Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Why Do Republicans Want To Deny Health Care To Americans?

24 views
Skip to first unread message

Harry Hope

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 9:35:39 AM4/4/10
to

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2010/042010/04042010/535939

4/4/2010

By Michael Watterson


With passing health care reform on March 21, Barack Obama and the
Democratic Party removed the "if" from our health care system.

We have moved away from a system in which people could assume they had
health care coverage if they were struggling financially and had
Medicaid, if they were older and had Medicare, if they served our
country and had VA benefits, if they had a job with health care
benefits, or if they were wealthy enough to afford coverage on their
own.

We have moved toward a system in which people can assume they have
health care coverage.

No ifs about it.

Republicans claim they are going to run on repealing this new system.

This means they want to reopen the "doughnut hole" and charge seniors
more for prescription drugs,

they want to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover
a pre-existing condition,

they want to remove 25-year-olds from their parents' insurance
coverage,

and they want to take away health coverage from 32 million Americans.

___________________________________________________

Mind-boggling, eh?

Harry


Message has been deleted

Kevin Cunningham

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 10:18:21 AM4/4/10
to
On Apr 4, 9:47 am, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
> bill.
>
> Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
> current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
> Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
> place?

What a crock! The repugs held absolute power for years and what did
they do? Nothing. They had the opportunity to create what ever
health care system they wanted to.

And they did. They created a system that destroys most of Americans
bankrupt. They created a system
were there were 46 million uninsured and tens of millions under
insured. In their years in power they destroyed a health care system
proposed by dems before, you would have thought they would have
proposed their "option". But they didn't. They don't have an
option. They just lie.

Were is the repug health care option? Why don't they bring it up?
Why didn't they work with dems and forge a compromise?

Because they don't have a health care option. Because they hate
African-Americans. And their hatred is so strong they warned every
repug not to step over the line to cooperation.

First.Post

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 10:22:06 AM4/4/10
to
On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 06:47:55 -0700 (PDT), Salty Stan
<wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 4, 9:35 am, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
>bill.
>
>Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
>current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
>Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
>place?

No. The reason for the bill is tax dollars.

Commie

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 10:42:56 AM4/4/10
to

"Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b03d740b-dcfc-4de5...@g11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
bill.

=================

Bullshit - that's what you've been programmed to say.
I'll bet you've never read two pages of this bill.
BTW, it's has a name that's not, "ObamaCare".

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:05:50 AM4/4/10
to

"Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b03d740b-dcfc-4de5...@g11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 4, 9:35 am, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
> bill.
>
> Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
> current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
> Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
> place?
.
.
Republican proposals were incorporated in the health care bill.

Yet they still voted AGAINST it.

Republican opposition was simply based on obstruction for the sole purpose
of discrediting Obama.

You lost,

The bill is weak, but it's a start.

We needed "single payer" or Medicare for all.

The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 1:26:20 PM4/4/10
to
> repug not to step over the line to cooperation.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Why should I pay for your healthcare??

The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 1:27:31 PM4/4/10
to
On Apr 4, 10:05 am, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "Salty Stan" <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> We needed "single payer" or Medicare for all.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Care to cite those "Republican proposals" sid?? No,George Soros's
facebook page is NOT a cite.

wy

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 1:59:38 PM4/4/10
to
On Apr 4, 9:47 am, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 9:35 am, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
> bill.
>
> Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
> current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
> Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
> place?

Why, you simpleton, is because that all the elements of and
bureaucratic infrastructure for the health care bill to come into full
effect takes time to create, institute, implement and evolve into a
new, fully functioning system. As with anything from the ground up,
it's done in stages. Why doesn't it take till tomorrow to get that
new and improved 100 miles to the gallon car to be available to
everyone? Well, duhhh, it takes years to develop any new car model
from scratch before it can be a fully functioning one designed to meet
what it was built for. Why doesn't it take you 2 seconds to get to
work? Well, duhhh, because it takes you an hour to get ready in the
morning from showering to eating and getting the kids to school before
you can even begin to hit the road on your way to work, but not before
you encounter traffic slowing you down along the way, making you end
up at work 2 hours after you got up in the morning, not 2 seconds.
It's all done in stages, everything is. That's why. And in the case
of the health care bill, it's also budgeted according to it being done
in stages. What a simpleton.

wy

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 2:05:37 PM4/4/10
to

Why should you pay your HMO? After all, your premiums are going to
pay for other people's coverage, just as other people's premiums to
your HMO will pay for your coverage, especially if your bill ends up
costing more than you have ever put into your premiums. There's no
getting around it, whether it's HMO or otherwise, insurance of any
kind is basically you paying for others, just as others are paying for
you - it's all socialism. The only difference being that HMOs are in
it for profit, which is the capitalist element of a private system, a
government plan isn't. So you're actually paying more to HMOs because
a percentage of your premium is for their profit.

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 2:25:22 PM4/4/10
to

"wy" <w...@myself.com> wrote in message
news:e0e56738-3fbe-4ef3...@30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
.
.
HMO advantage was a Republican giveaway to insurance companies and few
crumbs thrown to the insured.

Insurance companies were overpaid by 14%

It's no wonder they advertised do aggressively!

Werner

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 4:09:36 PM4/4/10
to
On Apr 4, 9:35 am, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> ...

>
> We have moved toward a system in which people can assume they have
> health care coverage.
>


How much coverage can a bankrupt country give? People assume SS covers
their retirement. Try living on $1000/month.


http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/SocialSecurity.shtml
http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/HealthCare.shtml
The 2008 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports show the
combined unfunded liability of these two programs has reached $101.7
trillion in today's dollars! That is more than seven times the size of
the U.S. economy and 10 times the size of the outstanding national
debt. The unfunded liability is the difference between the benefits
that have been promised to retirees and what will be collected in
dedicated taxes and Medicare premiums. Last year alone, the size of
the debt rose by $11.5 trillion. If no other reform is enacted, this
funding gap can only be closed in future years by substantial tax
increases, large benefit cuts or both.
http://retirementreform.org/socialsecurity/brief-analysis-616-social-security-and-medicare-projections-2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oDVn_S-Rrg&feature=related


znuybv

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 4:13:14 PM4/4/10
to

It took bribery , deceit and corruption to put this health care in
place.
You will reap what you sow.

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 4:19:07 PM4/4/10
to

"Werner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:b10aae1d-c5a8-4bc5...@w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 4, 9:35 am, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> We have moved toward a system in which people can assume they have
>> health care coverage.
>>
>
>
> How much coverage can a bankrupt country give? People assume SS covers
> their retirement. Try living on $1000/month.
.
.
Our nation is not bankrupt.

Only Republican ideas are bankrupt.

SS was never designed to provide complete retirement fund.
.
.
.


.
>
>
> http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/SocialSecurity.shtml
> http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/HealthCare.shtml
> The 2008 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports show the
> combined unfunded liability of these two programs has reached $101.7
> trillion in today's dollars! That is more than seven times the size of
> the U.S. economy and 10 times the size of the outstanding national
> debt. The unfunded liability is the difference between the benefits
> that have been promised to retirees and what will be collected in
> dedicated taxes and Medicare premiums. Last year alone, the size of
> the debt rose by $11.5 trillion. If no other reform is enacted, this
> funding gap can only be closed in future years by substantial tax
> increases, large benefit cuts or both.
> http://retirementreform.org/socialsecurity/brief-analysis-616-social-security-and-medicare-projections-2008
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oDVn_S-Rrg&feature=related
>
>

.
.
.

The "Trustees Report" requires them to plan on a 75 year window.

Nothing could be more UNrealistic than that.

Baby boomers, who are reputed to be the big problem, are entering the system
now...they will age OUT of the system in twenty years.

Only a small fix is needed.

We need to remove the unrealistic "cap" that protects the wealthy from
paying their fair share.

Hiding their money in Switzerland is how they demonstrate their patriotism.

If they don't like it they can leave the country just as Limbo threatened.

Diogenes

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 7:01:25 PM4/4/10
to

they want to take away health coverage from 32 million Americans.
>
----
They just don't want 1 million Americans paying for 31 million freeloaders.

None4U

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 7:17:24 PM4/4/10
to

"Diogenes" <Diog...@its.invalid> wrote in message
news:hpb5ol$imf$1...@news.eternal-september.org...


There are no 32 million Americans. There's 6 million, And 26 million
illegals.


Message has been deleted

Christopher Helms

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 7:32:57 PM4/4/10
to


It's not mind boggling. Republicans think and say what corporate
interests tell them to think and say. Whether this or that is good,
bad or indifferent for the country simply doesn't come into it. They
do what they are programmed to do and if they are programmed to tell
32 million uninsured people to go screw themselves, that's what they
will do. Happily. Enthusiastically. If they are programmed to say that
sending the American manufacturing base to Mexico, China and soon
Columbia is good for America, they will do so with broad smiles and
cooked statistics. They will say that $4.75 a gallon for gas is cheap,
that billions of dollars unaccounted for in Iraq isn't important, that
eight hundred dollars for a hammer is okay, that NAFTA created
American jobs, that deficits don't matter, whatever the people in the
boardrooms tell them to say. The Republicans don't have ideas; they
are nothing more than ventriloquist's dummies for whoever is giving
them money from one minute to the next. If the healthcare "debate"
taught us anything, it's that the Republican party is nothing more
than a political jukebox that will play any goddamn song you like,
including Say Yes To Socialism! (See Wall Street, government sponsored
Healthcare Monopolies, Banksters, Big Oil, Massive Subsidies etc etc.)
if you jam enough quarters into the slot. They are whores and they are
barely pretending to be anything else these days.

Rightardia

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 8:00:41 PM4/4/10
to
On 04/04/2010 09:47 AM, Salty Stan wrote:
> We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
> bill.
>
> Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
> current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
> Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
> place?

Republicans preferred to stonewall Obama and thought they could torpedo
his presidency by defeating health care. The GOP failed!

It's tough shit that you don't like the the new law. The GOP got exactly
what it deserved.

--
Rightardia: The progressive alternative to conservative fascism.

Werner

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 9:24:05 PM4/4/10
to
> will do. ...


Any state can decree government single payer health care.


A "right" as envisioned by the Founders meant that the government 
was
  not permitted to interfere with your pursuit of them, i.e., 
your
 pursuit   of happiness was to be unhindered by government. 
The "right" of free speech means that    government cannot interfere
with your free speech.  The "right" of  gun  ownership means that the
government cannot infringe your gun ownership.     What does "right"
to health care mean?  It means that the government cannot stand    in
the way of your pursuit of health care, or impede your
obtaining health    care. The "right" to an  attorney means that the
government cannot prevent you obtaining an attorney  to represent
you.
Of course, "right" has incorrectly come to mean that someone must
supply   you with something.  If your "right" to housing means that
some slave   must supply you with housing, and your "right" to health
care means  that some slave must supply you with health care, and
your 
"right" to  an attorney means that some slave must supply you
with an 
attorney, does your "right" to free speech mean that some
slave must 
supply you with a loudspeaker, or TV air time?  Does your
"right" to 
own guns mean that some slave must supply you with guns?
http://www.capitaldistrict-lp.org/Rights.shtml 
Dollars in the common
treasury are like fish in the common sea - 
anyone who can will
harvest to extinction. That is why socialism is 
fundamentally
corrupting and can not work. The Fed is making a lot of 
paper fish.
This is an illusion of wealth. The real fish are gone. 
 ----
http://www.capitaldistrict-lp.org/how.shtml 
Governing has become a
way to get privileges for some at the expense 
of others.
http://www.capitaldistrict-lp.org/what.shtml
http://www.investmentu.com/IUEL/2008/August/the-national-debt.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp8ZmQMCtqA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FSoXKapKQs&feature=related
===


Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 9:42:28 PM4/4/10
to

"Werner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5b297705-6695-4918...@n31g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...


==================
The states:

1. Most are broke
2. Most state legislatures are corrupt.

Our "States Rights" are an an anachronism.
"States Right" keep America from moving forward.
They were fine in an agrarian society where communications were limited.
For the twenty-first century they are obsolete.
==================

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 10:55:49 PM4/4/10
to

What exactly is this "system" that the Republicans created again?

> They created a system
> were there were 46 million uninsured and tens of millions under
> insured.  In their years in power they destroyed a health care system
> proposed by dems before, you would have thought they would have
> proposed their "option".  But they didn't.  They don't have an
> option.  They just lie.
>
> Were is the repug health care option?  Why don't they bring it up?
> Why didn't they work with dems and forge a compromise?

Probably because the Dems shut them out as they crafted this bill
behind closed doors.

>
> Because they don't have a health care option.  Because they hate
> African-Americans.

Right, the GOP does not want to create a health care plan because they
hate African-Americans.

> And their hatred is so strong they warned every
> repug not to step over the line to cooperation.

Also, poll after poll reveals that the vast majority of Americans
oppose this health care bill too. Do they hate Africans Americans too?

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 10:58:35 PM4/4/10
to

So, did you ever get an answer to that?

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:00:02 PM4/4/10
to

Wow, what a nice long explanation. And still didn't answer the
question.

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:00:31 PM4/4/10
to

Wasn't HMO's a Ted Kennedy idea?

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:02:31 PM4/4/10
to
On Apr 4, 8:00 pm, Rightardia <rightar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/04/2010 09:47 AM, Salty Stan wrote:
>
>
>
---

>
> > We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
> > bill.
>
> > Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
> > current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
> > Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
> > place?
>
> Republicans preferred to stonewall Obama and thought they could torpedo
> his presidency by defeating health care. The GOP failed!
>
> It's tough shit that you don't like the the new law. The GOP got exactly
> what it deserved.
>
> --
> Rightardia: The progressive alternative to conservative fascism.

Couldn't help but notice you didn't address the question.

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:05:01 PM4/4/10
to
On Apr 4, 9:42 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "Werner" <whetz...@mac.com> wrote in message

As opposed to the Federal government?

> 2. Most state legislatures are corrupt.

Mainly Democrat run states. (NY, NJ, MASS, etc.)

>
> Our "States Rights" are an an anachronism.
> "States Right" keep America from moving forward.
> They were fine in an agrarian society where communications were limited.
> For the twenty-first century they are obsolete.

Ever hear of the tenth amendment?
> ==================
>
>

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:08:50 PM4/4/10
to

"Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7726ac0c-506b-46be...@o26g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
.
.
Republicans were invited in.

Many of their proposals were accepted.

They only wanted to obstruct and present Obama with a failure.

Republicans failed America......

...and...

You are a liar

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:11:15 PM4/4/10
to

"Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7e7c6b8b-b7d2-4679...@i16g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...

"Republican proposals in the health care bill" Google it

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:14:10 PM4/4/10
to

"Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:243426db-1920-4d17...@w3g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
,
,
HMO Advantage was a Republican idea....a giveaway to the insurance companies

"HMO Advantage" is not "HMO"

You Republican liars like to confuse things.

Insurance companies are being overpaid by 14%

wy

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:16:30 PM4/4/10
to

Sorry for that professorial explanation. But here's the fat-free,
dumbed-down version for those who failed kindergarten:

Because it's being built from scratch in stages, that's why.

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:18:31 PM4/4/10
to

"Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9651ed47-34bc-4898...@i5g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
..
.
.
The Federal government is not "broke"

That's another Republican lie

Tenth Amendment Ratified 1791.

"..."States Rights" are an an anachronism...."

It holds America at the mercy of our most backward states

wy

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:20:47 PM4/4/10
to

Yes and no:

Asked about his greatest regret as a legislator, Ted Kennedy would
usually cite his refusal to cut a deal with Richard Nixon on health
care.

. . . [in 1971], Nixon asked Congress to require for the first time
that all companies provide a health plan for their employees, with
federal subsidies for low-income workers. Nixon was particularly
intrigued by a new idea called health maintenance organizations, which
held the promise of providing high-quality care at lower prices by
relying on salaried physicians to manage and coordinate patient care.

At first, Kennedy rejected Nixon’s proposal as nothing more than a
bonanza for the insurance industry that would create a two-class
system of health care in America. But after Nixon won reelection,
Kennedy began a series of secret negotiations with the White House
that almost led to a public agreement. In the end, Nixon backed out
after receiving pressure from small-business owners and the American
Medical Association. And Kennedy himself decided to back off after
receiving heavy pressure from labor leaders, who urged him to hold out
for a single-payer system once Democrats recaptured the White House in
the wake of the Watergate scandal.

Thirty-five year later, the single-payer dream of Democratic liberals
still remains politically out of reach . . .

The simple lesson from this story — and certainly the one Kennedy
himself drew — is that when it comes to historic breakthroughs in
social policy, make the best deal you can get, leaving it to
subsequent generations to perfect.

As anyone who saw Sicko might remember, Kennedy’s initial reaction
was, in fact, an entirely accurate assessment of Nixon’s motivation in
promoting HMOs — as confirmed by a taped conversation between Tricky
Dick and aide John Ehrlichman (transcript condensed to remove cross-
talk):

Nixon: “. . . You know, I’m not too keen on any of these damn medical
programs.”

Ehrlichman: “This is a private enterprise one.”

President Nixon: “Well, that appeals to me.”

Ehrlichman: “Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for
profit. . . . I had Edgar Kaiser come in [and] talk to me about this,
and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less
medical care, because the less care they give them, the more money
they make.”

President Nixon: “Fine.”

Ehrlichman: “… and the incentives run the right way.”

President Nixon: “Not bad.”

Republican scum sticking it to the little guy, as always.

Sid9

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:24:08 PM4/4/10
to

"wy" <w...@myself.com> wrote in message
news:cc18ff7a-10b9-447b...@i25g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
.
.
He's playing the Republican "confusion" game

The bill takes on "HMO Advantage" not HMOs

"HMO Advantage" is overpaid by the government by 14%

HMOs are untouched.

This is part of the Republican LIE to frighten seniors.


None4U

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 12:32:48 AM4/5/10
to

"Sid9" <si...@belsouth.net> wrote in message
news:hpbkrj$uv5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Nope, it holds the Federal government accountable. Only you Socialist think
the Federal govrnment is America.,


The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 7:19:05 AM4/5/10
to
On Apr 4, 1:05 pm, wy <w...@myself.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 1:26 pm, The PHANTOM <hoofhearte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 9:18 am, Kevin Cunningham <sms...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 4, 9:47 am, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
> > > > bill.
>
> > > > Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
> > > > current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
> > > > Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
> > > > place?
>
> a percentage of your premium is for their profit.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

I get to chose which doctor I go to and when. I don't have a 6 week
waiting period to see the doctor of my choice. Tell me one thing the
government runs well and runs within budget. Then tell me why you
believe Obama and Pelosi should run healthcare.

The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 7:19:50 AM4/5/10
to
On Apr 4, 1:25 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "wy" <w...@myself.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e0e56738-3fbe-4ef3...@30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> .
> .
> HMO advantage was a Republican giveaway to insurance companies and few
> crumbs thrown to the insured.
>
> Insurance companies were overpaid by 14%
>
> It's no wonder they advertised do aggressively!- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

And you think insurance companies won't make $TRILLIONS on this
ObongCare fiasco??

The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 7:21:28 AM4/5/10
to
On Apr 4, 3:19 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "Werner" <whetz...@mac.com> wrote in message
> >http://retirementreform.org/socialsecurity/brief-analysis-616-social-...

> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oDVn_S-Rrg&feature=related
>
> .
> .
> .
>
> The "Trustees Report" requires them to plan on a 75 year window.
>
> Nothing could be more UNrealistic than that.
>
> Baby boomers, who are reputed to be the big problem, are entering the system
> now...they will age OUT of the system in twenty years.
>
> Only a small fix is needed.
>
> We need to remove the unrealistic "cap" that protects the wealthy from
> paying their fair share.
>
> Hiding their money in Switzerland is how they demonstrate their patriotism.
>
> If they don't like it they can leave the country just as Limbo threatened.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

"Limbo" didn't threaten to leave the country. That lie makes
everything else you post automatically suspicious sid.

The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 7:23:49 AM4/5/10
to
> Rightardia: The progressive alternative to conservative fascism.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

How can (R)s "stonewall" anything?? Obama has the Whitehouse and both
houses of congress are controlled by progressives. If this healthcare
contol bill was such a panacea it should've been passed 8 months ago.

The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 7:24:58 AM4/5/10
to
On Apr 4, 8:42 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "Werner" <whetz...@mac.com> wrote in message
> > ===- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

This fucked up Health Control bill will cost Texas over $28BILLION
over ten years. We don't want it !!

The PHANTOM

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 7:25:46 AM4/5/10
to
> So, did you ever get an answer to that?- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Nope. I never get an answer to that question.

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 10:14:07 AM4/5/10
to
On Apr 4, 11:08 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "Salty Stan" <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7726ac0c-506b-46be...@o26g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
>
>----

> > Probably because the Dems shut them out as they crafted this bill
> > behind closed doors.
>
> .
> .
> Republicans were invited in.
>


Boehner: GOP leaders haven't met Obama for health talks since April
By Molly K. Hooper - 09/09/09 11:09 AM ET

The ball is in President Obama's court to reach out to Republicans if
he wants a bipartisan bill on healthcare reform, House GOP Leader John
Boehner (Ohio) said Monday morning.

Boehner told reporters that the president has not invited House GOP
leaders to the White House for meetings on healthcare reform since the
end of April.

Earlier this year, GOP leaders sent a letter to the president in May
stating that they would like to work with the administration to find
"common ground" on healthcare reform.

But the administration responded with a tersely worded letter
indicating that they had healthcare reform under control.
>-
>
> You are a liar

I am?

Stile4aly

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 10:19:03 AM4/5/10
to
> believe Obama and Pelosi should run healthcare.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Fascinating. Every insurance plan I've ever had requires me to see
the doctors on the insurance plan's list. If they're not on the list,
I must pay cash, which basically means I can't see them. Oftentimes,
particularly with specialists, there is a wait. Earlier this year I
needed back surgery. I had a 4 week wait before I was able to have
the surgery. So, pretending that there are no waiting periods and
unlimited choices today is simply false.

Stile4aly

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 10:27:57 AM4/5/10
to

How can they stonewall? Pretty simple. The rules of the Senate
require a certain set of steps to be taken in order for debate to be
opened on a bill, amendments to be made, debate to be closed, and a
final vote to be taken. Basically, any of these steps can occur by
unanimous consent. That is to say, if there is no objection then a
debate can be opened or closed, or an amendment or bill adopted. If
one Senator objects then there must be a vote and in order for there
to be a vote there must be a certain amount of debate (usually 30
hours). Moreover, if one Senator objects and Mitch McConnell
announces that he intends to filibuster, then 60 votes are required
for any step rather than 51. Given that the use of the filibuster has
been significantly increased and given that Republican solidarity has
been near unanimous, the Senate has essentially become a 60 vote
environment requiring 120 hours of debate minimum for anything more
controversial than renaming a post office.

The Republicans ultimately could not stop any piece of legislation
prior to the election of Scott Brown, provided that the Democrats held
absolute solidarity (which they didn't), but they could slow the
process to a glacial pace and force required business (like the
passage of a budget) to interfere with the legislative agenda.

With 41 seats, the Republicans could basically shut down government
for the next 6 months.

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 11:40:24 AM4/5/10
to

Ok, let's try it.

Here you go, G.O.P. ideas on health care:

* Number one: let families and businesses buy health insurance
across state lines.
* Number two: allow individuals, small businesses, and trade
associations to pool together and acquire health insurance at lower
prices, the same way large corporations and labor unions do.
* Number three: give states the tools to create their own
innovative reforms that lower health care costs.
* Number four: end junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health
care costs by increasing the number of tests and procedures that
physicians sometimes order not because they think it's good medicine,
but because they are afraid of being sued.

Also, checkout these other GOP proposals.

# Empowering Patients First Act (Republican Study Committee Health
Care Reform Bill, introduced July 30, 2009)
# Improving Health Care for All Americans Act (Shadegg Health Care
Reform Bill, introduced July 14, 2009)
# Medical Rights & Reform Act (Kirk-Dent Health Care Reform Bill,
introduced June 16, 2009)
# Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH)
Act (Gingrey medical liability reform bill, introduced June 6,
2009)
# Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2009 (Johnson small business
health plans bill, introduced May 21, 2009)
# Promoting Health and Preventing Chronic Disease through Prevention
and Wellness Programs for Employees, Communities, and Individuals Act
of 2009 (Castle Wellness & Prevention Bill, introduced July 31,
2009)
# Improved Employee Access to Health Insurance Act of 2009 (Deal auto-
enrollment bill, introduced October 15, 2009)
# Health Insurance Access for Young Workers and College Students Act
of 2009 (Blunt bill to improve health insurance coverage of
dependents, introduced October 21, 2009)

So how many of these were incoporated into Obama's bill, Sid?

Sid?

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 11:43:32 AM4/5/10
to
On Apr 4, 11:16 pm, wy <w...@myself.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 11:00 pm, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
---

>
> > Wow, what a nice long explanation. And still didn't answer the
> > question.
>
> Sorry for that professorial explanation.  But here's the fat-free,
> dumbed-down version for those who failed kindergarten:
>
> Because it's being built from scratch in stages, that's why.

If that's true, then why doesn't Obama insure them NOW, in stage 1?

Won't many of them die because they're not insured? That's what Obama
said when he was pushing this plan.

Message has been deleted

Sid9

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 12:42:44 PM4/5/10
to

"South China Blue Sea" <six-...@borgcollective.gov> wrote in message
news:six-nine-E82364...@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article
> <34ec582d-a682-4cc8...@u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,

> Salty Stan <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here you go, G.O.P. ideas on health care:
>>
>> * Number one: let families and businesses buy health insurance
>> across state lines.
>
> Democrats passed the bill in the House. Will Republicans allow a vote in
> the
> Senate or will they prevent interstate insurance?

>
>> * Number three: give states the tools to create their own
>> innovative reforms that lower health care costs.
>
> What tools didn't they have?

>
>> * Number four: end junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health
>
> Who decides what are junk lawsuits if you don't allow the cases into
> court?
>
> --
> Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to
> be.
> Silver silverware - Where is the love? At least I can stay in
> character.
> Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? Annoying Usenet one post at a
> time.
> Damn the living - It's a lovely life. We support you,
> Sarah.
.
.
He can�t rewrite history about Obama's efforts to include Republicans.

This is all a distraction from the facts of Obama's effort to include
Republicans.

McConnell and Boehner's plan was to simply obstruct anything with stupid
delays that dragged the inevitable out into the wee hours of the night

[Groucho]
I don't know what they have to say,
It makes no difference anyway,
Whatever it is, I'm against it.
No matter what it is or who commenced it,
I'm against it.

Your proposition may be good,
But let's have one thing understood,
Whatever it is, I'm against it.
And even when you've changed it or condensed it,
I'm against it.

I'm opposed to it,
On general principle, I'm opposed to it.

[chorus] He's opposed to it.
In fact, indeed, that he's opposed to it!

[Groucho]
For months before my son was born,
I used to yell from night to morn,
Whatever it is, I'm against it.
And I've kept yelling since I first commenced it,
I'm against it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtMV44yoXZ0

Salty Stan

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 1:29:02 PM4/5/10
to
On Apr 5, 12:42 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "South China Blue Sea" <six-n...@borgcollective.gov> wrote in messagenews:six-nine-E82364...@news.eternal-september.org...
---
> .
> He can t rewrite history about Obama's efforts to include Republicans.
>
---
>

For Sid: a history about Obama's efforts to include Republicans:

Sid9

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 2:25:56 PM4/5/10
to

"Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3f61f0f-8d63-4ca7...@30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
.
.
Yeah, yeah, yeah......the Republican bullshit continues to flow.

Siobhan Medeiros

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 3:00:06 PM4/5/10
to
On Apr 4, 7:55 pm, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 4, 10:18 am, Kevin Cunningham <sms...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 9:47 am, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What a crock!  The repugs held absolute power for years and what did
> > they do?  Nothing.  They had the opportunity to create what ever
> > health care system they wanted to.
>
> > And they did.  They created a system that destroys most of Americans
> > bankrupt.
>
> What exactly is this "system" that the Republicans created again?

>
> > They created a system
> > were there were 46 million uninsured and tens of millions under
> > insured.  In their years in power they destroyed a health care system
> > proposed by dems before, you would have thought they would have
> > proposed their "option".  But they didn't.  They don't have an
> > option.  They just lie.
>
> > Were is the repug health care option?  Why don't they bring it up?
> > Why didn't they work with dems and forge a compromise?
>
> Probably because the Dems shut them out as they crafted this bill
> behind closed doors.
>
>
>
> > Because they don't have a health care option.  Because they hate
> > African-Americans.
>
> Right, the GOP does not want to create a health care plan because they

> hate African-Americans.
>
> > And their hatred is so strong they warned every
> > repug not to step over the line to cooperation.
>
> Also, poll after poll reveals that the vast majority of Americans
> oppose this health care bill too. Do they hate Africans Americans too?

ACtually, a clear majority either support this bill or oppose it
because it's not liberal enough.

Around 60% want a public option.

Try another lie, this one's getting old.

Siobhan Medeiros

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 3:02:51 PM4/5/10
to

Siobhan Medeiros

unread,
Apr 5, 2010, 3:04:26 PM4/5/10
to

leonox1

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 11:44:56 AM4/6/10
to
On Apr 5, 2:25 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
> "Salty Stan" <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Sorry Sid9, you can't make facts disappear by sticking your fingers in
your ears and chanting, "La la la I can't hear you"

Truth is the cure for liberalism.

leonox1

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 11:46:13 AM4/6/10
to

Poll after poll reveals that the vast majority of Americans oppose
this health care bill, and yes, even liberals.

But if you find a poll that shows a majority of Americans support this
Bill, please post it here:

leonox1

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 11:50:10 AM4/6/10
to
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/07/AR201...

I'm sorry, but you mistaken. The event you have posted was a half-day
televised summit that Obama had with Republicans. (A cynic may say it
was Obama's version of a Potemkin village) after it was over the
Democrats went back into closed door sessions to continue drafting
their bill, locking the Republicans out.

Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 12:15:29 PM4/6/10
to


Excellent point.... the rest of us believe in the people and the
States while Socialists only believe in an all powerful Federal Government.


Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 12:31:17 PM4/6/10
to

Diversification is obsolete? Interesting, you own only one stock in
your retirement plan?

Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 12:32:22 PM4/6/10
to
On 4/4/2010 11:00 PM, Salty Stan wrote:

> On Apr 4, 2:25 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
>> "wy" <w...@myself.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:e0e56738-3fbe-4ef3...@30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> On Apr 4, 1:26 pm, The PHANTOM <hoofhearte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Apr 4, 9:18 am, Kevin Cunningham <sms...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 4, 9:47 am, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want
>>>>>> *this*
>>>>>> bill.
>>
>>>>>> Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
>>>>>> current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>>
>>>>>> Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
>>>>>> place?
>>
>>>>> What a crock! The repugs held absolute power for years and what did
>>>>> they do? Nothing. They had the opportunity to create what ever
>>>>> health care system they wanted to.
>>
>>>>> And they did. They created a system that destroys most of Americans
>>>>> bankrupt. They created a system

>>>>> were there were 46 million uninsured and tens of millions under
>>>>> insured. In their years in power they destroyed a health care system
>>>>> proposed by dems before, you would have thought they would have
>>>>> proposed their "option". But they didn't. They don't have an
>>>>> option. They just lie.
>>
>>>>> Were is the repug health care option? Why don't they bring it up?
>>>>> Why didn't they work with dems and forge a compromise?
>>
>>>>> Because they don't have a health care option. Because they hate
>>>>> African-Americans. And their hatred is so strong they warned every
>>>>> repug not to step over the line to cooperation.- Hide quoted text -

>>
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>> Why should I pay for your healthcare??
>>
>>> Why should you pay your HMO? After all, your premiums are going to
>>> pay for other people's coverage, just as other people's premiums to
>>> your HMO will pay for your coverage, especially if your bill ends up
>>> costing more than you have ever put into your premiums. There's no
>>> getting around it, whether it's HMO or otherwise, insurance of any
>>> kind is basically you paying for others, just as others are paying for
>>> you - it's all socialism. The only difference being that HMOs are in
>>> it for profit, which is the capitalist element of a private system, a
>>> government plan isn't. So you're actually paying more to HMOs because
>>> a percentage of your premium is for their profit.
>>
>> .
>> .
>> HMO advantage was a Republican giveaway to insurance companies and few
>> crumbs thrown to the insured.
>>
>> Insurance companies were overpaid by 14%
>>
>> It's no wonder they advertised do aggressively!
>
> Wasn't HMO's a Ted Kennedy idea?

You mean another Ted Kennedy *FAILURE* ?

Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 12:37:20 PM4/6/10
to
On 4/4/2010 9:42 PM, Sid9 wrote:
>
> "Werner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message

> news:5b297705-6695-4918...@n31g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
>> On Apr 4, 7:32 pm, Christopher Helms <Chrishelms...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> It's not mind boggling. Republicans think and say what corporate
>>> interests tell them to think and say. Whether this or that is good,
>>> bad or indifferent for the country simply doesn't come into it. They
>>> do what they are programmed to do and if they are programmed to tell
>>> 32 million uninsured people to go screw themselves, that's what they
>>> will do. ...
>>
>>
>> Any state can decree government single payer health care.
>>
>
>
> ==================
> The states:
>
> 1. Most are broke

Obama is Broke.

> 2. Most state legislatures are corrupt.

Harry Reid and the Louisiana Purchase and the Corn-husker Kickback.


> Our "States Rights" are an an anachronism.
> "States Right" keep America from moving forward.
> They were fine in an agrarian society where communications were limited.
> For the twenty-first century they are obsolete.

The 21st century is devoid of diversification?

Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 12:41:31 PM4/6/10
to

The whole Federal Government is Broke. Isn't it better to have a few
people without health care from only the BROKE States, rather than ALL
of the people without health care from the BROKE Federal Government?

> 2. Most state legislatures are corrupt.

So is the Federal Legislature. What's the Difference?


Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 2:08:12 PM4/6/10
to
On 4/4/2010 9:47 AM, Salty Stan wrote:
> We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
> bill.
>
> Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
> current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>
> Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
> place?


The taxes started right away.... So the Taxes must be the primary
reason for this Socialist-Care law with new IRS oversight.


The health of the people is just a headline that will never be realized
and gets sympathy for the hidden tax parts in the law that were started
on day one.


Stealing money "right now" is important to Democrats, dieing people are
sort of a down the road four years maybe, kind of after thought.


The people Harry is killing over the next 4 years will send him a
"thank-you card" from their after life.

Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 2:21:08 PM4/6/10
to

sort of a down the road four years maybe, kind of after thought. And
when we get 4 years down the road there will be no increase in Hospitals
and doctors, so Harry will be over taxing the medical systems and
killing people with his management of their health care.


The people Harry is killing over the next 4 years will send him a
"thank-you card" from their after life.

Until Harry voted for Government Health care, people were responsible
for their own health, Today(NOW) Harry is responsible for peoples health
care. How are the people doing under "Harry-Care"?


wy

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 5:40:45 PM4/6/10
to
On Apr 5, 7:19 am, The PHANTOM <hoofhearte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 1:05 pm,wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 1:26 pm, The PHANTOM <hoofhearte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 4, 9:18 am, Kevin Cunningham <sms...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > a percentage of your premium is for their profit.- Hide quoted text -

>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I get to chose which doctor I go to and when. I don't have a 6 week
> waiting period to see the doctor of my choice. Tell me one thing the
> government runs well and runs within budget. Then tell me why you
> believe Obama and Pelosi should run healthcare.

Funny. I get to choose which doctor I go to and when, too. Depending
on urgency, I can see him the same day or, if it's not that urgent,
waiting a few days, maybe a week, won't kill me. And to think that
this happens under a Canadian government-run system that's cheaper to
run than the U.S. one by about 35%. Wow, imagine that.

wy

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 5:48:10 PM4/6/10
to
On Apr 5, 11:43 am, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 4, 11:16 pm,wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 4, 11:00 pm, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ---
>
> > > Wow, what a nice long explanation. And still didn't answer the
> > > question.
>
> > Sorry for that professorial explanation.  But here's the fat-free,
> > dumbed-down version for those who failed kindergarten:
>
> > Because it's being built from scratch in stages, that's why.
>
> If that's true, then why doesn't Obama insure them NOW, in stage 1?

The bureaucratic infrastructure isn't there for everything to start
overnight. Let's see you try to accommodate over 30 million newly
insured people with everything that would be available to do them
under the bill at the snap of your fingers on top of trying to
restructure the existing system with all those who are already
insured. And the whole thing is budgeted in such a way that it can
only accommodate the growing changes in a manageable way, not
crushingly all at once. Boy, you're functionally stupid.

>
> Won't many of them die because they're not insured? That's what Obama
> said when he was pushing this plan.

What does it matter to you, anyway? They were dying by the shiploads
under the old system and you didn't care then. In due time, once all
the stages have been gone through and completed and everything is
fully up and running, it's all going to work out just peachy keen
fine.

Sid9

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 5:54:59 PM4/6/10
to

"Poetic Justice" <Twist-...@blackhole.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote in message
news:4bbb5e9b$0$23560$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
.
.
The "States" represent a minority of the American people.

Nowadays their sole goal is to deter progress.

Clairbear

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 7:27:17 PM4/6/10
to
"Sid9" <si...@belsouth.net> wrote in
news:hpgahc$h7r$1...@news.eternal-september.org:

>
> "Poetic Justice" <Twist-...@blackhole.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote in
> message news:4bbb5e9b$0$23560$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
>> On 4/5/2010 12:32 AM, None4U wrote:
>>> "Sid9" <si...@belsouth.net> wrote in message
>>> news:hpbkrj$uv5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>
>>>> "Salty Stan" <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:9651ed47-34bc-4898-b6bf-51787d52a872
@i5g2000vbk.googlegroups.co
>>>> m...

>>>>> On Apr 4, 9:42 pm, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>> "Werner" <whetz...@mac.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>

>>>>>> news:5b297705-6695-4918-a94c-0c711c0e9440
@n31g2000vbd.googlegroups
>>>>>> .com...

So where do all these people live The states are where the live DUMBASS

> Nowadays their sole goal is to deter progress.
>

Nobody wants your socialist Marxist agenda

Democratic HoseBagger

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 6:50:58 PM4/6/10
to
HoseBagger, Kevin Cunningham <sms...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>On Apr 4, 9:47 am, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> We don't want to deny health care to anyone. We just don't want *this*
>> bill.
>>
>> Did you know that ObamaCare actually *denies* any care at all to the
>> current un-insured for this year...and the next...and the next etc.
>>
>> Why is that, Harry? Wasn't that the reason for this bill in the first
>> place?
>
>What a crock! The repugs held absolute power for years and what did
>they do? Nothing. They had the opportunity to create what ever
>health care system they wanted to.
>
>And they did. They created a system that destroys most of Americans
>bankrupt. They created a system
>were there were 46 million uninsured and tens of millions under
>insured. In their years in power they destroyed a health care system
>proposed by dems before, you would have thought they would have
>proposed their "option". But they didn't. They don't have an
>option. They just lie.
>
>Were is the repug health care option? Why don't they bring it up?
>Why didn't they work with dems and forge a compromise?
>
>Because they don't have a health care option. Because they hate
>African-Americans. And their hatred is so strong they warned every
>repug not to step over the line to cooperation.

Why would Republicans want to introduce another government welfare
program?

-

Next to spending other people's money, Liberals
always have a goal to bag the guy with a big hose.

Democratic HoseBagger

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 6:50:58 PM4/6/10
to
HoseBagger, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>
>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2010/042010/04042010/535939
>
>4/4/2010
>
>By Michael Watterson
>
>
>With passing health care reform on March 21, Barack Obama and the
>Democratic Party removed the "if" from our health care system.
>
>We have moved away from a system in which people could assume they had
>health care coverage if they were struggling financially and had
>Medicaid, if they were older and had Medicare, if they served our
>country and had VA benefits, if they had a job with health care
>benefits, or if they were wealthy enough to afford coverage on their
>own.

The author sure sounds jealous.

>
>We have moved toward a system in which people can assume they have
>health care coverage.
>
>No ifs about it.
>
>Republicans claim they are going to run on repealing this new system.

The meat of the provisions of ObamaCare won't go into effect until
finishes off his first term, but much of the spending will be made. He
won't be elected for a second term so a Republican Congress with a
Republican President can repeal and replace Obama's debacle.


>
>This means they want to reopen the "doughnut hole" and charge seniors
>more for prescription drugs,

$500 billion in Medicare cuts and more baby boomers entering Medicare
will leave a bigger hole.


>
>they want to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover
>a pre-existing condition,
>

Insurance is all risk. If insurers are forced to take high risk
customers they will have offset it with high premiums for all. Oh
wait, those who can't afford the insurance will be subsidized by
government courtesy of the taxpayer. Along with higher premiums,
higher taxes will added on for the new welfare program.

>they want to remove 25-year-olds from their parents' insurance
>coverage,

Obamacare doesn't want young adults to grow up.

>
>and they want to take away health coverage from 32 million Americans.
>

Take away health insurance from Americans who never had health
insurance.
>___________________________________________________
>
>Mind-boggling, eh?
>
>Harry
>
It doesn't add up. Harry can't add up.

Poetic Justice

unread,
Apr 6, 2010, 9:47:35 PM4/6/10
to


What election is one that we all vote for?


There is only one candidate that gets a National vote. The rest are
States voting for representatives.


Message has been deleted

Beam Me Up Scotty

unread,
Apr 7, 2010, 9:57:42 PM4/7/10
to
On 4/6/2010 9:52 PM, South China Blue Sea wrote:
> In article <f9bnr5t08f3v5k9d1...@4ax.com>,

> Democratic HoseBagger <Hos...@DNC.com> wrote:
>
>> Why would Republicans want to introduce another government welfare
>> program?

"Why Do Republicans Want To Deny Health Care To Americans?"


The premise is false, No one is *Denied* health care, the only thing
Obama has done is to make Obama responsible for who pays.


We all get health care... Liberals LIE when they say we don't.

Democratic HoseBagger

unread,
Apr 7, 2010, 10:37:53 PM4/7/10
to
HoseBagger, South China Blue Sea <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>In article <f9bnr5t08f3v5k9d1...@4ax.com>,
> Democratic HoseBagger <Hos...@DNC.com> wrote:
>

>> Why would Republicans want to introduce another government welfare
>> program?
>

>Another?

Anything free from the government is welfare.

leonox1

unread,
Apr 7, 2010, 10:38:59 PM4/7/10
to

Anytime now

Sid9

unread,
Apr 7, 2010, 10:43:25 PM4/7/10
to

"Democratic HoseBagger" <Hos...@DNC.com> wrote in message
news:e2gqr51jr95hroi76...@4ax.com...
.
.
There's nothing free in the program.
That's a Republican lie

Message has been deleted

leonox1

unread,
Apr 8, 2010, 9:37:51 AM4/8/10
to

Stages? I didn't remember Obama saying that... can you please provide
a link?

Why don't they insure those millions of people right now? When they
put in Medicaid & Medicare, did they have to wait for years for the
stages?

Do you really want all those people to DIE while waiting for their
stage? Wasn't taht the reason Obama was pushing this plan? Why is he
throwing all those people under the bus?

Patriot Games

unread,
Apr 8, 2010, 6:20:09 PM4/8/10
to
On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:52:09 -0700, South China Blue Sea

<chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <f9bnr5t08f3v5k9d1...@4ax.com>,
> Democratic HoseBagger <Hos...@DNC.com> wrote:
>> Why would Republicans want to introduce another government welfare
>> program?
>Another?

Are you ever gonna stop lying?

On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 06:19:56 -0700, Shocking China Blue
<chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <BBIrn.263188$vr1....@en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com>,
> "vict0r" <l...@oocom.netb> wrote:
>> AT&T to Book $1 Billion Cost on Health-Care Reform
>> A change in the tax treatment of Medicare subsidies triggered the non-cash
>> expense, and the company will consider changes to the benefits it offers
>A non-cash expense means some numbers are moved from one column to another. It's
>about balancing books; it costs nothing. Something that actually costs ATT money
>will be described as an actual cost.

Oops! Caught Lying:

Non-Cash Charge: What Does Non-Cash Charge Mean?
"A charge off, made by a company against earnings, that does not
require an initial outlay of cash. Non-cash charges are typically
against the depreciation, amortization, and depletion accounts on a
company's balance sheet. Companies take these charges against earnings
due to extraordinary circumstances such as accounting policy changes
or significant depreciation of asset's market value.

"Any sort of charge will usually result in lower earnings in the
period when the charge was made.

"Sometimes also referred to as a write down."
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/noncashcharge.asp

QuiG...@webtv.net

unread,
Apr 9, 2010, 5:27:40 AM4/9/10
to
http://www.healthreform.gov/

http://healthcarefactcheck.com/

Action Center

1. Get the facts and share them with your friends
http://www.dccc.org/page/invite/factcheck

2. Sign our Thank You card for Speaker Pelosi here
http://www.dccc.org/page/s/sptycard

3. Become a fan of Democrats on Facebook and follow us on Twitter
http://www.facebook.com/electdemocrats?v=app_11007063052&ref=ts
http://twitter.com/dccc

Health Care Reform: Get the Facts

=

MYTH: House health insurance reform legislation will lead to
out-of-control deficit spending

FACT: The Affordable Health Care for America act contains several
cost-control measures, including rewarding quality instead of quantity
of care, payment bundling, reducing hospital readmissions, negotiating
drug prices, investing in prevention, cracking down on fraud, creating a
Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation and promoting accountable
care organizations.
Health care reform will also cut the deficit by more than $100 billion
in the first ten years and $1 trillion in the second ten years. This
constitutes the biggest deficit reduction package in more than a decade.

=

MYTH: End-of-life provisions in House health insurance reform bill will
lead to "Death Panels"

FACT: The bill never requires anyone to discuss end-of-life care.
Nonpartisan Politifact.com calls the suggestion that the bill would
encourage anyone to end their lives sooner an "outright distortion."

=

MYTH: Health insurance reform plan will lead to cuts in Medicare
benefits and services

FACT: Nothing in the bill would cut basic Medicare benefits.
Instead, the bill strengthens Medicare by reducing inefficiency and
rooting out and eliminating waste and fraud. In it's October newsletter,
the AARP said of the House bill "the changes actually aim to strengthen
Medicare and improve beneficiaries' care and access to physicians."

=

MYTH: Private Plans Outlawed
Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) claimed on his website that individual
private health insurance plans will be outlawed in 2013 under the
Democratic health care plan.

PolitiFact.com: Private health insurance not banned In fact, PolitiFact
rates this myth so miseleading that it calls it "Pants on Fire."
Individual policies will continue to be available, but people will buy
those policies through the national health insurance exchange, which
will ensure that people with pre-existing conditions will be able to get
coverage.
The House bill also allows for existing policies to be grandfathered in,
so individual purchasers who like their coverage will be able to keep
it.

America's Affordable Health Choices Act

On Sunday, March 21st 2010, the House achieved a historic victory for
American families by passing the comprehensive health insurance reform.

Throughout the legislative process, House Democrats fought tirelessly to
bring real change to America by fixing our broken health care system.
Below are some critical reforms enacted by this landmark legislation:


Affordability

* Reduces cost by creating competitive health insurance exchanges where
consumers can small businesses can buy affordable coverage much like
large companies do today

* Creates tax credits and subsidies to help low and middle income
Americans afford quality care

* Closes the Medicare prescription "donut hole" by providing an initial
$250 rebate and then deep discounts on prescription drugs for Medicare
beneficiaries in the donut hole

* Extends the solvency of the Medicare Hospital Insurance trust fund by
at least nine years


Access

* Ends insurance company practice of discriminating and denying coverage
based on pre-existing conditions, health status or gender

* Increases access to care by investing in Community Health Centers

* Expands eligibility for Medicaid

* Eliminates copays for preventative Medicare benefits such as cancer
screenings and provides free yearly exams for Medicare beneficiaries


Accountability

* Gives Americans they tools and information they need to make informed
decisions about their health insurance coverage

* Reins in unwarranted, egregious premium increases by empowering the
Department of Health and Human Services and state insurance
commissioners to conduct thorough annual reviews

* Creates incentives for health care providers reimbursed by Medicare to
base decisions on quality rather than quantity of care and to move away
from a fee-for-service system.

* Promotes transparency by cracking down on waste and fraud in Medicare,
Medicaid, SCHIP and private insurers


Financial Responsibility

* Cuts the deficit by more than $100 billion in the first ten years,
then one trillion in the second ten years

* Constitutes the biggest deficit reduction package in more than a
decade

* Restores fiscal responsibility by reining in health care costs across
our economy


While some provision of the bill will be phased in over time, the
following provisions will take effect as soon as President Obama signs
the bill:

* Tax credits for small businesses

* Preventive care covered 100 percent by Medicare

* Closing the Medicare prescription drug "donut hole"

* Temporary coverage for early retirees, ages 55-64

* Insurance companies can no longer drop people from coverage when they
get sick

* Ends discrimination against children based on heath status or
pre-existing conditions

* Ends restrictive annual limits on benefits for new insurance policies

* Allows adult children to be covered under their parents' plan up to
the age of 26

* Ensures that insurers spend at least 80 percent of premiums on medical
care

* Eliminates copays for preventive care under new private plans

* Provides temporary coverage for Americans with pre-existing conditions
until Exchange is implemented

* Expands enough funding for community health centers to double capacity
in five years

Beam Me Up Scotty

unread,
Apr 9, 2010, 11:53:15 AM4/9/10
to
On 4/8/2010 12:10 AM, Che...@tighten.com wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 21:57:42 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty
> <Then-Destro...@blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
>
>> "Why Do Republicans Want To Deny Health Care To Americans?"
>>
>>
>> The premise is false, No one is *Denied* health care, the only thing
>> Obama has done is to make Obama responsible for who pays.
>
> Health care insurance is denied by virtue of several things
>

You just changed the premise..... *NO ONE IS DENIED HEALTH CARE*

> Not having health care is tatamount to denial

There is Medicare and other options.


NO it's not denial of care... Back to lying

> The reponsibility for payment for those who have no money rests with
> those who do have money (or insurance) or both

NO but it is with those that have no money... They should work to get
the maximum coverage they can on their own, if they can't afford
Cadillac health care then, that's life.


There is NO right to health care....


> Adding 30-50 million payers of at least SOME payment lessens those who
> are paying for it all now.

If they were denied care(as you stated), it cost you NOTHING so taking
them in for full coverage can't lessen the costs to those paying now,
You have shown the lack of logic in your imaginary world.


Message has been deleted

leonox1

unread,
Apr 10, 2010, 8:48:46 AM4/10/10
to

Hmmm I made the liberal shut up.

wy

unread,
Apr 18, 2010, 3:07:02 AM4/18/10
to

Any half-wit with a kindergarten education in pre-math, being counting
with fingers, would know that a major overhaul of the system that
would affect 300+ million people to one degree or another is not
something that can be done overnight because the bureaucratic
infrastructure isn't there for it yet. But you're not even a half-wit
with a kindergarten education in pre-math to know that much, are you?

Now I've made you shut up.

0 new messages