Wh Calls Health Care Anger 'manufactured'

[CMJ]

Please, let's leave the Republican Jesus (or should I say "rock star") out of this.

I actually don't have a HUGE problem with Reagan's massive deficit spending. The economy needed a huge boost to try and get out of the Carter recession(which was worse in many ways than this current downturn). Sometimes you gotta do some creative stuff to get the gears of industry rolling again if a financial freefall is occuring. Obviously no one likes the deficits(or debt) we keep racking up, but the GOP can't exactly take the high road on this as their modern day champion used a similar tack to get out of a major economic meltdown a generation ago.

I don't really have a dog in the fight. I would probably be accused of being a liberal by many on this board, but you more than anyone, know how many times we talked politics and I took the conservative side often.

Or maybe that's just 'cause we both like to debate for the hell of it?

Edited August 8, 2009 by CMJ

[HoustonEagle]

Most studies I have seen do not support that statement.

Furthermore, just about every friend/acquaintance overseas that I have(in countries ranging from Norway to Australia) strongly advocates a National Health care plan. Honestly, I'm a bit dubious about one here for now(let's try to get Medicare and Medicaid solvent first - I think projections have them broke inside of 20 years), but I do think we should have some sort of nationalized plan eventually. Hopefully within a generation.

I may as well throw in my anecdotal evidence. I have several coworkers in my office from the UK, 3 with-in spitting distance. To a man they have nothing bad to say about the health care system. Never had any problems with lines or not receiving care.

[UNTflyer]

... the GOP can't exactly take the high road on this as their modern day champion used a similar tack to get out of a major economic meltdown a generation ago.

Reagan's deficits were caused by massive tax cuts, which helped spur investment causing the longest peacetime expansion that Clinton loved to take credit for.

From Reagan cutting taxes until the Dot.com Bust, we had one mild two-quarter recession at the end of '90, followed by two nonsecutive negative growth quarters in 2001.

To say that deficits caused the current recession is just simply wrong. The main factor in this recession was the financial market failure last September which would have happened whether we had a balanced budget or not.

[CMJ]

Reagan's deficits were caused by massive tax cuts, which helped spur investment causing the longest peacetime expansion that Clinton loved to take credit for.

From Reagan cutting taxes until the Dot.com Bust, we had one mild two-quarter recession at the end of '90, followed by two nonsecutive negative growth quarters in 2001.

To say that deficits caused the current recession is just simply wrong. The main factor in this recession was the financial market failure last September which would have happened whether we had a balanced budget or not.

I didn't say the deficits caused the recession? I thought I said something along the lines of - sometimes you need (massive)deficit spending to try and get out of an economic downturn. While Reagan did cut some programs, spending as a whole went up(mostly military related) - but hey it worked.

[UNTflyer]

I didn't say the deficits caused the recession?

That was a general statement, not directed at you.

[HoustonEagle]

Read what I said again... and think it over.

Deficit in 2008 was just over $400B.

The latest deficit number is $1.3 trillion. That's a little more than triple, but when the numbers are finally in you can bet it will be quadrupled.

[/quote

I realize you are fighting for your team but why not preface your stats with some of the back story? The government has been in crisis mode since back into the end of Bush's reign. If Republicans were in power now they most certainly would have passed a stimulus as well and while the structure of that stimulus would have been different the debt would have been just as real. The same is true with the bailouts. The current polarization of America truly scares me. Much like most everything in life the answers are often in the middle and failure to see that will only limit a person. I am with the Democrats right now but by no means do I agree with every platform of the party. (I will save you the discussion of segmented demographics and why that makes voting Democrat a tougher choice) I can also easily say that one day I will vote more with the Republicans again. American political preference has always swung on a pendulum and it is one major reason why we continue to be the greatest most well run nation in the world. I just worry about the increased amplitude of these swings due to "team" politics.

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

I realize you are fighting for your team but why not preface your stats with some of the back story? The government has been in crisis mode since back into the end of Bush's reign. If Republicans were in power now they most certainly would have passed a stimulus as well and while the structure of that stimulus would have been different the debt would have been just as real. The same is true with the bailouts. The current polarization of America truly scares me. Much like most everything in life the answers are often in the middle and failure to see that will only limit a person. I am with the Democrats right now but by no means do I agree with every platform of the party. (I will save you the discussion of segmented demographics and why that makes voting Democrat a tougher choice) I can also easily say that one day I will vote more with the Republicans again. American political preference has always swung on a pendulum and it is one major reason why we continue to be the greatest most well run nation in the world. I just worry about the increased amplitude of these swings due to "team" politics.

Great point, especially on the polarization of politics in America. Do you think a the emergence of a 3rd party (either the Libertarian or another that pulls in both moderate R's and D's) would help combat this?

[CMJ]

Great point, especially on the polarization of politics in America. Do you think a the emergence of a 3rd party (either the Libertarian or another that pulls in both moderate R's and D's) would help combat this?

Because of the Electoral College, I don't believe a 3rd party will ever be viable for more than 1 or 2 election cycles(ie a Perot type run).

[UNTflyer]

I realize you are fighting for your team but why not preface your stats with some of the back story? The government has been in crisis mode since back into the end of Bush's reign.

First, I'm fighting for my country, not my team. The debt that Obama is proposing will crush the dollar.

Second, the government is not the economy. The economy is in a crisis, not the government. Therefore, an economically sound solution is required - not a bigger government that is trying to buy votes with social programs.

Cut taxes, make the "Bad Bank" to buy bad mortgages to free up the financial markets, and keep hands off the greatest health care system in the world.

[UNT90]

I may as well throw in my anecdotal evidence. I have several coworkers in my office from the UK, 3 with-in spitting distance. To a man they have nothing bad to say about the health care system. Never had any problems with lines or not receiving care.

How old are they? Have they had any health problems? Did they discuss their health problems with you?

Obviously, if these guys are in their 20's or 30's and healthy, I'm sure they would have no problems with socialized health care, because they only thing they would have used it for would be an annual check up scheduled 6 months in advance.

More details, please.

I can tell you that I have a fiend who lives in Canada who had to wait 5 months for major knee surgery. He seriously considered driving to the states to have surgery because he worked a physically demanding job, but decide to live with the pain for 5 months. It was not an easy time. He was in his 40s and otherwise healthy.

[GreenBat]

I challenge FFR, Flyer, Kram, EE and any other member of the anti-Obama movement to watch the attached link from Friday's Rachel Maddow show and find any non-FACT in Frank Schaeffer's answers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E1SLJgATvM

Edited August 8, 2009 by GreenBat

[UNTflyer]

I challenge FFR, Flyer, Kram, EE and any other member of the anti-Obama movement to watch the attached link from Friday's Rachel Maddow show and find any non-FACT in Frank Schaeffer's answers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E1SLJgATvM

Oh, where to begin...

With the very first question and answer: calling someone a Nazi is NOT an implicit call for violence. Nobody is sending coded messages by participating in the political process. And then he finishes his answer that "these calls are incredibly irresponsible." There IS NO CALL FOR VIOLENCE, and I would point out that the only ones being violent at these meetings are union thugs beating up protestors.

THEN, he goes on to compare concerned citizens to "Brown Shirts of the 1930s." Is he not, in the same response, guilty of the same thing he is accusing citizens of? And I love the caption that says "Limbaugh still pushing Nazi rhetoric."

He called them an "angry, small group of white people" while the pictures showed people of all races protesting against the health care plan.

So... with the first 3 minutes full of nothing but lies, rhetoric, and fear-mongering, I declare victory in your inane little challenge.

Edited August 8, 2009 by UNTflyer

[FirefightnRick]

I challenge FFR, Flyer, Kram, EE and any other member of the anti-Obama movement to watch the attached link from Friday's Rachel Maddow show and find any non-FACT in Frank Schaeffer's answers.<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E1SLJgATvM" target="_blank">

</a>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E1SLJgATvM

Good grief Brett, Rachell Madcow? You understand don't you, that Madcow is trying to paint the people in the video doing the shoving out the door as the "Violent Right Wingers" right?

How rediculous is this interview, when at the same time the guy is talking about violent religious zealots they're showing video of protestors who attended the Kathy Castor Ybor City Town Hall getting assaulted and forcefully shoved out by SEIU union strongarms, who by the way, stands on the same side that Madcow supports. One of SEIU's leaders, Andy Stern has been qouted about their tactics: “We prefer to use the power of persuasion, but if that doesn’t work we use the persuasion of power.”

Rick

Edited August 8, 2009 by FirefightnRick

[KRAM1]

What FFR and Flyer said...I'm out of town and saw this on a hotel computer...drinking too much beer to spend more time on this, but Brett...you have to be kidding me. The first part of the link is just plain bad info...some would say lies...get real.

And to Silver Eagle and his AARP "crap"...I too got that from AARP...but, unlike Silver Eagle, I understand why AARP is taking the position they are...in recent years AARP's management has been quite open in supporting "health care reform" and has moved left a good bit in its leadership and thinking. So, while reading AARP's "stuff" and their position, you have to understand that AARP is not "fair and balanced" in their inner circle and leadership. Not saying they are "liberal nut cases" at all...just understand they are working on the left side of the equation.

Believe what you want...socialized medicine, hower, is BAD. The federal gov't has never run such a program in a efficient manner...never will...it is not the nature of gov't to do so...it will cost more, provide fewer benefits and lead to rationing of care. Bank on that...go for it if you will, but understand what you want...and be VERY careful...you might just get it.

I, too, have friends from England...one has moved here while family remains in England...parents are in the late 60's-early 70's and they HATE their socialized medical care...long lines, refused care, refused procedures, higher and higher taxes, etc. The younger one's in the family...early 30's and below do not have as much of an issue with the sytem...wonder why? They seldom use it! Go figure.

[GreenBat]

As I will continue to ask to you conservative non-thinkers. Is there a problem? If you believe the answer is Yes. Then present a better plan to fix it than what has been presented. If you believe the answer is no, then bury your head back in the sand and let the other Right-Wing jack-booted thugs continue to destroy America.

[UNTflyer]

As I will continue to ask to you conservative non-thinkers. Is there a problem? If you believe the answer is Yes. Then present a better plan to fix it than what has been presented. If you believe the answer is no, then bury your head back in the sand and let the other Right-Wing jack-booted thugs continue to destroy America.

Sure, there's a problem. The problem is that too many Americans believe they are entitled to services the rest of us have to pay for, and the answer is to tell them to suck it up, get a job, pay your own way, and if you can't you can line up at the Medicaid office.

[EagleD]

Put some 'tussin on it.

[GreenBat]

Sure, there's a problem. The problem is that too many Americans believe they are entitled to services the rest of us have to pay for, and the answer is to tell them to suck it up, get a job, pay your own way, and if you can't you can line up at the Medicaid office.

What would you do if you had a life-threatening illness and your medical bill bankrupt you and your insurance was terminated?

That is what this is about. This is not about trying to kill old people, which the suggested plan does not even do. The plan suggest that EVERY, again I say EVERY person has a living will and that part of the plan was suggested by TWO Rebuplicans.

[eulesseagle]

Our current health care does not need to be under federal control not unless one feels that the government should micromanage every aspect of our lives. This is still, somewhat, a capitalistic society. Anyone who needs medical care can receive medical care.....even illegals. The health care bill is just another in a series of legislations to tax....tax....tax. Example: Social Security. Does anyone really think all the tax that is taken out of our paychecks really goes into the Social Security? If you do then why does Congress says it is broke.....you know like no money in the pot. Example: Gasoline tax to fix the highways. Same as above. The list continues. Where does that money go?

Someone mentioned NAZI. National "SOCIALIST" Party. If one wants to draw comparisons to the 1930s look what Hitler's party accomplished. Nationalized health care, nationalized the auto industry, their version of the Cap and Trade (they really are big on clean air and the environment), nationalized the banks and nationalized the media, the blaming of factions of the conservative party as radical just to name five. The government has not, yet, nationalized the media but I would believe there is a push to do so under the guize of the "Hush Rush" bill. Aw, Stalin and Mao did the same thing.

Concerning the health care bill there are some interesting aspects of the bill.

1. All doctors will make the same.

2. There will be limited care more so directed at the young workers and to a lesser degree the older.

3. There will be "end of life" counseling every few years after one reaches a certain age.

4. If a doctor does not fix your problem right the first time the chances of you getting a second appointment will almost be moot. Something to do with the sucess rate of doctor/patient percentages that is government mandated.

5. No choice of doctors....the government will assign you one.

....got this from a Missouri television host who has actually read the health care bill and had a copy with some of the disturbing items highlighted a couple of days ago.

6. All illegals ----still---- receive all benefits of health care.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&...=5&t=903496

http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2009/07/27...5-the-truth.htm

The bill is dangerous and IS NOT needed in a free democratic society.

of course there will be some on this board who will do their usual ad hominum which equates to being intellectually bankrupt because they actually have no opinion of discourse and can not defend their viewpoint. i think this is so because it is hard to argue against the truth.

ee

Edited August 8, 2009 by eulesseagle

[UNTflyer]

What would you do if you had a life-threatening illness and your medical bill bankrupt you and your insurance was terminated?

What would you do if this happened?

Huh?? What would you do???

What's with this hypothetical terminated insurance? If I got cancer, it's not a pre-existing condition and it's covered. We had a woman at my company who got breast cancer and she had no problems with the insurance. And if my insurance company jerked me around, I call my lawyer.

Any unpaid portion would be paid by me, and if that means I pay $50 a month for the rest of my now extended life, then so be it. I would never file bankruptcy.

[GreenBat]

You are right! Everything is just Peachy-F'n-Keen and needs to stay the way it is.

[UNT90]

Love the thoughtful, logical responses in this thread. ***SARCASM***

Edited August 8, 2009 by UNT90

[CMJ]

Love the thoughtful, logical responses in this thread. ***SARCASM***

I sorta tried?

I think it's about time to stop these threads till around April.

[TheTastyGreek]

Put some 'tussin on it.

And if we run out... Just put some water in the bottle... SHAKE IT UP!!!

[HoustonEagle]

Our current health care does not need to be under federal control not unless one feels that the government should micromanage every aspect of our lives. This is still, somewhat, a capitalistic society. Anyone who needs medical care can receive medical care.....even illegals. The health care bill is just another in a series of legislations to tax....tax....tax. Example: Social Security. Does anyone really think all the tax that is taken out of our paychecks really goes into the Social Security? If you do then why does Congress says it is broke.....you know like no money in the pot. Example: Gasoline tax to fix the highways. Same as above. The list continues. Where does that money go?

Someone mentioned NAZI. National "SOCIALIST" Party. If one wants to draw comparisons to the 1930s look what Hitler's party accomplished. Nationalized health care, nationalized the auto industry, their version of the Cap and Trade (they really are big on clean air and the environment), nationalized the banks and nationalized the media, the blaming of factions of the conservative party as radical just to name five. The government has not, yet, nationalized the media but I would believe there is a push to do so under the guize of the "Hush Rush" bill. Aw, Stalin and Mao did the same thing.

Concerning the health care bill there are some interesting aspects of the bill.

1. All doctors will make the same.

2. There will be limited care more so directed at the young workers and to a lesser degree the older.

3. There will be "end of life" counseling every few years after one reaches a certain age.

4. If a doctor does not fix your problem right the first time the chances of you getting a second appointment will almost be moot. Something to do with the sucess rate of doctor/patient percentages that is government mandated.

5. No choice of doctors....the government will assign you one.

....got this from a Missouri television host who has actually read the health care bill and had a copy with some of the disturbing items highlighted a couple of days ago.

6. All illegals ----still---- receive all benefits of health care.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2009/07/27...5-the-truth.htm

The bill is dangerous and IS NOT needed in a free democratic society.

of course there will be some on this board who will do their usual ad hominum which equates to being intellectually bankrupt because they actually have no opinion of discourse and can not defend their viewpoint. i think this is so because it is hard to argue against the truth.

ee

Would you mind pointing me to the reference material where you got these facts regarding the current health care "Bill"? I would love to read and make an educated decision but I am having trouble finding this in print. Please help oh enlightened one.

Did you even read the link that you posted? It is debunking the internet rumor that there will be mandated end of life counseling sessions. The plan will simply pay for that counseling session once every five years if you so choose to participate.

From the link you posted to support your well researched argument.

"2. Text of pp. 425-430 (Section 1233) of the actual health care bill, which, as far as I can tell after wading through several pages of legalese, merely amends Title 18 of the Social Security Act to stipulate that Medicare will pay for — not mandate — "advance care planning consultations" between individuals and physicians every five years, during which a spectrum of end-of-life options can be explained and discussed so said individuals can knowledgeably choose their own treatment preferences in advance:"

Also,

ad hominum is spelled "Ad hominem" Not something I would generally point out in someones post but it is rare for someone to misspell a word that they are incorrectly using while touting their intellectual superiority. For future reference you must first be making a fact based argument yourself. Then, when I attack it's validity because you have a DWI, ad hominem!

I wish you luck on future posting. One day I only hope that I can snatch the pebble from your hand.

Oh. I almost forgot. Yes Nazis are bad. Have a good day.

Edited August 8, 2009 by HoustonEagle