Whose Medical Decisions?
No ObaMao
fast that no one has time to read it would have provoked public
outrage. But now, this has been attempted twice in the first 6 months
of a new administration.
The fact that they got away with it before, with the "stimulus" bill,
may have led them to believe that they could get away with it again.
But the first bill simply spent hundreds of billions of dollars. The
current "health care" bill threatens to take life-and-death decisions
out of the hands of individuals and their doctors, transferring those
decisions to Washington bureaucrats.
People are taking that personally-- as they should. Your life and
death, and that of your loved ones, is as personal as it gets.
The mainstream media are again circling the wagons to protect Barack
Obama, but this time it may not work. One of those front-page
editorials disguised as a news article in the New York Times begins:
"The stubborn yet false rumor that President Obama's health care
proposals would create government-sponsored 'death panels' to decide
which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in
recent weeks."
Nowhere? Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is "Special Advisor for Health Policy"
for the Obama administration. That's nowhere? He is also co-author of
an article on Americans' "over-utilization" of medical care in the
June 18, 2008 issue of the Journal of the American Medical
Association. Is that nowhere?
Dr. Emanuel's article points out that Americans do not visit doctors
or go into hospitals more than people in other industrialized
countries. In fact we go to both places less often than people do in
those other countries, which include countries with government-
controlled medical care.
As the article points out, "It is more costly care, rather than high
volume, that accounts for higher expenditures in the United States."
There are more Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) devices per capita in
the United States, more coronary bypass operations and Americans use
more new pharmaceutical drugs created within the past 5 years.
Americans also have more of what the article calls "amenities" with
their medical care. "Hospital rooms in the United States offer more
privacy, comfort and auxiliary services than do hospital rooms in most
other countries."
In other words, it is not quantity but quality that is different-- and
more expensive-- about American medical care. This is what Dr.
Emanuel's "over-utilization" consists of.
At one time, it would have been none of Dr. Emanuel's business if your
physician prescribed the latest medications for you, rather than the
cheaper and obsolete medications they replaced. It would have been
none of his business if you preferred to have a nice hospital room
with "amenities" rather than being in an unsanitary ward with
inadequate nursing care, as under the National Health Service in
Britain.
The involvement of government gives Dr. Emanuel the leverage to
condemn other Americans' choices-- and a larger involvement of
government will give him the power to force both doctors and patients
to change their choices.
As for a "death panel," no politician would ever use that phrase when
trying to get a piece of legislation passed. "End of life" care under
the "guidance" of "some independent group" sounds so much nicer-- and
these are the terms President Obama used in an interview with the New
York Times back on April 14th.
He said, "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives
are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care
bill out there." He added: "It is very difficult to imagine the
country making those decisions just through the normal political
channels. That is why you have to have some independent group that can
give you guidance."
But when you select people like Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel to give
"independent" guidance, you have already chosen a policy through your
choice of advisors, who simply provide political cover. The net result
can be exactly the same as if those providing that guidance were
openly called "death panels."
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/18/whose_medical_decisions?page=full
Whose Medical Decisions? Part II
When famed bank robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, he
said: "Because that's where the money is."
For the same reason, it is as predictable as the sunrise that medical
care for the elderly will be cut back under a government-controlled
medical system. Because that's where the money is.
My experience is probably not very different from that of many other
people in their seventies. My medical expenses in the past year have
been more than in the first 40 years of my life-- and I did not spend
one night in a hospital all last year or go to an emergency room even
once.
Just the ordinary medical expenses of keeping an old geezer going
along in good health are high. Throw in a medical emergency or two and
the costs go through the roof.
So long as my insurance company and I are paying for it, it is nobody
else's business what my medical expenses are. But once the government
is involved, everything is their business.
It is not just a question of what the government will pay for. The
logic of their collectivist thinking-- and the actual practice in some
other countries with government-controlled health care-- is that you
cannot even pay for some medical treatments with your own money, if
the powers that be decide that "society" cannot let its resources be
used that way, or that it would not be "social justice" for some
people to have medical treatments that others cannot get, just because
some people "happen to have money."
The medical care stampede is about much more than medical care,
important as that is. It is part of a whole mindset of many on the
left who have never reconciled themselves to an economic system in
which how much people can withdraw from the resources of the nation
depends on how much they have contributed to those resources.
Despite the cleverness of phrases about people who "happen to have
money," very few people just happen to have money. Most people earned
their money by supplying other people with goods or services that
those people were willing to pay for.
Since it is their own money that they have earned, these people feel
free to spend it to give their 80-year-old grandmother another year or
two of life, or to pay for a hip replacement operation for their mom
or dad, even If some medical "ethicist" might say that the resources
of "society" would be better used to allow some 20-year-old to talk
over his angst with a shrink.
Barack Obama has talked about the high costs of taking care of elderly
or chronically ill patients in terms of "society making those
decisions." But a world in which individuals make their own trade-offs
with their own money is fundamentally different from a world where
third parties take those decisions out of their hands and impose their
own notions of what is best for "society."
Calling these arbitrary notions "ethics" doesn't change anything,
however effective it may be as political spin.
More is at stake than the outcomes of medical decisions, extremely
important as those are. What is also at stake is freedom and the
dignity of individuals who do not live their lives as supplicants of
puffed-up power holders who are spending the money taken from them in
taxes.
One of the many phony arguments for government-controlled medical care
is that Americans do not have any longer life expectancy than in other
countries, despite much higher medical expenditures.
This argument is phony because longevity depends on health-- and
"health care" and "medical care" are not the same, no matter how many
times the two are confused in the media or in politics. Health care
includes things that doctor cannot do much about.
Homicide affects your longevity but there is not much that doctors can
do about it when they arrive on the scene after you have been shot
through the heart, except fill out the paperwork. Rates of homicide,
obesity and narcotics usage are higher here than in many other
countries, reducing our longevity.
But in the things that medical care can do something about-- like
cancer survival rates-- the United States ranks at or near the top in
the world. But that can change if we give up the real benefits of a
top medical system for the visions and rhetoric of politicians.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/19/whose_medical_decisions_part_ii?page=full
dave
> There was a time when rushing a thousand-page bill through Congress so
> fast that no one has time to read it would have provoked public
> outrage. But now, this has been attempted twice in the first 6 months
> of a new administration.
>
>
If you have enough time to trudge through that you certainly don't work
for a living.
Dude777
It is better to stay silent and be thought a fool then to post and leave
no doubt. Or something like that.
Michael Coburn
> There was a time when rushing a thousand-page bill through Congress so
> fast that no one has time to read it would have provoked public outrage.
> But now, this has been attempted twice in the first 6 months of a new
> administration.
>
> The fact that they got away with it before, with the "stimulus" bill,
> may have led them to believe that they could get away with it again.
(snore)
> But the first bill simply spent hundreds of billions of dollars.
LIE:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/15/jon-kyl/
sen-jon-kyl-says-only-68-percent-stimulus-has-been/
The bill has yet to spend even one of those "hundreds of billions of
dollars", and was not intended to spend all the money all at once.
People INVEST if they see that the investments are not being made into a
DEAD economy. The equities markets have reacted quite favorably. The
rest of this post is even more of a lie.
> The
> current "health care" bill threatens to take life-and-death decisions
> out of the hands of individuals and their doctors, transferring those
> decisions to Washington bureaucrats.
That is, of course, a much bigger lies than the opening. The ACTUAL bill
is on line for all to read and many have. The rightrde lies we find
below have been refuted and the liars can't find the crap they claim in
the bill. Yet the lies just keep coming and being repeated.
> People are taking that personally-- as they should. Your life and death,
> and that of your loved ones, is as personal as it gets.
And HR 3200 helps you (or certainly doe not interfere with your efforts)
to take care of your life and health and the life and health of your
loved ones.
> The mainstream media are again circling the wagons to protect Barack
> Obama, but this time it may not work.
Actually, they have started to tell the truth.
> One of those front-page editorials
> disguised as a news article in the New York Times begins: "The stubborn
> yet false rumor that President Obama's health care proposals would
> create government-sponsored 'death panels' to decide which patients were
> worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in recent weeks."
Nice job, NYT!
Now as you rammage through the garbage below, try and find something that
has anything to do with the the headline or the opening remarks. GOOD
LUCK.
> Nowhere? Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is "Special Advisor for Health Policy" for
> the Obama administration. That's nowhere? He is also co-author of an
> article on Americans' "over-utilization" of medical care in the June 18,
> 2008 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Is that
> nowhere?
Yet he has not said anything about the government getting between you and
your doctor or baring you from any medical procedure you would like to
have done. THAT IS A FACT!
> Dr. Emanuel's article points out that Americans do not visit doctors or
> go into hospitals more than people in other industrialized countries. In
> fact we go to both places less often than people do in those other
> countries, which include countries with government- controlled medical
> care.
THAT IS A FACT! We also end up with more serious health problems because
we cannot afford to have regular check-ups and screenings and that is one
of the things that is addressed in the new rules for claiming that a
company is selling "health insurance". Any policy sold as "health
insurance" must not require a deductible or a co-pay for WELL ACCEPTED
STANDARD SCREENINGS AND ANNUAL PHYSICALS.
> As the article points out, "It is more costly care, rather than high
> volume, that accounts for higher expenditures in the United States."
And a lot of that COST is due to putting off checkups and screenings due
to the expense. In the long run this is creates much greater costs.
> There are more Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) devices per capita in
> the United States, more coronary bypass operations and Americans use
> more new pharmaceutical drugs created within the past 5 years.
And this makes our system very convenient but also very expensive. While
it serves the well off very well it does not serve the less well off at
all. HR 3200 is an attempt to preserve convenience for the well off
while making the system more accessible to the not so well off.
> Americans also have more of what the article calls "amenities" with
> their medical care. "Hospital rooms in the United States offer more
> privacy, comfort and auxiliary services than do hospital rooms in most
> other countries."
And this also increases the costs. Those costs are fine for those who
can afford them, but not a good idea for those who cannot.
> In other words, it is not quantity but quality that is different-- and
> more expensive-- about American medical care. This is what Dr. Emanuel's
> "over-utilization" consists of.
The point is valid and has nothing to do with the headlines and the
claims in the beginning of this latest lie rag. It also has nothing to
do with REALITY.
> At one time, it would have been none of Dr. Emanuel's business if your
> physician prescribed the latest medications for you, rather than the
> cheaper and obsolete medications they replaced. It would have been none
> of his business if you preferred to have a nice hospital room with
> "amenities" rather than being in an unsanitary ward with inadequate
> nursing care, as under the National Health Service in Britain.
And with the proposed health care reform plan that will not change. There
is absolutely nothing ion HR 3200 that alters this. Yet the lies
continue.
> The involvement of government gives Dr. Emanuel the leverage to condemn
> other Americans' choices-- and a larger involvement of government will
> give him the power to force both doctors and patients to change their
> choices.
LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! we note that
there is NO credible cite for this at all.
> As for a "death panel," no politician would ever use that phrase when
> trying to get a piece of legislation passed. "End of life" care under
> the "guidance" of "some independent group" sounds so much nicer-- and
> these are the terms President Obama used in an interview with the New
> York Times back on April 14th.
>
> He said, "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives
> are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill
> out there." He added: "It is very difficult to imagine the country
> making those decisions just through the normal political channels. That
> is why you have to have some independent group that can give you
> guidance."
And he was speaking of YOUR chosen doctor, lying pig. And only speaking
to the fact that such consultations will now be paid by medicare and were
not so paid before.
> But when you select people like Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel to give
> "independent" guidance, you have already chosen a policy through your
> choice of advisors, who simply provide political cover.
Gee, lying pig, ya thing that he can handle the load single handedly? Of
course no one other than a rightarded lunatic would CHOOSE him for an end
of life consultation or any other medical consultation.
> The net result
> can be exactly the same as if those providing that guidance were openly
> called "death panels."
>
> http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/18/
whose_medical_decisions?page=full
Garbage.
> Whose Medical Decisions? Part II
>
> When famed bank robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, he
> said: "Because that's where the money is."
>
> For the same reason, it is as predictable as the sunrise that medical
> care for the elderly will be cut back under a government-controlled
> medical system. Because that's where the money is.
Show it to us in the bill, lying pig.
> My experience is probably not very different from that of many other
> people in their seventies. My medical expenses in the past year have
> been more than in the first 40 years of my life-- and I did not spend
> one night in a hospital all last year or go to an emergency room even
> once.
And this has NOTHING to do with HR 3200.
> Just the ordinary medical expenses of keeping an old geezer going along
> in good health are high. Throw in a medical emergency or two and the
> costs go through the roof.
>
> So long as my insurance company and I are paying for it, it is nobody
> else's business what my medical expenses are. But once the government is
> involved, everything is their business.
So here we have a guy on government insurance called Medicare complaining
about the government being involved in HIS health insurance. But he's a
Republican and that is what we have learned to expect from Republicans.
And if he is not enrolled in Medicare part B then what is he whining
about anyway? Why is he trying to pass off a lie? BECAUSE HE IS A
REPUBLICAN AND THAT IS PART OF THE DUES YOU PAY TO BE A MEMBER!
> It is not just a question of what the government will pay for. The logic
> of their collectivist thinking-- and the actual practice in some other
> countries with government-controlled health care-- is that you cannot
> even pay for some medical treatments with your own money,
That is not what HR 3200 does and so this crap is the usual rightrded lie.
if the powers
> that be decide that "society" cannot let its resources be used that way,
> or that it would not be "social justice" for some people to have medical
> treatments that others cannot get, just because some people "happen to
> have money."
This is lying filth. The health care reform package DOES NOT STOP people
from buying health insurance from the same health insurance companies
they have always used. The lying filth just keeps coming.
> The medical care stampede is about much more than medical care,
> important as that is. It is part of a whole mindset of many on the left
> who have never reconciled themselves to an economic system in which how
> much people can withdraw from the resources of the nation depends on how
> much they have contributed to those resources.
That is yet another lie. The current proposal doe not IN ANY WAY prevent
people from drawing on their resources as much as they chose. That is
why no one is proposing any sort of "single payer" system and HR 3200 is
CERTAINLY NOT A SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM. But the lies just don't stop.
> Despite the cleverness of phrases about people who "happen to have
> money," very few people just happen to have money. Most people earned
> their money by supplying other people with goods or services that those
> people were willing to pay for.
>
> Since it is their own money that they have earned, these people feel
> free to spend it to give their 80-year-old grandmother another year or
> two of life, or to pay for a hip replacement operation for their mom or
> dad, even If some medical "ethicist" might say that the resources of
> "society" would be better used to allow some 20-year-old to talk over
> his angst with a shrink.
And nothing in the current plan infringes on that freedom in any way,
liar.
> Barack Obama has talked about the high costs of taking care of elderly
> or chronically ill patients in terms of "society making those
> decisions." But a world in which individuals make their own trade-offs
> with their own money is fundamentally different from a world where third
> parties take those decisions out of their hands and impose their own
> notions of what is best for "society."
No, lying pig. Society has the right to limit what it, collectively,
will pay, and to prohibit the sale of products that are fraudulent. And
that is what is being done. Any person who wants to spend MORE of THEIR
OWN MONEY can do so. The proposed system in HR 3200 nor any other bill
out of any House committee would prevent people from using private
insurance or their own money to do buy whatever medical care they might
choose. There is NO SINGLE PAYER PROPOSAL on the table.
What is it about the word _OPTION_, in the phrase "Public Option", that
you lying pigs are having a problem with. And what part of "you can keep
the plan you have" is it that you feel you can lie about without being
called a liar?
> Calling these arbitrary notions "ethics" doesn't change anything,
> however effective it may be as political spin.
We cannot ethically expect the community to pay huge sums of money to
prolong the life of people they do not know when medical science says
that it should not be done. But NOTHING PREVENTS family and close
friends form doing so. IT IS NOT A SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM.
> More is at stake than the outcomes of medical decisions, extremely
> important as those are. What is also at stake is freedom and the dignity
> of individuals who do not live their lives as supplicants of puffed-up
> power holders who are spending the money taken from them in taxes.
Make no mistake: What is actually "at stake" is the profits of the
current rape artists in the medical insurance sector.
> One of the many phony arguments for government-controlled medical care
> is that Americans do not have any longer life expectancy than in other
> countries, despite much higher medical expenditures.
And the main problem for you, lying pig, is that no such a system is "on
the table" or being discussed.
> This argument is phony because longevity depends on health-- and "health
> care" and "medical care" are not the same, no matter how many times the
> two are confused in the media or in politics. Health care includes
> things that doctor cannot do much about.
The "argument" is PHONY because there is no proposal to emulate any of
the current "socialized" systems. What part of "option" is it that
continues to ricochet off your rightarded brain stem?
> Homicide affects your longevity but there is not much that doctors can
> do about it when they arrive on the scene after you have been shot
> through the heart, except fill out the paperwork. Rates of homicide,
> obesity and narcotics usage are higher here than in many other
> countries, reducing our longevity.
JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!
<<<<<<<<< further misdirection and lying filth deleted >>>>>>>>
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
Brenda Ann
"dave" <da...@dave.dave> wrote in message
news:5fadnTeuB-xfORHX...@earthlink.com...
I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry Potter
in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and single
spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't pay them to
make stupid remarks on television.
squirltop
The people have let the congress and lawmakers be lazy fucks for ever.
Earmarks and 'special interests' are the scourge of American politics.
Hopefully understanding what is put out will be a new trend in
American politics, with out politicians. To much 'nothing' from most
politicans for too long. It has long been far far past the breaking
point.
dave
>
> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
> spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry Potter
> in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and single
> spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't pay them to
> make stupid remarks on television.
>
>
There is no single bill to be read right now. As I understand it, there
are are at least 3 committees, each with a different version. They have
staff who are familiar with every word and nothing is hidden. They do
have all day to read things.
dave
>
> The people have let the congress and lawmakers be lazy fucks for ever.
> Earmarks and 'special interests' are the scourge of American politics.
> Hopefully understanding what is put out will be a new trend in
> American politics, with out politicians. To much 'nothing' from most
> politicans for too long. It has long been far far past the breaking
> point.
I see in your future a freeway overpass and "breaking news"...
jf...@my-deja.com
> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
> spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry Potter
> in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and single
> spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't pay them to
> make stupid remarks on television.
teacher. We were taught that the House and Senate were subdivided
into committees. Legislators were expected to be expertly
knowledgeable only about the bills reported out of their committees,
not all bills. The "READ THE BILL!" rablle rouserrs are just
displaying their own stupidity and ignorance.
cuh...@webtv.net
every single word of any and all bills.
A lot of times I listen to local radio talk shows when the radio talk
show host and people who phone in are talking about those bills.
cuhulin
Michael Coburn
Legalese is a pain in the ass to read. But the representatives have
staffs that "report out" the honest version in plain talk and that is
what the representative must read. There is probably a group that does
this for each caucus. The representatives also have at least two other
jobs in addition to understanding the bills. One of these is to do all
that can be done on a bill such as HR 3200 to educated the people as to
the actual contents of the bill and the purpose of the bill. And the
other duty is to ascertain the thus educated will of the constituents.
Our current system fails in these last two important areas much more than
if fails in the requirement to "read the bill".
IMHO a NON PARTISAN agency such as The Congressional Research Service
should put the English encapsulation of a bill as important as HR 3200 on
line for all to read. The administration should not be forced to put this
encapsulation on line due to the lack of a NON PATISAN service. And this
truthful encapsulation of the bill is what should be the subject of any
PUBLIC debate.
The link below illustrates the concept and at present but is woefully
inadequate to the required task:
http://opencrs.com/document/R40517/
Here we see a discussion of the various tax proposals that finance the
extension of insurance to the lower income folks who cannot currently
afford such insurance.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2009/08/crs-tax.html
But I am of the opinion that HR 3200 is _THE_ current bill that has been
reported out of the House committees and that CRS should offer a PLAIN
TALK assessment of that bill.
Beam Me Up Scotty
Why have them all vote, if they have no clue what they are voting for?
It would be suffecient to have those "expertly knowledgeable only about
the bills" vote for the entire congress......
I think we see who's ignorant. We could vote on it but the few here that
are "expertly knowledgeable only about" your infinite stupidity need
read your posts to determine that.
~ RHF
Dave 'staff' ain't your Elected Representative.
US Senators and US Congresspersons are Elected
TO KNOW -not- simply told by someone "it's in there"
& "we're cool" & "no problem"
CALL Your Senators and Congresspersons
-Tell Them- Just Say NO to Obama-Care©
and Yes to “The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009,”
which is real Health Care Reform which includes
Tort Reform and the All American Freedom of 'Choice'
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/41922bb478e085fb
.
Question - Can Your Senators and Congressperson Answer
a Simple Honest Question About Obama-Care© ? :
Why "Tort Reform" is NOT Part of Obama-Care© ?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/64bb18fca8797de6
.
Read - “The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009,” -versus-
Obama-Care© : Giving Americans The Right To 'Choose' !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/626026f0b6b74b73
Call the White House and TELL Prez Obama that
Americans have the Right to a 'Choice' in Health Care.
.
WQGT447
> On Aug 20, 5:39 am, dave <d...@dave.dave> wrote:
>
> > Brenda Ann wrote:
>
> > > I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
> > > spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry Potter
> > > in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and single
> > > spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't pay them to
> > > make stupid remarks on television.
>
> > There is no single bill to be read right now. As I understand it, there
> > are are at least 3 committees, each with a different version. They have
> > staff who are familiar with every word and nothing is hidden. They do
> > have all day to read things.
>
> Dave 'staff' ain't your Elected Representative.
>
> US Senators and US Congresspersons are Elected
> TO KNOW -not- simply told by someone "it's in there"
> & "we're cool" & "no problem"
>
> CALL Your Senators and Congresspersons
> -Tell Them- Just Say NO to Obama-Care©
> and Yes to “The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009,”
> which is real Health Care Reform which includes
> Tort Reform and the All American Freedom of 'Choice'http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/41922bb478e085fb
> .
> Question - Can Your Senators and Congressperson Answer
> a Simple Honest Question About Obama-Care© ? :
> .
> Read - “The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009,” -versus-
> Call the White House and TELL Prez Obama that
> Americans have the Right to a 'Choice' in Health Care.
> .
By God, you are desperate, aren't you? Whose payroll are you on?
Blue Cross? HealthNet? Inquiring minds want to know...
~ RHF
> On Aug 19, 10:47 pm, "Brenda Ann" <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote:> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
> > spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry Potter
> > in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and single
> > spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't pay them to
> > make stupid remarks on television.
>
- Social Studies teacher.
- We were taught that the House and Senate
- were subdivided into committees.
Ok so that is true enough.
- Legislators were expected to be expertly
- knowledgeable only about the bills reported
- out of their committees,
OK they should be 'knowledgeable' at least.
- not all bills.
OK so They are Voting Blind or simply
Voting as the Party Bosses Tell Them.
-or- Should Trust Prez Obama - yeah sure . . .
- The "READ THE BILL!" rablle rouserrs are just
- displaying their own stupidity and ignorance.
D'Oh ! - Some "BILLS" are Important Enough
that They Should Be Read Word-for-Word and
Page-for-Page Front-to-Back and back again.
Obama-Care© is such a Bill : Read It !
OK so we all now know that Our US Senators
and US Representatives are NOT Responsibly
for their Votes - one word 'absurd' ~ RHF
-ps- what you are calling 'rablle rouserrs' are
US Citizens exercising their Right to Freedom
of Speech.
.
The BIG LIE - Recent Poll reveals that Americans Trust
their Insurance Companies 51% over Obama-Care©
Just Say NO to Obama-Care© !
CALL Your Senators and Congresspersons
-Tell Them- Just Say NO to Obama-Care©
and Yes to “The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009,”
which is real Health Care Reform which includes
Tort Reform and All American Freedom of 'Choice'
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/309494572b981635
Not the Force Cohesion of Obama-Care© Big
Government Controlled {No Options or Choices}
with it's End-of-Life Counseling as the Final Solution.
? - Can Your Senators and Congressperson Answer
a Simple Honest Question About Obama-Care© ? :
Why "Tort Reform" is NOT Part of Obama-Care© ?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/64bb18fca8797de6
.
! - “The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009,” -versus-
Obama-Care© : Giving Americans The Right To 'Choose' !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/626026f0b6b74b73
Call the White House and TELL Prez Obama that
Americans have the Right to a 'Choice' in Health Care.
.
Recent Poll reveals that Americans Trust their
Insurance Companies 51% over Obama-Care©
.
~ RHF
Why do some people call Prez Obama's
"Special Advisor for Health Policy"
Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel - 'The Doctor Death' ?
Was Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel responsible for
End-of-Life {Ending-Your-Life} Counseling
in Obama-Care© ?
> http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/18/whose_medical_...
> http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/19/whose_medical_...
>
> http://townhall.com/Columnists/ThomasSowell/
>
> http://www.tsowell.com/
jf...@my-deja.com
dog.com> wrote:
> Why have them all vote, if they have no clue what they are voting for?
> It would be suffecient to have those "expertly knowledgeable only about
> the bills" vote for the entire congress......
argument. Just because someone does not qualify as an expert does not
mean that they are completely clueless, and most of the legislators
will fall somewhere between these two extremes.
>
> I think we see who's ignorant. We could vote on it but the few here that
> are "expertly knowledgeable only about" your infinite stupidity need
> read your posts to determine that.
I never claimed to be omniscient. My stupidity is probably finite.
~ RHF
- By God, you are desperate, aren't you?
- Whose payroll are you on?
- Blue Cross? HealthNet?
- Inquiring minds want to know...
Michael Coburn
> jf...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> On Aug 19, 10:47 pm, "Brenda Ann" <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote:
>>> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
>>> spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry
>>> Potter in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and
>>> single spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't
>>> pay them to make stupid remarks on television.
>> That is not what I learned from my high school Social Studies teacher.
>> We were taught that the House and Senate were subdivided into
>> committees. Legislators were expected to be expertly knowledgeable
>> only about the bills reported out of their committees, not all bills.
>> The "READ THE BILL!" rablle rouserrs are just displaying their own
>> stupidity and ignorance.
>
> Why have them all vote, if they have no clue what they are voting for?
> It would be suffecient to have those "expertly knowledgeable only about
> the bills" vote for the entire congress......
The representatives of the people do not need to read the legal version
in order to be fully aware of what is in the bill. The American people
should also have a PLAIN TALK version of the bill. The "expertly
knowledgeable are on the committees that draft the bill and haggle out
what is in the bill in the committees. The market up version is then
ready for debate and amendment. The knowledge of what is in the version
"reported out" of the committee and of all the proposed amendments are
the responsibility of the caucus that will assign different staff members
and House members to each such task in order to produce a more
intelligible shorter version of the legalese.
The interesting part is that the House currently is composed of the
legislative assembly (the committees) which actually produces proposed
legislation, and the representative assembly who are to understand what
is in the proposed legislation so that they may communicate with their
constituency and vote on the proposed legislation. I think you are
claiming that the representatives of the people should not have any voice
in what the APPOINTED and ANOINTED few might decide. You MUST be a
latter day Republican.
> I think we see who's ignorant. We could vote on it but the few here that
> are "expertly knowledgeable only about" your infinite stupidity need
> read your posts to determine that.
I find most of the rightarded posts to be outright lies concerning the
actual proposed legislation. It isn't ignorance. It is outright lying.
~ RHF
- lies concerning the actual proposed legislation.
- It isn't ignorance.
- It is outright lying.
OK so "End-of-Life" Counseling is NOT in the
Obama-Care© Bills.
OK so Half or the Cost of Obama-Care© is NOT
going to be Paid for by Reductions in Medicare
Spending for America's Senior Citizens.
the inconvenient truth - ain't a lie ~ RHF
m II
> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
> spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry Potter
> in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and single
> spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't pay them to
> make stupid remarks on television.
Ahh...but you forget.
Harry Potter, compared to the conglomeration of politicians, has a far
deeper grasp of reality and truth.
..and that is NO fairy tale.
mike
--
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /
/ /\ \/ /\'Think tanks cleaned cheap' /\ \/ /
/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/
Densa International©
For the OTHER two percent.
Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage,
I block all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail,
Google Groups or HOTMAIL address.
I also filter everything from a .cn server.
For solutions which may work for you, please check:
http://improve-usenet.org/
Michael Coburn
Actually, there IS a proposal in HR 3200 to COVER such counseling if the
insured person wishes to "counsel". It is not mandatory.
> OK so Half or the Cost of Obama-Care© is NOT going to be Paid for by
> Reductions in Medicare Spending for America's Senior Citizens.
Why don't you show us some data or a cite for this stupid claim?
Christopher Helms
> No ObaMao wrote:
> > There was a time when rushing a thousand-page bill through Congress so
> > fast that no one has time to read it would have provoked public
> > outrage. But now, this has been attempted twice in the first 6 months
> > of a new administration.
It didn't bother you guys when the Republicans banged the Patriot Act
or TARP through Congress not only without without anybody reading
either of them, but with the administration almost screaming that
there simply wasn't time to do anything but pass it because Armageddon
was At Hand.
~ RHF
Michael Coburn,
Paying Doctors for a Service called "End-of-Life"
Counseling and Grading them on the performance
of that 'service' for each and every American Senior
Citizen that is covered by Medicare will de-facto
make it Mandatory.
- - OK so Half or the Cost of Obama-Care©
- - is NOT going to be Paid for by Reductions
- - in Medicare Spending for America's Senior
- - Citizens.
- Why don't you show us some data or a cite for this stupid claim?
Michael Coburn 'stupid claim' that's Obama-Bot©
{Liberal-Fascist} Name Calling : Not Facts.
1 - Mr. Obama proposed $622 Billion in cuts to
Federal Health-Care Spending. {Medicare &
Medicaid}
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124839406488477649.html
Te White House has proposed Shaving {Cutting}
$177 Billion from Payments to Health Insurers
under Medicare managed-care plans, which
allow America's Senior Citizens to obtain
Medicare Coverage outside the government-run
program. {Choice} and forcing America's Senior
Citizens into a Government Only Medicare Plan
Reducing Coverage, Benefits, Services, and
Treatment.
2 - Prez Obama proposed $313 Billion in Cuts to
Medicare and Medicaid to help Pay for $1 Trillion
Obama-Care© Reforms.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/13/news/economy/Obama_health_Care.reut/index.htm
Cuts to Reduce/Eliminate Medicare : Coverage,
Benefits, Services, and Treatment for America's
Senior Citizens.
3 - Medicare, Medicaid Cuts in Prez Obama's Budget
Total $316 Billion Over 10 Years
http://healthcenter.bna.com/pic2/hc.nsf/id/BNAP-7PNMU2?OpenDocument
-but- American Senior Citizens will get . . .
End-of-Life" {Ending-Your-Life} Counseling
with Obama-Care©
4 - Prez Obama calls for Cuts in Medicare and Medicaid
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/pers-j16.shtml
.
mc - now go and do a 'stupid' on those cites ~ RHF
.
dave
> On Aug 20, 5:39 am, dave <d...@dave.dave> wrote:
>> Brenda Ann wrote:
>>
>>> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
>>> spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry Potter
>>> in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and single
>>> spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't pay them to
>>> make stupid remarks on television.
>> There is no single bill to be read right now. As I understand it, there
>> are are at least 3 committees, each with a different version. They have
>> staff who are familiar with every word and nothing is hidden. They do
>> have all day to read things.
>
> Dave 'staff' ain't your Elected Representative.
>
work. The Representative runs for office and conceives "big picture"
policy, makes the speeches, collects the checks, etc., but the staff
does the actual work.
Why do you hate workers?
dave
>> .
>
> By God, you are desperate, aren't you? Whose payroll are you on?
> Blue Cross? HealthNet? Inquiring minds want to know...
Roy is a "Bubble Puppy". He lives in a parallel universe. He thinks
Fox News is real.
I watch Fox News. It's a combination of horror and black comedy that is
truly awesome.
dave
>
> OK so "End-of-Life" Counseling is NOT in the
> Obama-Care� Bills.
>
It never was, Bozo. There was a provision to pay a doctor for 1
consultation every 5 years. (A Republican proposed part of the bill, by
the way.)
> OK so Half or the Cost of Obama-Care� is NOT
> going to be Paid for by Reductions in Medicare
> Spending for America's Senior Citizens.
No. Reduction in Medicare waste. Administrative streamlining, fraud
prevention, etc.
>
> the inconvenient truth - ain't a lie ~ RHF
>
There are not 2 sides to a fact. There is no way a lie equals "balance"
against a truth.
WQGT447
Fox is amazing, isn't it? Those guys are incapable of telling even
the slightest bit of truth if it will help anyone who makes less than
$500,000 per annum. They are desperate to turn back the clock to the
year 1890, or possibly even antebellum times when they are at their
worst.
WQGT447
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Are you on dope or something? This is all unadulterated nonsense,
reading in all sorts of baloney that just ain't there.
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:39:39 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
>
>> jf...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>> On Aug 19, 10:47 pm, "Brenda Ann" <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote:
>>>> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
>>>> spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry
>>>> Potter in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and
>>>> single spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't
>>>> pay them to make stupid remarks on television.
>>> That is not what I learned from my high school Social Studies teacher.
>>> We were taught that the House and Senate were subdivided into
>>> committees. Legislators were expected to be expertly knowledgeable
>>> only about the bills reported out of their committees, not all bills.
>>> The "READ THE BILL!" rablle rouserrs are just displaying their own
>>> stupidity and ignorance.
>> Why have them all vote, if they have no clue what they are voting for?
>> It would be suffecient to have those "expertly knowledgeable only about
>> the bills" vote for the entire congress......
>
> The representatives of the people do not need to read the legal version
> in order to be fully aware of what is in the bill. The American people
> should also have a PLAIN TALK version of the bill. The "expertly
> knowledgeable are on the committees that draft the bill and haggle out
This is what the Church did to elevate it's self above the common
people. Latin was used to exclude the people.... Now you want our
government to become elitist, when the Constitution was written it was
plan text that we all could understand. It had to be to be ratified and
accepted by the people.
> what is in the bill in the committees. The market up version is then
> ready for debate and amendment. The knowledge of what is in the version
> "reported out" of the committee and of all the proposed amendments are
> the responsibility of the caucus that will assign different staff members
> and House members to each such task in order to produce a more
> intelligible shorter version of the legalese.
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*
Don't list what you studied, tell me where you succeeded and failed.
*Poetic-Justice*
cuh...@webtv.net
years old, cancer) in Arlington,Texas,,, I once asked her about a little
skin growth on top of one of my shoulders, I have had that ever since I
was a kid.She told me she can't give out any medical advice because she
could lose her License.
Take two mornings and call me in the aspirin
I smell Rain, I better jump out at my old trailer and put my tools up..
cuhulin
~ RHF
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
- Are you on dope or something?
Why do some people think Prez Obama's
"Special Advisor for Health Policy"
Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel -is- 'On Dope or Something' ?
- This is all unadulterated nonsense, reading
- in all sorts of baloney that just ain't there.
Was Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel responsible for
the 'unadulterated nonsense' of End-of-Life
{Ending-Your-Life} Counseling in Obama-Care© ?
Obama-Care© full of 'all sorts of baloney
that just ain't there' . . . except higher Taxes
and Limiting Medical Treatment for All.
.
that's obama-speak© right back-at-you ~ RHF
.
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:39:39 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
>
>> jf...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>> On Aug 19, 10:47 pm, "Brenda Ann" <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote:
>>>> I want to know what is so difficult about reading a 1000 page, double
>>>> spaced, single sided bill, when your kid can read 1000 pages of Harry
>>>> Potter in under a week (double sided pages, in much smaller print, and
>>>> single spaced). And BTW, it's their JOB to read these bills. We don't
>>>> pay them to make stupid remarks on television.
>>> That is not what I learned from my high school Social Studies teacher.
>>> We were taught that the House and Senate were subdivided into
>>> committees. Legislators were expected to be expertly knowledgeable
>>> only about the bills reported out of their committees, not all bills.
>>> The "READ THE BILL!" rablle rouserrs are just displaying their own
>>> stupidity and ignorance.
>> Why have them all vote, if they have no clue what they are voting for?
>> It would be suffecient to have those "expertly knowledgeable only about
>> the bills" vote for the entire congress......
>
> The representatives of the people do not need to read the legal version
> in order to be fully aware of what is in the bill. The American people
> should also have a PLAIN TALK version of the bill. The "expertly
> knowledgeable are on the committees that draft the bill and haggle out
This is what the Church did to elevate its self above the common
people. Latin was used to exclude the people.... Now you want our
government to become elitist. When the Constitution was written it was
plain text that we could understand. It had to be ratified and
accepted by the people.
> what is in the bill in the committees. The market up version is then
> ready for debate and amendment. The knowledge of what is in the version
> "reported out" of the committee and of all the proposed amendments are
> the responsibility of the caucus that will assign different staff members
> and House members to each such task in order to produce a more
> intelligible shorter version of the legalese.
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*
Media policy is... the only good news is bad news.
~ RHF
Dave the Representative 'picks' the Staff
or at least the Chief-of-Staff; and the bottom
line is the Public Elects 'Their' Representative.
The foundation of The Representative Government
-is- "The Representative".
- Why do you hate workers?
Dave there you go like a typical Obama-Bot©
putting Words in other people's mouths.
Blessed by God with Life and Progressive by Nature thru Living ~ RHF
[Just an Old Retired Blue Collar Union Member - Dosvedanya Tovarisch]
.
~ RHF
> On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 05:18:29 -0700, dave wrote:
> > Roy, "staff" is the part the part of the machine that actually does the
> > work. The Representative runs for office and conceives "big picture"
> > policy, makes the speeches, collects the checks, etc., but the staff
> > does the actual work.
>
- He must have been one of those bosses that the
- crew smiled to his face and hated behind his back
bosses,
What Bosses ?
We Ain't Got To Show You No Stinking BOSSES !
As a 'worker' I expect an Honest Day's Pay :
for an Honest Day's Work*. {Fair Treatment}
* Did not matter whether I liked the Boss or not.
As a 'boss' I expect an Honest Day's Work :
For an Honest Day's Pay**. {Fair Treatment}
** Did not matter whether They liked Me or not.
Michael Coburn
We do not live in a direct democracy and most of us do not want to live
in a direct democracy. We elect REPRESENTATIVES as our AGENTS who have a
responsibility to act in our best interests. Those representatives will
organize the legislative process so as to accomplish the true aim of
representation. That is part of the job they have before them. We the
people WANT to be informed on particular acts of legislation and this
health reform legislation is one of those situations. We want the
representatives and the people to know what is in any bill that would
accomplish health care reform of any kind. The focus on "read" the bill
is whacky just as you have indicated. The legalese is not "plain talk"
and cannot be "plain talk" if it is to be supported in the courts.
Understanding what is in the bill does not require a diploma in legalese.
It requires a LEGAL staff that is true to the representative and a
representative that is true to his/her constituency.
>> what is in the bill in the committees. The market up version is then
>> ready for debate and amendment. The knowledge of what is in the
>> version "reported out" of the committee and of all the proposed
>> amendments are the responsibility of the caucus that will assign
>> different staff members and House members to each such task in order to
>> produce a more intelligible shorter version of the legalese.
--
Michael Coburn
Have you stopped beating your wife?
The subject section (section 1233) of HR 3200 says that medicare WILL PAY
FOR A CONSULTATION BETWEEN AND PERSON ON MEDICARE AND THAT PERSON'S
CHOSEN PHYSICIAN CONCERNING END OF LIFE DECISIONS SUCH AS LIVING WILLS
AND THE LIKE IF THE ELDERLY PERSON CHOOSES SUCH A CONSULTATION. THERE IS
NO REQUIREMENT FOR ANY CONSULTATION. ONLY AN INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR IT
IF THE PERSON WANTS IT.
> Obama-Care© full of 'all sorts of baloney that just ain't there' . . .
> except higher Taxes and Limiting Medical Treatment for All.
> .
> that's obama-speak© right back-at-you ~ RHF
> .
Yet, you can't find anything in HR 3200 that actually raises taxes on
people who's income is less than $250,000 except for a "punitive tax"
levied against those who refuse to carry ANY insurance at all. (NO
different than the government requiring people to have auto liability
insurance). You will not fine _*ANY*_ limitation to Medical Treatment in
HR 2300 anywhere.
YOU ARE A LYING REPUBLICAN PIG!
surprise, surprise, surprise
WQGT447
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> - Are you on dope or something?
>
> Why do some people think Prez Obama's
> "Special Advisor for Health Policy"
> Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel -is- 'On Dope or Something' ?
>
> - This is all unadulterated nonsense, reading
> - in all sorts of baloney that just ain't there.
>
> Was Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel responsible for
> the 'unadulterated nonsense' of End-of-Life
> {Ending-Your-Life} Counseling in Obama-Care© ?
>
> Obama-Care© full of 'all sorts of baloney
> that just ain't there' . . . except higher Taxes
> and Limiting Medical Treatment for All.
> .
> that's obama-speak© right back-at-you ~ RHF
> .
Higher taxes for all? Bullshit. Prove it.
Limited medical treatment? We already have that, and getting more
limited all the time.
Fool.
Chas. Chan
By his own definition Michael Coburn is not normal.
From his DeFunCted blog: 'I spend a good deal of time on the
Washington State Ferry system commuting between my much smaller home
on the Olympic peninsula and West Seattle. And I have invested some
time [on] it conducting a sort of informal survey among the people I
am able to speak with on the ferry. I tell them that I am an amateur
economist (which I have been for no less than 20 years) and that I am
attempting to determine what normal people (which I quickly define as
those who are not preoccupied with economics) think that "The Economy"
might be...' [...an enormous amount of jibberish]
"20 years" as an amateur economist and his favorite quote is by Bart
Simpson -- "These are my opinions, and you can't have em"
More likly Michael Coburn is 20 years of age!
______________________________________
Who is the distinguished Thomas Sowell which the "abnormal" Michael
Coburn describes as "rightarded"?
A Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow
The Hoover Institution
Stanford University
EDUCATION:
Ph.D. in Economics, University of Chicago, 1968
A.M. in Economics, Columbia University, 1959
A.B. in Economics, magna cum laude, Harvard College, 1958
EXPERIENCE:
Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, September 1980
- present
Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., July 1974 - June 1980
Visiting Professor of Economics, Amherst College, September- December
1977
Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, April- August 1977
Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, July
1976 - March 1977
Project Director, The Urban Institute, August 1972 - July 1974
Associate Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., September 1970 - June
1972
Associate Professor of Economics, Brandeis University, September 1969
- June 1970
Assistant Professor of Economics, Cornell University, September 1965 -
June 1969
Economic Analyst, American Telephone & TelegraphCo., June 1964 -
August 1965
Lecturer in Economics, Howard University, September 1963 - June 1964
Instructor in Economics, Douglass College, Rutgers University,
September 1962 - June 1963
Labor Economist, U.S. Department of Labor, June 1961 - August 1962
PRINCIPAL PUBLICATIONS:
On Classical Economics (Yale University Press, 2006)
Black Rednecks and White Liberals (Encounter Books, 2005)
The Quest for Cosmic Justice (Free Press,1999)
Conquests and Cultures (Basic Books, 1998)
Migrations and Cultures (Basic Books, 1996)
The Vision of the Anointed (Basic Books, 1995)
Race and Culture: A World View ( Basic Books,1994 )
A Conflict of Visions (William Morrow, 1987)
Ethnic America (Basic Books, 1981)
Knowledge and Decisions (Basic Books, 1980)
Say's Law: An Historical Analysis (Princeton University Press, 1972)
No ObaMao
Amid all the controversies over medical care, no one seems to be
asking a very basic question: Why does it take more than 1,000 pages
of legislation to insure people who lack medical insurance?
Despite incessant repetition of the fact that millions of Americans do
not have medical insurance, hardy souls who have actually read the
mammoth medical care legislation being rushed through Congress have
discovered all sorts of things there that have nothing whatever to do
with insuring the uninsured-- and everything to do with taking medical
decisions out of the hands of doctors and their patients, and
transferring those decisions to Washington bureaucrats.
That's called "bait and switch" when an unscrupulous business
advertises one thing and tries to sell you something else. When
politicians do it, it is far more dangerous to far more people.
Deception is not an incidental aspect of this medical care
legislation, but is at the very heart of it.
That such a massive change of the entire medical care system, from top
to bottom, was attempted to be rushed through Congress before the
August recess-- before anybody in or out of Congress had time to read
it all-- should have told us from the outset that we were being played
for fools.
Despite President Obama's statements that he is not advocating a
"single payer" system for medical care-- which is to say, a government
monopoly of power over life and death decisions-- just a few years
ago, he was telling a union audience that he was in favor of a "single
payer" system. At that time, he pointed out that it was unlikely that
such a system could be put in place all at once, that it might take a
number of years to advance, step by step, to that goal.
In other words, Barack Obama fully understood the "entering wedge"
political strategy that has allowed so many government programs to
start off small, and apparently innocuous-- and then grow to gigantic
size and scope over the years.
If telling us that he is not for a single payer system will soothe us
into going along, then it is perfectly understandable why he said it.
But that is no reason for us to believe him.
As for those uninsured Americans who are supposedly the reason for all
this sound and fury, there is remarkably little interest in why they
are uninsured, despite the incessant repetition of the fact that they
are.
The endless repetition serves a political purpose but digging into the
underlying facts might undermine that purpose. Many find it sufficient
to say that the uninsured cannot "afford" medical insurance. But what
you can afford depends not only on how much money you have but also on
what your priorities are.
Many people who are uninsured have incomes from which medical
insurance premiums could readily be paid without any undue strain. But
they choose to spend their money on other things. Many young people,
especially, don't buy medical insurance and elderly people already
have Medicare. The poor have Medicaid available, even though many do
not bother to sign up for it, until they are already in the hospital--
which they can do then.
Throwing numbers around about how many people are uninsured may create
the impression that the uninsured cannot get medical treatment, when
it fact they can get medical treatment at any hospital emergency
room.
Is this ideal? Of course not. But nothing is going to be ideal,
whether the current medical care legislation passes or not. The
relevant question is: Are the problems created by the current
situation worse than the problems that will be created by the pending
legislation? That question never seems to get asked, much less
answered.
No small part of our current medical care problems have been created
by politicians who drive up the cost of medical insurance by mandating
that insurance cover things that many people are unwilling to pay
for.
Many of us are willing to pay for treatment of a sprained ankle
ourselves, if we can get less expensive insurance to cover us just for
catastrophic illnesses. But that is one of many decisions that
politicians have taken out of our hands. There will be many more
decisions taken out of our hands if Obamacare passes.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/20/whose_medical_decisions_part_iii
The serious, and sometimes chilling, provisions of the medical care
legislation that President Obama has been trying to rush through
Congress are important enough for all of us to stop and think, even
though his political strategy from the outset has been to prevent us
from having time to stop and think about it.
What we also should stop to think about is the mindset behind this
legislation, which is very consistent with the mindset behind other
policies of this administration, whether the particular issue is
bailing out General Motors, telling banks who to lend to or appointing
"czars" to tell all sorts of people in many walks of life what they
can and cannot do.
The idea that government officials can play God from Washington is not
a new idea, but it is an idea that is being pushed with new audacity.
What they are trying to do is to create an America very unlike the
America that has existed for centuries-- the America that people have
been attracted to by the millions from every part of the world, the
America that many generations of Americans have fought and died for.
This is the America for which Michelle Obama expressed her resentment
before it became politically expedient to keep quiet.
It is the America that Reverend Jeremiah Wright denounced in his
sermons during the 20 years when Barack Obama was a parishioner,
before political expediency required Obama to withdraw and distance
himself.
The thing most associated with America-- freedom-- is precisely what
must be destroyed if this is to be turned into a fundamentally
different country to suit Obama's vision of the country and of
himself. But do not expect a savvy politician like Barack Obama to
express what he is doing in terms of limiting our freedom.
He may not even think of it in those terms. He may think of it in
terms of promoting "social justice" or making better decisions than
ordinary people are capable of making for themselves, whether about
medical care or housing or many other things. Throughout history,
egalitarians have been among the most arrogant people.
Obama has surrounded himself with people who also think it is their
job to make other people's decisions for them. Not just Dr. Ezekiel
Emanuel, his health care advisor who complains of Americans' "over-
utilization" of medical care, but also Professor Cass Sunstein, who
has written a whole book on how third parties should use government
power to "nudge" people into making better decisions in general.
Then there are a whole array of Obama administration officials who
take it as their job to pick winners and losers in the economy and
tell companies how much they can and cannot pay their executives.
Just as magicians know that the secret of some of their tricks is to
distract the audience, so politicians know that the secret of many
political tricks is to distract the public with scapegoats.
No one is more of a political magician than Barack Obama. At the
beginning of 2008, no one expected a shrewd and experienced politician
like Hillary Clinton to be beaten for the Democratic nomination for
President of the United States by someone completely new to the
national political scene. But Obama worked his political magic, with
the help of the media, which he still has.
Barack Obama's escapes from his own past words, deeds and associations
have been escapes worthy of Houdini.
Like other magicians, Obama has chosen his distractions well. The
insurance industry is currently his favorite distraction as
scapegoats, after he has tried to demonize doctors without much
success.
Saints are no more common in the insurance industry than in politics
or even among paragons of virtue like economists. So there will always
be horror stories, even if these are less numerous or less horrible
than what is likely to happen if Obamacare gets passed into law.
Obama even gets away with saying things like having a system to "keep
insurance companies honest"-- and many people may not see the painful
irony in politicians trying to keep other people honest. Certainly
most of the media are unlikely to point out this irony.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/21/whose_medical_decisions_part_iv
~ RHF
> On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:41:33 -0700, ~ RHF wrote:
* * * * * Five Star Snip * * * * *
- - Why do some people think Prez Obama's
- - "Special Advisor for Health Policy"
- - Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel -is- 'On Dope or Something' ?
- -
- - - This is all unadulterated nonsense, reading
- - - in all sorts of baloney that just ain't there.
- - Was Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel responsible for the
- - 'unadulterated nonsense' of End-of-Life
- - {Ending-Your-Life} Counseling in Obama-Care© ?
- Have you stopped beating your wife?
- The subject section (section 1233) of HR 3200 says that medicare
WILL PAY
- FOR A CONSULTATION BETWEEN AND PERSON ON MEDICARE AND THAT PERSON'S
- CHOSEN PHYSICIAN CONCERNING END OF LIFE DECISIONS SUCH AS LIVING
WILLS
- AND THE LIKE IF THE ELDERLY PERSON CHOOSES SUCH A CONSULTATION.
THERE IS
- NO REQUIREMENT FOR ANY CONSULTATION. ONLY AN INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR
IT
- IF THE PERSON WANTS IT.
-
- - Obama-Care© full of 'all sorts of baloney that just ain't
there' . . .
- - except higher Taxes and Limiting Medical Treatment for All.
- - .
- - that's obama-speak© right back-at-you ~ RHF
- - .
- Yet, you can't find anything in HR 3200 that actually raises taxes
on
- people who's income is less than $250,000 except for a "punitive
tax"
- levied against those who refuse to carry ANY insurance at all. (NO
- different than the government requiring people to have auto
liability
- insurance). You will not fine _*ANY*_ limitation to Medical
Treatment in
- HR 2300 anywhere.
Michael Coburn gee which is it HR 3200 ? -or- HR 2300 ?
- YOU ARE A LYING REPUBLICAN PIG!
Michael Coburn ah Obama-Bot© {Liberal-Fascist}
Name Calling : Not Facts. {oink, Oink. OINK !}
- surprise, surprise, surprise
no surprise, No Surprise. NO SURPRISE !
- "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
Michael Coburn yes those are your 'opinions' and nothing more [.]
.
Gee Michael Coburn there is no need for you
to get "All Wee-Wee'd Up !" like Prez Obama
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=15164159&ch=4226716&src=news
.
Prez Obama {without his Teleprompter} is Truly
the Gift {Gaft} that Keeps on Giving - rotfl ~ RHF
.
White House trying to Define Prez Obama's :
"All Wee-Wee'd Up !"
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/08/21/robert-gibbs-defines-obama-phrase-wee-weed-up/
-while- Everyone knows Prez Obama was talking
about . . . many/most of the Members {members}
of US Government Pissing-on-Themselves; which
would include 'himself' ;;;---}}}
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26328.html
.
Yeah - Obama-Speak© is Sort-of-Like "Zeta-Talk"
comes to Prime-Time in Washington DC.
http://www.zetatalk.com/
.
Picture this "Yes We Wee-Wee-Can !
http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/obligatory-all-wee-weed-up-photoshop/
.
Maybe Prez Obama realizes that it is He Himself
[BHO] that has Wee Wee'd On Obama-Care©
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/08/weeweed-up-health-care-debate-slips-further-from-white-house-control.html
.
Lets All Sing-a-long with Prez Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xi_ju0Bw0_U
.
baracking-the-obama -cause- he's the prez ~ RHF
.
cuh...@webtv.net
John Galt
> Who is Michael Coburn?
I've been sparring with Trucker (his previous non de plume) for years.
When he says "rightarded" he is simply saying, "you don't agree with me,
and I am always right."
(More broadly, the mental acuity of anyone who uses dismissive labels of
their political opponents, be it "rightards", "moonbats", or "wingnuts"
is seriously in question. As soon as I see one of those words, I realize
I am wasting my time.)
He's really not all that complicated. He's a statist that absolutely
positively beleives that if the US government controls all aspects of
his life, he will have a better life.
And for him, he's undoubtedly correct.
I advise you to plonk him, like I do. It leads to a much more pleasant
USENET experience.
JG
bob young
No ObaMao wrote:
> There was a time when rushing a thousand-page bill through Congress so
> fast that no one has time to read it would have provoked public
> outrage. But now, this has been attempted twice in the first 6 months
> of a new administration.
Never mind, if he wasn't so busy 'up thar' running a country that his predecessor managed to put
firmly 'in the shit' he might deign to gaze upon you groveling 'down thar' . No doubt, again, if he
had the time, he would feel genuinely sorry for you.
Americans it would seem, or at least some of them, have no qualms about trashing their country each
time something crops up they don't agree with.
It would seem that men always need some idiotic fiction in the name of which they can hate one
another. Once it was religion. Now it is the State.
[Albert Einstein]
[How long did you sit down scratching your thick head before you managed to work out that stupid,
insulting, childish nym of yours ?]
>
>
> The fact that they got away with it before, with the "stimulus" bill,
> may have led them to believe that they could get away with it again.
>
> But the first bill simply spent hundreds of billions of dollars. The
> current "health care" bill threatens to take life-and-death decisions
> out of the hands of individuals and their doctors, transferring those
> decisions to Washington bureaucrats.
>
> People are taking that personally-- as they should. Your life and
> death, and that of your loved ones, is as personal as it gets.
>
> The mainstream media are again circling the wagons to protect Barack
> Obama, but this time it may not work. One of those front-page
> editorials disguised as a news article in the New York Times begins:
> "The stubborn yet false rumor that President Obama's health care
> proposals would create government-sponsored 'death panels' to decide
> which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in
> recent weeks."
>
> Nowhere? Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is "Special Advisor for Health Policy"
> for the Obama administration. That's nowhere? He is also co-author of
> an article on Americans' "over-utilization" of medical care in the
> June 18, 2008 issue of the Journal of the American Medical
> Association. Is that nowhere?
>
> http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/18/whose_medical_decisions?page=full
> http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/19/whose_medical_decisions_part_ii?page=full
>
> http://townhall.com/Columnists/ThomasSowell/
>
> http://www.tsowell.com/
bob young
Dude777 wrote:
> dave wrote:
> > No ObaMao wrote:
> >> There was a time when rushing a thousand-page bill through Congress so
> >> fast that no one has time to read it would have provoked public
> >> outrage. But now, this has been attempted twice in the first 6 months
> >> of a new administration.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > If you have enough time to trudge through that you certainly don't work
> > for a living.
>
> It is better to stay silent and be thought a fool then to post and leave
> no doubt. Or something like that.
Right on
Michael Coburn
> Part III and IV
>
> Amid all the controversies over medical care, no one seems to be asking
> a very basic question: Why does it take more than 1,000 pages of
> legislation to insure people who lack medical insurance?
I already addressed this pig shit in another thread and so I have delete
the pig manure. The entire load of manure and my address of it is
preserve in googlegroups for all to see:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics/msg/3445cfadb26882b2?
hl=en&dmode=source
<<<<<<<<<DELETED REPETITIVE PIG SHIT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/20/
whose_medical_decisions_part_iii
>
>
> The serious, and sometimes chilling, provisions of the medical care
> legislation that President Obama has been trying to rush through
> Congress are important enough for all of us to stop and think, even
> though his political strategy from the outset has been to prevent us
> from having time to stop and think about it.
The people had time to think about it and they elected representatives to
do something about it. And the Representatives in the House have
followed the commitments that Obama made that got him elected to office.
The result id HR 3200. The President wanted to get this done and move on
to other very pressing business but that was not to be. Hence, it became
necessary to spell out all the detail and that has now been done. It
doesn't seem to matter. The Republicans continue to lie about what's in
the bill.
> What we also should stop to think about is the mindset behind this
> legislation, which is very consistent with the mindset behind other
> policies of this administration, whether the particular issue is bailing
> out General Motors, telling banks who to lend to or appointing "czars"
> to tell all sorts of people in many walks of life what they can and
> cannot do.
Republican off topic pig shit.
> The idea that government officials can play God from Washington is not a
> new idea, but it is an idea that is being pushed with new audacity.
HR 3200 preserves all the choices while accomplishing the tasks that need
to be accomplished.
> What they are trying to do is to create an America very unlike the
> America that has existed for centuries-- the America that people have
> been attracted to by the millions from every part of the world, the
> America that many generations of Americans have fought and died for.
More off topic Republican swill.
> This is the America for which Michelle Obama expressed her resentment
> before it became politically expedient to keep quiet.
The election is over. You cretins lost. Deal with it.
> It is the America that Reverend Jeremiah Wright denounced in his sermons
> during the 20 years when Barack Obama was a parishioner, before
> political expediency required Obama to withdraw and distance himself.
Which he DID.
> The thing most associated with America-- freedom-- is precisely what
> must be destroyed if this is to be turned into a fundamentally different
> country to suit Obama's vision of the country and of himself. But do not
> expect a savvy politician like Barack Obama to express what he is doing
> in terms of limiting our freedom.
LIE. NOTHING IN HR 3200 limits freedom other than limiting the freedom
to never insure ones self and to take advantage of FREE care when it is
needed. The only freedom taken away is the freedom to steal from
everyone else. There is a 2.5% punitive tax that will be assessed on
people who have good incomes but who are unwilling to insure themselves.
This insistence concerning MINIMAL insurance is no different than
insisting that car owners must carry liability insurance. Because we do
not let people die in the street. The FREE RIDERS will get medical
care. And unless a punitive tax is levied we will all CONTINUE to pay
for the care of the FREE RIDERS.
> He may not even think of it in those terms. He may think of it in terms
> of promoting "social justice" or making better decisions than ordinary
> people are capable of making for themselves, whether about medical care
> or housing or many other things. Throughout history, egalitarians have
> been among the most arrogant people.
It has to do with ECONOMIC justice you lying sack of pig manure. It is
sen that people game the system by NOT being insured. HR 3200 does not
solve the problem, but it does put a major dent in it.
> Obama has surrounded himself with people who also think it is their job
> to make other people's decisions for them. Not just Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel,
> his health care advisor who complains of Americans' "over- utilization"
> of medical care, but also Professor Cass Sunstein, who has written a
> whole book on how third parties should use government power to "nudge"
> people into making better decisions in general.
There is nothing wrong with educating people to make better decisions.
The concept logically assumes that they are free to make such decisions.
> Then there are a whole array of Obama administration officials who take
> it as their job to pick winners and losers in the economy and tell
> companies how much they can and cannot pay their executives.
Another off topic whiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnneeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Why not
stick to what is in the bill? You can't. If you do you will be shown to
be a liar.
I have left the last part unmolested. Why bother. It is a merely
personal attack on Obama and that is all it is. It has NOTHING to do
with health care reform at all. Most of the pig shit in the post
actually had nothing to do with the current proposal for health care
reform. I have actually carried the water for the only "invasion" of
personal decisions and that invasion is the insistence that people carry
liability insurance on their bodies. There is no free lunch. When these
irresponsible FREE RIDERS end up in the hospital, we all pay for it.
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
~ RHF
> On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 18:13:47 -0700, No ObaMao wrote:
> > Part III and IV
>
> > Amid all the controversies over medical care, no one seems to be asking
> > a very basic question: Why does it take more than 1,000 pages of
> > legislation to insure people who lack medical insurance?
- I already addressed this pig shit in another
- thread and so I have delete the pig manure.
- The entire load of manure and my address
- of it is preserve in googlegroups for all to see:
Michael Coburn the Obama-Bot© 'pig shit' that's
Obama-Speak© {Liberal-Fascist} Name Calling :
Not Facts. -preserved- for all to see ;-}
Michael Coburn the Obama-Bot© 'pig manure' that's
Obama-Speak© {Liberal-Fascist} Name Calling :
Not Facts. -preserved- for all to see ;-}
Michael Coburn the Obama-Bot© 'load of manure' that's
Obama-Speak© {Liberal-Fascist} Name Calling :
Not Facts. -preserved- for all to see ;-}
.
- - - = = = RHF's Canned Reply 'Rant' = = = - - -
[>: To Liberal-Fascist {Democrat} Name Calling :<]
ROTFL - You Know When You Are Winning An Argument :
When a Super-Smart 'Enlightened" Liberal Starts Name Calling*.
* They Lose Their Ability To Think And Get Emotional - rotfl ~ RHF
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/318979fbe8546cfa
.
So Michael Coburn have you gone out like a good
little Obama-Bot© and . . . Wee-Wee'd-Up ! Today ?
-preserve-the-moment- ;;;---}}} ~ RHF
.
Prez Obama {Speaking in Obama-Speak©}
"All Wee-Wee'd Up !"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/f6724364f5eddd65
.
Prez Obama's {Obama-Care©}
"All Wee-Wee'd Up !" Medical Decisions !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/a35661812caaec4e
.
- Michael Coburn - "DELETED REPETITIVE PIG SHIT"
? Is that an Obama-Care© Medical Decision ?
- --
- "Those are my opinions and you can't have em"
- -- Bart Simpson
Bart Simpson now he knows how to get all
"All Wee-Wee'd Up !" ;;;---}}} ~ RHF
.
dave
If you didn't know better, you'd swear the media was run by rich people
and that all this negative press was just greedy people protecting their
wallets. Good thing America's better than that.
Chas. Chan
> Chas. Chan wrote:
> > Who is Michael Coburn?
>
> I've been sparring with Trucker (his previous non de plume) for years.
>
> When he says "rightarded" he is simply saying, "you don't agree with me,
> and I am always right."
>
> (More broadly, the mental acuity of anyone who uses dismissive labels of
> their political opponents, be it "rightards", "moonbats", or "wingnuts"
> is seriously in question. As soon as I see one of those words, I realize
> I am wasting my time.)
>
> He's really not all that complicated. He's a statist that absolutely
> positively beleives that if the US government controls all aspects of
> his life, he will have a better life.
>
> And for him, he's undoubtedly correct.
>
> I advise you to plonk him, like I do. It leads to a much more pleasant
> USENET experience.
>
> JG
>
Ah, I see, thank you. In other words, to be more efficiently precise,
he's just another Liberal Fascist.
Nickname unavailable
hitler hated liberals, he killed over 6.5 million jews because most of
them are liberal. he killed communists, socialists, trade unionists,
the mentally retarded, the physical disabled, the unemployed, whom he
all considered useless eaters.
liberals would not kill for your political and economic beliefs, the
constitution is a liberal document, that grants you those rights.
liberals would house the retarded, help the disabled, and provide
unemployment benefits for the unemployed. once again you have proven
that propaganda can work on the truly stupid.
cuh...@webtv.net
Is www.libertypost.org ever going to make a comeback? I Hopes so!
122 three inch long galvanized screws (and also galvanized flat washers)
to each one of those eight Ondura www.ondura.com corrugated roof
panels I done put on my old trailer.But, I still needs to run those
screws along the bottom eves on both sides on the roof up there.For
doing that, I am going to use my electric drill with a philips bit.If I
had tried using my electric drill on those other screws, especially
wayyyyy up there at the top, it would have knocked my arse off of the
roof and off of my ladder and flat on the ground, because I was
literally laying on my belly on top of that trailer roof wayyyy up
there.I am too young to die, too old to die too!
cuhulin
John Galt
Well, he hasn't abandoned the idea of representative government, just
the idea that there should be more than his political school of thought
represented in America.
So, I wouldn't call him a fascist yet, but he's well along the road.
JG
cuh...@webtv.net
screws (also galvanized flat washers too) to each one of those Ondura
corrugated roofin panels.But, multiply and add em up, it's still a LOT
of screwing!
I best git back to my screwing again.
cuhulin
~ RHF
Gone Out and Wee-Wee'd-Up ! This Week ?
-preserving-the-moment- ;;;---}}} ~ RHF
-begin- the Month of September 2009 by following
The Great and Wonder Leader "O"© by doing your
"All Wee-Wee'd Up !" thingee for all to see . . .
.
Prez Obama 'The "O"Man' of "O"Merica©
-aka- The Great and Wonder Leader "O"©
-or- "O" The Great and Wonder Leader©
.
Prez Obama {Speaking in Obama-Speak©}
"All Wee-Wee'd Up !"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/f6724364f5eddd65
.
Prez Obama's {Obama-Care©}
"All Wee-Wee'd Up !" Medical Decisions !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/a35661812caaec4e
.
The Gift {Gaft} that Keeps on Giving
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/35d1ddbcb3466097
.
Obama-Bots© Promoting Liberal-Lies and
Democrat-Distortions
-aka- Getting "All Wee-Wee'd Up !"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/bdf594bab27563d0
.
this "All Wee-Wee'd Up !" moment is brought
to you by Insane Political Pay-Back
-and- It's a B-I-T-C-H ~ RHF
-ps- In 2009 it's now Blame Obama Time !
-cause- The ObamaSter© is the President
http://logisticsmonster.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/fascism-joker.jpg
-and- BHO is "All Wee-Wee'd Up !"
.
.
> .
> So Michael Coburn have you gone out like a good
> -preserve-the-moment- ;;;---}}} ~ RHF
> .
> Prez Obama {Speaking in Obama-Speak©}
> .
> Prez Obama's {Obama-Care©}