... and cognitive functions? What else would explain your apparent lack of self-awareness regarding other's estimation of you?

If memory serves you were insulting me from day 1 here.
No it doesn't serve you well. Your victim/b.s. purveyor routine has been failing since the start. That selective memory has also prevented you from coming clean about the refuse that you've strewn since day 1. Man up, turkey. Or continue slathering denial and disrespect as if it were gravy, mashed potatoes and cranberry relish... mmm... tasty.

Whatfur
11-27-2009, 10:37 PM
Bring it on, wild turkey killer! Or is that death by Wild Turkey... of your memory cells... and cognitive functions? What else would explain your apparent lack of self-awareness regarding other's estimation of you?

Bye graz.

graz
11-27-2009, 10:42 PM
Bye graz.

Good night, good night! Parting is such sweet sorrow,
That I shall say good night till it be morrow.

Whatfur
11-28-2009, 08:48 PM
...to be a little more costly than advertised. (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/11/27/obamacares-cost-could-top-6-trillion/)

Whatfur
12-04-2009, 12:58 PM
... the AARP to be a bunch of hypocrites. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pz78OxSDj8g)

graz
12-04-2009, 01:10 PM
... the AARP to be a bunch of hypocrites. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pz78OxSDj8g)

Re: Healthcare Bill Proves... (http://trueslant.com/rickungar/2009/12/01/suddenly-senile-–-mccain-fakes-concern-for-medicare-beneficiaries/)

Get off my lawn (http://wonkette.com/412467/john-mccain-whines-about-old-people-for-several-minutes)

bjkeefe
12-04-2009, 03:05 PM
Re: Healthcare Bill Proves... (http://trueslant.com/rickungar/2009/12/01/suddenly-senile-–-mccain-fakes-concern-for-medicare-beneficiaries/)

Get off my lawn (http://wonkette.com/412467/john-mccain-whines-about-old-people-for-several-minutes)

Awesome response(s).

graz
12-04-2009, 03:15 PM
Thanks. I'm just frustrated... but less circumspect than Ezra, if more so than 'fur.

Although he makes a point worth considering (Ezra, of course):

The U.S. Congress is hostile not only to liberal power, but also to conservative power, and for that matter, to majority governance. The rules trump the election, trump the organizing, trump the 50-plus senators in support of the public option, trump all of it. Liberals will never have 70 votes in the Senate, and, in a useful symmetry for the purposes of coalition building, nor will conservatives, and nor, it seems, will people who want to make hard decisions to solve pressing problems. The story of the public option -- and of the preservation of employer-based health care, and the insufficient cost controls, and the protection of providers, and all the rest -- isn't just a story for liberals. It's a story about our system of governance and its inability to respond to problems even when you stack the deck in change's favor.



http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/draft.html

bjkeefe
12-04-2009, 03:29 PM
Thanks. I'm just frustrated... but less circumspect than Ezra, if more so than 'fur.

Although he makes a point worth considering (Ezra, of course):



http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/draft.html

Yeah, that filibuster and the related problem, the hold, both have to be addressed. (Yglesias was calling for this while the Reps were last still in power, IIRC.) I don't know how we're ever going to get the Senate to go along with it, though. Possibly getting them to make the rule changes, but not have them take effect until a few years down the road, so it won't seem like the current majority if trying to change things midstream.

Whatfur
12-04-2009, 05:27 PM
...that the liberals are willing to eat their own parents and grandparents for a few illegal alien votes. (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/cannibalizing_america.html)

handle
12-04-2009, 06:13 PM
...that the liberals are willing to eat their own parents and grandparents for a few illegal alien votes. (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/cannibalizing_america.html)

I like the picture at the top of the page, toilets were sure different back in Uncle Sam's day....

Isn't this wingnut fear mongering blog basically saying "get your government hands off my medicare"? How would the douche that wrote it, and for that matter nutfur* have characterized medicare legislation back when the cannibal liberals first proposed it, And shoved it down their insanely partisan gullets?
Let's take a little stroll down documented history lane:

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MEDICARE PROGRAM

1945 Harry Truman sends a message to Congress asking for
legislation establishing a national health insurance plan.

Two decades of debate ensue, with opponents warning of the
dangers of "socialized medicine."

By the end of Truman's administration, he had backed off
from a plan for universal coverage, but administrators in
the Social Security system and others had begun to focus
on the idea of a program aimed at insuring Social Security
beneficiaries.

July 30, 1965 Medicare and its companion program Medicaid, (which
insures indigent recipients), are signed into law by
President Lyndon Johnson as part of his "Great Society."

Ex-president Truman is the first to enroll in Medicare.

Medicare Part B premium is $3 per month.


*as in "what's that fur growing on my nuts, mediocre health care cannibal doctor?"

Whatfur
12-04-2009, 06:35 PM
Its been interesting listening to the Hugh Hewitt show on my drive home this week as nightly he has had significant Obamacare advocates there to debate, discuss and explain their views. The following article talks of these discussions, provides their transcripts, and points out the numerous shortcomings in the expert testimony. That is not to say that they were not compelling at times too. Give it a read. (http://townhall.com/columnists/HughHewitt/2009/12/04/gambling_with_american_medicine)

handle
12-04-2009, 06:50 PM
And while I'm wasting my time... would it have killed him to work in a couple of more of the crack-pot talking point issues into the blog post? Like atheist homosexual death squads will confiscate your guns so only the big evil government can pull your plug?

This is my last offer: Do I have to write this shit for you? Wake up! Be a wingnut, not a stupid-lazynut!

Wingnut think tank heads up (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/05/business/economy/05jobs.html?hp): It's time to dust off the old "The economy was turning around under Bush anyway, so the new guy had nothing to do with the recovery" crap from 1994.

handle
12-04-2009, 07:38 PM
Its been interesting listening to the Hugh Hewitt show on my drive home this week as nightly he has had significant Obamacare advocates there to debate, discuss and explain their views. The following article talks of these discussions, provides their transcripts, and points out the numerous shortcomings in the expert testimony. That is not to say that they were not compelling at times too. Give it a read. (http://townhall.com/columnists/HughHewitt/2009/12/04/gambling_with_american_medicine)

Nothing to back up your previous assertion that "the liberals are willing to eat their own parents and grandparents for a few illegal alien votes"?

Please thank whoever helped you with the tone of your post. Unfortunately, your long history of trying to write condescending attacks from the deepest ideological troughs, tends to undermine any attempt to "rise above" your previous level of discourse, let alone that of anyone else.
Nice try though.... C-

handle
12-04-2009, 07:53 PM
doink

Whatfur
12-04-2009, 08:46 PM
...to need Peyton Manning to do its commercials. (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34652)

handle
12-04-2009, 09:47 PM
A fine example of political rickrolling folks!

A 2006 study showed 89% of insured Americans satisfied with our medical care (and a majority of the uninsured also satisfied with their care.)

That first part describes me, but it doesn't mean I don't give a fuck about anybody else.
The uninsured get care in ER's and we all pay for it, I'd be happy too!

kezboard
12-04-2009, 10:40 PM
Well, I guess that proves that our system is great and we don't need reform at all.

Whatfur
12-05-2009, 12:28 PM
Well, I guess that proves that our system is great and we don't need reform at all.

Is that what you got out of it? On the flip side I could say...so we are spending a trillion dollars while turning an industry on its head to accommodate between 7-30 million unisured Americans...I guess that proves this bill is the best thing since Jefferson penned the Declaration.

handle
12-05-2009, 04:01 PM
Is that what you got out of it? On the flip side I could say...so we are spending a trillion dollars while turning an industry on its head to accommodate between 7-30 million unisured Americans...I guess that proves this bill is the best thing since Jefferson penned the Declaration.

Mr. kneejerk conservative, sorry libertarian since the great defeat of '08, is right. Better we should spend that money occupying third world countries to feed our oil addiction, making him and his oil buddies even richer than they already are, than saving our overall health and well being.
Is it me or does anyone else see that these souless pigs couldn't reel in their boundless greed even if they broke the bank accounts of every last American (anybody remember last October?).

Let me break it down folks.. the wingnuts and their water boy Buttfur, would rather spend our money on killing foreigners, and putting our kids in harms way, than healing Americans.

Make no mistake, the money is going to get spent either way, regardless of who is pulling the strings.. GW Bush ran up the biggest deficit in history, so... frugal? they are not.

handle
12-05-2009, 04:07 PM
Is that what you got out of it? On the flip side I could say...so we are spending a trillion dollars while turning an industry on its head to accommodate between 7-30 million unisured Americans...I guess that proves this bill is the best thing since Jefferson penned the Declaration.

I did the bolding.
Sorry for the multiple posts but I just noticed how he comes right out and reveals his sympathies for the insurance lobby. Uh, sorry, the real Americans.

Whatfur
12-05-2009, 05:59 PM
...that President Obama is trying to make hay while grasping at straw(s). (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-Health-care-reform-is-our-jobs-program-78594477.html)

handle
12-06-2009, 09:01 PM
...that President Obama is trying to make hay while grasping at straw(s). (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-Health-care-reform-is-our-jobs-program-78594477.html)

What ever happened to this?: (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0709/Health_reform_foes_plan_Obamas_Waterloo.html)

"If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,"

Whatfur
12-06-2009, 09:13 PM
...that it is not very compelling but this sure is. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYW2nAH_jQQ)

handle
12-06-2009, 11:05 PM
...that it is not very compelling but this sure is. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYW2nAH_jQQ)

whatever happened to this:
handle...find a quiet place...sit erect on the edge of a chair...examine your breath...(you might want to chew a Certs first)...pretend Fur does not exist...pretend BHtv does not exist...pretend that is not the same thing...pretend people don't find it strange that you only exist to follow Fur around...pretend you have something to offer...now hold your breath...hold...hold...keep holding...bye handle this is the last response you will ever get from me...peace friend

Whatfur
12-06-2009, 11:59 PM
...that it is not very compelling but this sure is. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYW2nAH_jQQ)

LOL. How pathetic is that? Let me clarify...

Healthcare Bill Proves...that it is not very compelling, but this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYW2nAH_jQQ) sure is.

"Doh!"

bjkeefe
12-07-2009, 12:09 AM
LOL. How pathetic is that?

Very. So is repeating the exact same words.

Whatfur
12-09-2009, 11:09 PM
...to be not about reform at all. (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/12/09/fehbp-plan-is-no-moderate-compromise/)


***Note to anyone who thinks I might be responding to them for some arcane reason...please note how the verbage follows from the title. Feel free to pretend that it is a response to you however... as the poster gets a kick out of it.

graz
12-09-2009, 11:20 PM
...to be not about reform at all. (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/12/09/fehbp-plan-is-no-moderate-compromise/)


***Note to anyone who thinks I might be responding to them for some arcane reason...please note how the verbage follows from the title. Feel free to pretend that it is a response to you however... as the poster gets a kick out of it.

verbiage |ˈvərbē-ij|
noun
speech or writing that uses too many words or excessively technical expressions.
ORIGIN early 18th cent.: from French, from obsolete verbeier ‘to chatter,’ from verbe ‘word’ (see verb ).

Whereas verbage rhymes with and in this case is garbage.

Oh yeah... care to detail what the final bill will contain?

Whatfur
12-09-2009, 11:35 PM
Whereas verbage rhymes with and in this case is garbage.

...

Comma usage tip: how to set off parenthetical elements...

Whereas verbage rhymes with and in this case is garbage. [INCORRECT]

Whereas verbage rhymes with, and in this case is, garbage. [CORRECT]

.

handle
12-10-2009, 12:58 AM
...to be not about reform at all. (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/12/09/fehbp-plan-is-no-moderate-compromise/)


***Note to anyone who thinks I might be responding to them for some arcane reason...please note how the verbage follows from the title. Feel free to pretend that it is a response to you however... as the poster gets a kick out of it.

This is as confusing as that weird Carly Simon track:
"You're so vain I bet you think this song is about you" well it was wasn't it?

handle
12-10-2009, 01:15 AM
Oh I get it! No Dipshitfur! I was complaining about the stupid Orr and the hot water or whatever that shit was supposed to be.... the title of this thread is fine!
But my critique was in the Orr thread so how you ever confused the two... are you starting your weekend early again?

Whatfur
12-10-2009, 10:03 AM
...to not be approved by "We the People". (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1403)

Whatfur
12-15-2009, 01:10 PM
...to be his way or the no way. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30601.html)