Remember that health care bill? The one that was "fantastic" and "incredibly well-crafted"?

[Futbol Phan]

Turns out that it's "mean" as well...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html

[xyzzy]

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
> Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html

Remember how upset Republicans were about "we have to read it to know what's in it"?

[xyzzy]

I meant "pass it" not "read it"

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

When there is no chance of bipartisanship, why give the other side
the talking points early?

Obamacare was a disaster because it was rammed through on partisan lines. Obama
and the Democrats couldn't be bothered to sell it to the nation because they
thought they had the power. Turns out that passing it was not only a disaster
for the country, but a disaster for the Democrats.

If Republicans really thought there was a chance to fix healthcare on
a bipartisan basis, they might share it with Democrats. But there
isn't, so they won't. And they won't pay the price for this, because
Democrats are so obviously unhinged in #Resistance mode.

Meanwhile, this headline at the Associated Press:

Iowa's last statewide exchange insurer seeks 43 percent hike

--
When the only tool you have is a hammer, all your problems tend to look
like nails. -- Abraham Maslow

[Michael Press]

In article <9426f523-0dd6-4b1b...@googlegroups.com>,

Futbol Phan <sgz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html

All according to plan. The AHCA fails on its own merits.

--
Michael Press

[xyzzy]

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:54:21 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
> On 2017-06-20, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
> >> Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
> >>
> >> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html
> >
> > Remember how upset Republicans were about "we have to read it to know
> > what's in it"?
>
> When there is no chance of bipartisanship, why give the other side
> the talking points early?
>
> Obamacare was a disaster because it was rammed through on partisan lines. Obama
> and the Democrats couldn't be bothered to sell it to the nation because they
> thought they had the power. Turns out that passing it was not only a disaster
> for the country, but a disaster for the Democrats.

Obamacare had 100 Senate hearings and 161 amendments from Republicans.

That the Democrats couldn't get it passed in a bipartisan nature was not for lack of trying.

Repubs aren't even trying. It's supremely ironic that you are chastising the Democrats for supposedly passing it by themselves because they had the power, when you're describing what the GOP is doing now, to a T.

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

On 2017-06-20, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:54:21 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
>> On 2017-06-20, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
>> >> Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
>> >>
>> >> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html
>> >
>> > Remember how upset Republicans were about "we have to read it to know
>> > what's in it"?
>>
>> When there is no chance of bipartisanship, why give the other side
>> the talking points early?
>>
>> Obamacare was a disaster because it was rammed through on partisan lines. Obama
>> and the Democrats couldn't be bothered to sell it to the nation because they
>> thought they had the power. Turns out that passing it was not only a disaster
>> for the country, but a disaster for the Democrats.
>
> Obamacare had 100 Senate hearings and 161 amendments from Republicans.
>
> That the Democrats couldn't get it passed in a bipartisan nature was not for lack of trying.

No, it was for lack of a good bill. That Republicans didn't vote for that
abortion is to their credit. It was based on a lie, and the results have been
dreadful.

>
> Repubs aren't even trying.

Why should they? When the one party calls the other murderers it is
not a signal to bargain in good faith. Democrats are slow-walking
everything, even approvals of appointments that are a slamdunk.

> It's supremely ironic that you are chastising the Democrats for
> supposedly passing it by themselves because they had the power, when
> you're describing what the GOP is doing now, to a T.

They don't have the power to pass anything that would make sense, other
than a repeal and retrenchment. That seems good compared to Obamacare,
alas.

--
Some people have twenty years of experience, some people have
one year of experience twenty times over. -- Anonymous

[Emperor Wonko the Sane]

I'm confused. Why did Pelosi say you'll have to pass it to see what's in the bill? There have been a lot of hearings on the House bill. There will probably be hearings on the Senate version. You have to hand it to the democrats. Almost no bill is public until it is submitted. The democrats have somehow turned this into scurrilous behavior. The dems are killin it in the propaganda wars.

Doug

[dotsla...@gmail.com]

Another freaking night is day argument from a supporter of the patriot act / clear skies / fair tax party.

I could only wish the left had 1% of the ballsy propaganda chops of the right. Except I don't.

Cheers.

[Emperor Wonko the Sane]

I'll take your substance-free response as an admission that you have no response.

Doug

[xyzzy]

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 2:52:22 PM UTC-4, Emperor Wonko the Sane wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:32:50 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:54:21 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
> > > On 2017-06-20, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
> > > >> Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html
> > > >
> > > > Remember how upset Republicans were about "we have to read it to know
> > > > what's in it"?
> > >
> > > When there is no chance of bipartisanship, why give the other side
> > > the talking points early?
> > >
> > > Obamacare was a disaster because it was rammed through on partisan lines. Obama
> > > and the Democrats couldn't be bothered to sell it to the nation because they
> > > thought they had the power. Turns out that passing it was not only a disaster
> > > for the country, but a disaster for the Democrats.
> >
> > Obamacare had 100 Senate hearings and 161 amendments from Republicans.
> >
> > That the Democrats couldn't get it passed in a bipartisan nature was not for lack of trying.
> >
> > Repubs aren't even trying. It's supremely ironic that you are chastising the Democrats for supposedly passing it by themselves because they had the power, when you're describing what the GOP is doing now, to a T.
>
> I'm confused. Why did Pelosi say you'll have to pass it to see what's in the bill? There have been a lot of hearings on the House bill. There will probably be hearings on the Senate version.

McConnell says he wants a vote on the Senate bill before the 4th of July recess. What kind of hearings do you think they can get done in that time?

[wolfie]

"Con Reeder, unhyphenated American" wrote

> Meanwhile, this headline at the Associated Press:
> Iowa's last statewide exchange insurer seeks 43 percent hike

The "why" here is actually interesting. There's ONE
person in Iowa who uses over $1M/month in medical
treatment. (He has a rare blood disorder.)

He obviously blows through his deductible in the first
few days of the year. After that, the insurer is on the
hook for over $12M, with possibly more if he has any
complications.

Under Obamacare, he can't be denied coverage and
the insurer can't cap payouts on a year or lifetime basis.
So the insurer has to try to spread out the cost - and that
means higher premiums. Or, with some, simply leaving
the market since they can't afford to risk this guy signing
up with THEM. (That's why Iowa is down to one exchange
carrier.)

Under the GOP plan, he'd get denied coverage or it
would be offered at a price he clearly couldn't pay.
(What would they charge for someone who they KNOW
is going to use $12M a year?) So he goes to a high-risk
pool, if Iowa creates one, or moves to another state that
does. And he still has to pay more, but now the bulk of
the cost is on the taxpayers. Or he simply goes without
coverage, can't get the maintenance care he needs, and
only gets treated by a hospital in urgent situations (who
then has to charge more for everyone or go broke).

(Just a side note on high-risk pools - Iowa has about 1.5M
employed residents. So, if it's a high-risk pool, each would
have to chip-in $8 in taxes just for him.)

So, all you free market types - what's the free market
solution here? The crazy left-wing solution is single-payer.
One $12M/yr patient spread over 150M isn't that much...

[wolfie]

"Emperor Wonko the Sane" wrote

> There have been a lot of hearings on the House bill

The House bill was DOA in the Senate. It's not being
took up. The Senate is writing their own bill.

> There will probably be hearings on the Senate version.

The Senate GOP leader says otherwise. I'd think he'd
know. (The GOP Senate Bill isn't being sent to any committee.)

[xyzzy]

He dies.

Duh.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 10:50:27 -0700 (PDT), xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:46:08 PM UTC-4, xyzzy wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
>> > Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
>> >
>> > http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html
>>
>> Remember how upset Republicans were about "we have to read it to know what's in it"?
>
>I meant "pass it" not "read it"

YES! Same thing with a stool sample.

Obamacare=Stool Sample

Hugh


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 11:32:47 -0700 (PDT), xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:54:21 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
>> On 2017-06-20, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
>> >> Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
>> >>
>> >> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html
>> >
>> > Remember how upset Republicans were about "we have to read it to know
>> > what's in it"?
>>
>> When there is no chance of bipartisanship, why give the other side
>> the talking points early?
>>
>> Obamacare was a disaster because it was rammed through on partisan lines. Obama
>> and the Democrats couldn't be bothered to sell it to the nation because they
>> thought they had the power. Turns out that passing it was not only a disaster
>> for the country, but a disaster for the Democrats.
>
>Obamacare had 100 Senate hearings and 161 amendments from Republicans.
>
>That the Democrats couldn't get it passed in a bipartisan nature was not for lack of trying.
>
>Repubs aren't even trying.

Yabetchaarse.

It's supremely ironic that you are chastising the Democrats for
supposedly passing it by themselves because they had the power, when
you're describing what the GOP is doing now, to a T.

That's two GFYs now.

[Some dued]

I wonder what the actual cost is for this 12mil/year billed for treatment.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 15:21:46 -0400, "wolfie" <bgbd...@gte.net> wrote:


>So, all you free market types - what's the free market
>solution here?

Life ain't fair. Get over it.

[JGibson]

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 2:41:10 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:

>
> Why should they? When the one party calls the other murderers it is
> not a signal to bargain in good faith. Democrats are slow-walking
> everything, even approvals of appointments that are a slamdunk.

Are you even listening to yourself? First, you seems to be describing why Democrats and Republicans can't bargain on any abortion bill. Second, the slow-walking that you describe is what the Republicans did for the entirety of Obama's term.

[JGibson]

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 3:21:53 PM UTC-4, wolfie wrote:

Go to the emergency room and give a fake name.

[wolfie]

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote

> Life ain't fair. Get over it.

Says the guy on not one, but two, government paid
health care plans.

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

On 2017-06-20, JGibson <james.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 2:41:10 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
>
>>
>> Why should they? When the one party calls the other murderers it is
>> not a signal to bargain in good faith. Democrats are slow-walking
>> everything, even approvals of appointments that are a slamdunk.
>
> Are you even listening to yourself?

Of course. But not with your ears.

> First, you seems to be describing why Democrats and Republicans
> can't bargain on any abortion bill.

The difference being that when Republicans mention murder something
actually dies, and that the legislation in question is the proximate
cause thereof.

> Second, the slow-walking that you describe is what the Republicans did
> for the entirety of Obama's term.

The rate of appointment confirmations in 2009 belies that statement.
In other words, bullshit. Democrats for Trump have taken it to a new
level.

--
Personally, I liked the university. They gave us money and facilities,
we didn't have to produce anything! You've never been out of college!
You don't know what it's like out there! I've *worked* in the private
sector. They expect *results*. -- "Dr. Ray Stantz", Ghostbusters

[xyzzy]

$1 to "Death Panels"

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

There is a good distance from that to accusing the opposing party's
legislators, in so many words, of murder.

--
Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. -- Francis Bacon

[Ken Olson]

Death Panel = Triage

[Ken Olson]

That he earned.

[Ken Olson]

I bet I said the same thing to convicts at least 5 times a day.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

But I had to earn them. I want some unentitled money.

Life ain't fair but I got over it.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:28:56 -0400, Ken Olson <kol...@freedomnet.org>
wrote:

Give him a break - he doesn't know what EARNED means. He thinks
ear-ning is an ear infection.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:29:59 -0400, Ken Olson <kol...@freedomnet.org>
wrote:

If wolfie was one he never knew what you meant.

Hugh

[wolfie]

"Ken Olson" wrote
> "wolfie" wrote

>> Says the guy on not one, but two, government paid
>> health care plans.

> That he earned.

Nah, he's said the government taking money from one
person and giving it to another is socialism. I'm pretty
sure he's against that.

[Michael Press]

In article <247635b0-275c-4e43...@googlegroups.com>,

xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:54:21 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
> > On 2017-06-20, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
> > >> Turns out that it's "mean" as well...
> > >>
> > >> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/politics/trump-mean-health-care/index.html
> > >
> > > Remember how upset Republicans were about "we have to read it to know
> > > what's in it"?
> >
> > When there is no chance of bipartisanship, why give the other side
> > the talking points early?
> >
> > Obamacare was a disaster because it was rammed through on partisan lines. Obama
> > and the Democrats couldn't be bothered to sell it to the nation because they
> > thought they had the power. Turns out that passing it was not only a disaster
> > for the country, but a disaster for the Democrats.
>
> Obamacare had 100 Senate hearings and 161 amendments from Republicans.
>
> That the Democrats couldn't get it passed in a bipartisan nature was not for lack of trying.
>
> Repubs aren't even trying.

Don't want to. Just watching the dumpster fire
that the Democratic Party started.

> It's supremely ironic that you are chastising the Democrats for supposedly passing it by themselves because they had the power, when you're describing what the GOP is doing now, to a T.

Government participation in the financial end of medicine
is a disaster. Now that government is in, how does it get out?

--
Michael Press

[Michael Press]

In article <59497aaf....@news.eternal-september.org>,

Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 15:21:46 -0400, "wolfie" <bgbd...@gte.net> wrote:
>
>
> >So, all you free market types - what's the free market
> >solution here?
>
> Life ain't fair. Get over it.

Riposte of the week.

--
Michael Press

[wolfie]

"Michael Press" wrote

> "J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote:

> "wolfie" <bgbd...@gte.net> wrote:
>
>>> So, all you free market types - what's the free market
>>> solution here?
>
>> Life ain't fair. Get over it.

> Riposte of the week.

Standard low-information, no idea reply. My kid
did better on the playground at 4yo.

[wolfie]

"Michael Press" wrote

> Government participation in the financial end of medicine
> is a disaster.

Best results for lowest price medical care in US? Government-ran.

[Ken Olson]

So am I, but that doesn't mean I will give my money to a system without
taking what I have coming from it, or more likely my wife, as I don't
expect to live long enough to collect.

[agavi...@gmail.com]

Apparently they do remember that.

[Michael Press]

In article <oicdl6$6g3$1...@dont-email.me>, "wolfie" <bgbd...@gte.net>
wrote:

You changed the subject from government meddling
in "insurance" where premiums are increasing at double
digit rates to the price of medical procedures that are
the result of our free enterprise system

Don't do that. It makes you appear dishonest.

--
Michael Press

[wolfie]

"Michael Press" wrote

> "wolfie" wrote:

> "Michael Press" wrote
>
>> > Government participation in the financial end of medicine
>> > is a disaster.
>
>> Best results for lowest price medical care in US? Government-ran.

> You changed the subject from government meddling
in "insurance"

"Government participation in the financial end of

medicine" != "government meddling in 'insurance'".
Thanks for trying.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

That makes your kid smarter than you, gofer.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

Yes, your 4 yo is definitely smarter than you.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

Return on earned investment is not an unearned freebie, Dumbo. I'm
sure you don't comprehend the meaning of earned. Ask your 4 yo for
help.

[Michael Press]

In article <oicdi3$682$1...@dont-email.me>, "wolfie" <bgbd...@gte.net>
wrote:

Than tag him and bring him in. You're getting mauled.

--
Michael Press

[Michael Press]

In article <oidp1t$t4i$1...@dont-email.me>, "wolfie" <bgbd...@gte.net>
wrote:

It is exactly what meddling in "insurance" is.

--
Michael Press