The GOP’s Bad/Inadequate Ideas on Health Care

It’s the “how” that seems to be missing from the document.
.
Applies to a lot being said these says, doesn’t it?

Shades of Pelosi :We’ll have to pass it to see what’s in it”

Kate Pickert:
.
“* The reason buying across state lines reduces costs is that insurers operating in states with less regulation – and fewer consumer protections – sell cheaper, less valuable products. It open the door to that race to the bottom problem, along with the adverse selection problem and a few others. More here.”
.
You chose a completely inadequate he-said/she-said burdened piece that offers a complete non-answer to the policy question.
.
If the ACA has just established once and for all a set of federally-enforced consumer protections (“no pre-existing exclusions,” etc.), and coverage requirements, then why would it be necessary to protect against a “race to the bottom” or “adverse selection?”
.
Why isn’t the policy answer both strong federal consumer-protection/coverage requirement regulations –presumably what the ACA contains– and an end to the federally-enforced, state-based “markets”?
.
Why can’t we have a (liberal) policy of both maximum federal consumer protection and maximum consumer choice, in other words?
.
Can you answer that question clearly, Kate Pickert?

I’m sure they plan on accomplishing their goals with a combination of tax reduction and deregulation. When ever you ask them how they’ll do anything, they always respond with one of those two options. And I can see why they’d keep returning to those tried and true responses. After all, tax reduction and deregulation worked so well for our national debt, the housing market, and banking industry for the duration of the Bush administration. Who amongst us isn’t longing to return to those halcyon days?

Shades of Pelosi :We’ll have to pass it to see what’s in it”
.
Keep repeating that lie all you want, freep. It doesn’t make it correct.

Thanks, Kate, but you didn’t link to your own article about today’s Big Day™ on HCR changes kicking in. Don’t just let Adam write a line in the morning reads; toot your own horn already. Remember to ask, WWKTD? Karen would post about her stuff then she’d answer questions and chew out Rusty’s ass for insulting her. re: recissions, if they can only happen in case of fraud, how is this determined, such as thru a checklist (literally) and / or review board? Must evidence be equal to a criminal standard in court? Thanks for your thoughts, Kate.

This:
.
“re: recissions, if they can only happen in case of fraud, how is this determined, such as thru a checklist (literally) and / or review board? Must evidence be equal to a criminal standard in court?”
.
is an excellent, well-thought, real-world question, deconstructiva, thanks so much for asking it.

I would assume this fraud would have to be found out the same way as any other insurance fraud? The company would have to gather evidence and then have its day in court unless the government found evidence first and brought up criminal allegations.

Let’s say for the purposes of argument that I’m one of the 35,000,000 Americans who do not have health insurance that HCR is going to cover (admittedly down the road a bit). And then I hear that the Republicans are going to work to take that away from me. (And don’t start, freeinpa, textee, earljr, etc. There has never been a Republican proposal that covers anything like that number.)

Now why in the world would I even consider voting Republican? How can the GOP just throw away 35,000,000 votes? And why can’t the Democrats reach out to those 35,000,000 and remind them of what the Republicans want to do?

Wow….where to start on this one.
.

“A few other things Republicans are also proposing in the Pledge that Cohn didn’t mention:
.
* They want to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but how will they pay for it? The Congressional Budget Office says the law will reduce the federal deficit by about $140 billion over ten years, so repealing the law will add to the deficit.
.
* Medical malpractice reform isn’t necessarily a bad idea, but it would reduce overall health care spending by about 1%. Not exactly a silver bullet.
.
* The reason buying across state lines reduces costs is that insurers operating in states with less regulation – and fewer consumer protections – sell cheaper, less valuable products. It open the door to that race to the bottom problem, along with the adverse selection problem and a few others. More here.
.
* “Strengthen the Doctor-Patient Relationship” is one of the GOP planks. Sounds good – who could be against that? It’s the “how” that seems to be missing from the document.”

.
Gee Ms Pickert, rather than regurgitate the talking points from the Obama Administration, why not advocate for TIME.com to come up with their own study to determine exactly how much money will be saved with the ACA? Doesn’t that make more sense? The CBO projections, are merely projections and nothing more. They have even said themselves that these projections are based upon the facts as they knew them at the time, but would in no way reflect the actuality of what will be the case at the time point in the future when most of these new regs are implemented. Now we do have some earlier results of the reform, and what is happening to the actual cost of insurance. In some cases, in order to pay for example, the new “pre-existing” reg, we are in some cases paying as much as 45% more for our insurance. A cost in my opinion which would not have been passed on had we not done anything at all.
.
So if a repeal of the bill happens, isn’t it also potentially correct to say that the cost of our insurance which is now drastically rising or is threatened to drastically rise will stop?
.
Also the Medical malpractice claim you make, is also a subjective claim. 1% would be a bare minimum, but implemented across the country, this one thing could have a major impact on the cost. Especially the cost of malpractice insurance increasing the overall overhead for most all doctors, and if implemented they may find they can operate much more effectively and cheaper thus allowing the free market principals of capitalism to drive down costs. Isn’t that right Ms. Pickert? The cost to hire a Nurse would be less, the cost to hire other employees of hospitals will be less, simply because the threat of a major windfall lawsuit would be non-existent anymore. Isn’t that right Ms Pickert? Think of that happening all across the country, not just in the few States which have implemented Tort reforms.
.
The so-called “race to the bottom” could also be defined with the right regulations to improve health insurance to the point that better, cheaper and more affordable health care insurance could be offered by let’s say 1000 insurance companies in any given State, rather than just the 1, 2 or 3 currently offered. With free market principals again, if there is more competition for my health care insurance dollar, doesn’t it make sense to believe that they will begin to offer the same products for less? Isn’t that how it was with the new Kindles we have to read the garbage you post on an almost daily basis, Ms Pickert? Also with competition, I have one question Ms Picker. Do you believe that Insurance Companies enjoy a highly regulated industry which allows for monopoly-like regions through out the US? Do monopolies like this bring prices down, or cause them to go up as a rule, Ms Pickert?
.
The Doctor-Patient relationships are being up-ended simply because of this new law. Were those relationships in jeopardy before healthcare reform was passed Ms Pickert? Or is this new problem as a result of passing this law?

Thanks, stuart and gumonshoe. I agree on letting courts do the legwork: have an impartial body of evidence as proof. Panels could be manipulated easier. Classic example: FERC under W Bush during Enron CA mess. They stonewalled when they had the power (pun intended) to take action (on stuff like price caps to stop megawatt laundering).
.
And stuart, kudos to you for asking many q’s on HCR. I’ve got doubts about this exchange thingy and crystal ball says we’ll need more changes. You have often pointed out here need to address HC costs and not just insurance and what other countries do. Kate could fill up a couple weeks of swamp posts and dead-tree just answering your questions, such as need for clear upfront ACA consumer protections vs. race-to-bottom, good one. Credit card swindlers companies’s RTB practices are bad enough; God forbid what HCI cos. would do unfettered.

Why isn’t the policy answer both strong federal consumer-protection/coverage requirement regulations –presumably what the ACA contains– and an end to the federally-enforced, state-based “markets”?
.

.
Here let me answer it for your mr stuart.
.
Simply, we live in a free market based system of Capitalism whereby the forces of demand and supply are used to dictate what we pay for anything, including healthcare insurance.
.
When things go bad, horribly bad it is when Government steps in with all of the mega-regulations you libtards tout as “consumer protection”, but in actuality cause businesses to spend more, and attempt to make more on less income. All that consumer protections have done over time is drive up the cost of doing business for businesses.
.
The consumer you think you are saving, actually ends up spending more for the same thing.
.
If you want protection for consumers, enact stricter anti-trust regulations, bust up the monopolies which are created by your consumer protection regulations.
.
Think Ma Bell, stuart. Just think what a cell phone would be costing you now had the government not stepped in and broke up that mega-conglomerate.

Who wrote that catchy little ditty you’re always humming to yourself when you comment on health care, Rusty?
.
I believe the title of it is “Tort Reform Uber Alles”.
.
Don’t you know any other songs? That one’s getting a little old… especially since it involves a very small part of health care costs.

Wow — thank you Kate, is this going to mark the permanent departure from the tired on one hand/on the other hand journalism? Congratulations.

Republican HC “proposals” are a contradictory jumble of nothing; it’s impossible even to guess what could be enacted in legislation, since it’s stuff that cannot possibly hold together.

When you start an article with a falsehood and then go on and on about how the Republicans are going to pay for the lie, there really isn’t much to discuss.

Democrats are always wanting concessions from “middle of the road” Republicans. During the Obamacare fiasco, they never took any suggestions or ideas from the other side into consideration. They wanted the glory and they got it: A piece of crap lie to the American people.

If you think anybody believes the estimates from the Dems or the government on the cost of anything; well, they would have to be really stupid to believe what this administration says about anything.

http://reason.com/blog/2010/03/30/3-reasons-why-obamacare-wont-c

But not only will the legislation not cut one thin dime from the deficit, it will also certainly cost far more than the $940 billion in new spending already on the table for at least three reasons.

These include:

1. Legislative Trickery. Congressional Democrats have pledged support for “the doc fix,” a permanent upward adjustment to the rates at which Medicare providers are reimbursed. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said, “We have made a commitment to do this. This is very important.” The cost of the “doc fix”? Some $247 billion over the next 10 years, wiping out any deficit reduction from health care reform.

2. Higher Premiums. In 2006, Massachusetts passed health care reform very similar to what President Obama just signed. The result? The Bay State now has the highest premiums in the country and cost about 33 percent more than expected.

3. Bad Accounting. The government is terrible at predicting how much programs will cost, especially when it comes to medical care. Initial 1960s’ projections of Medicare’s costs in 1990 had the program costing about $12 billion; the actual result was almost 10 times that amount. As a Joint Economic Committee report notes, “Major health care proposals have almost always cost more…than the highest cost estimates published while the legislation was pending.”

meltdown,
.
Tap-dancing and “dust-throwing” on your part aside, we’re still waiting on the GOP to explain HOW they’ll pay for what they are proposing…

You know Rusty, you are right.

After all, it is this “consumer protection” which makes sure the food I eat is safe, the car I drive is safe, the house I live in does not contain lead, etc. etc.

We don’t need these stupid “consumer protections”, and we should let the free market decide.

That way, if I die from being poisoned by the food I eat or get killed driving an unsafe car, or die from cancer living in a contaminated house, the next time I can choose an alternative.

Isn’t it obvious by now: Republicans. don’t. do. government. Their organizing principle since Reagan is the claim that “government is the problem”. Why would anyone expect serious or effective policy proposals from people who claim that nothing good can come from government? Why would anyone in their right mind think of voting to give them a job in the organization they claim to despise?

“still waiting on the GOP to explain HOW they’ll pay for what they are proposing…”

.
Here is a novel idea. Why don’t we let Americans simply pay for it themselves. Isn’t that amazingly simple??

When things go bad, horribly bad it is when Government steps in with all of the mega-regulations you libtards tout as “consumer protection”, but in actuality cause businesses to spend more, and attempt to make more on less income. All that consumer protections have done over time is drive up the cost of doing business for businesses.

Are you really this ignorant rustyblogwhore? Have you suffered a closed-head injury of some sort? You can’t really believe this tripe that you wrote. Without consumer protection, we’re China. Get hurt by a faulty product? Oh well. You should have been more careful. Your continued and absolute idiocy is astounding.

A very well defined reason why those who are in the 35% of lower income Americans, who rely upon Democrats to spread the wealth, so they can sit at home and be couch potatoes.

Have you checked the lead content of your breakfast cereal?

What fhmadvocat said. However, I am astonished that Rusty brought up a valid point to ponder, wow (by accident, no doubt, proving that a blind squirrel can find his nuts occasionally, but I digress):

Simply, we live in a free market based system of Capitalism whereby the forces of demand and supply are used to dictate what we pay for anything, including healthcare insurance.

…but should HC be a free market based thingy to buy, like a Quarter Pounder™ or a prom dress? Or should it be like police and fire protection, which is NOT so market-driven? If seen as public safety instead of supply-and-demand, basic HC services could viewed as a safety net, just like the police. Relying on companies who seek profits first ahead of customers is inviting disaster …which has already happened.

The whole debate on healthcare should start with questions like these -

1) Does every citizen of this country have the right to affordable healthcare?

2)If not ,then why not?
Should a homeless women with a young child living in a shelter on the South Side of Chicago be able to receive exactly the same kind of healthcare as a K Street lobbyist?

3) Should one’s health be a market driven commodity?

If we come to the conclusion that we want to be a Darwinian society where it’s survival of the fittest, then let’s all admit it and stop tinkering with healthcare, and forget this drivel about American Exceptionalism.

Rustydog:
.
This is your fellow citizens’ health we’re talking about here.
.
Are you saying that movement conservatives’ line on consumer protection is a Buddhist one, i.e. that you folks officially believe in reincarnation as a solution to the damage done to Americans’ health from big industry practices?

“Isn’t that how it was with the new Kindles we have to read the garbage you post on an almost daily basis, Ms Pickert?”
.
I have to admit, that was kinda funny.

Here is a novel idea. Why don’t we let Americans simply pay for it themselves. Isn’t that amazingly simple??
.
Brilliant idea, Ebenezer. You can pay for all your own personal streets, sewer, and water services, too.
.
Why didn’t I think of that??

You whine about Time not funding its own study because you don’t like the results from the CBO research, and then spend the next few paragraphs saying stuff like “could have” and “might” with absolutely nothing to back up your could’ve’s and might’s.
.
But whatever. You’re memory isn’t enough to recall how credit card deregulation led to most of the credit card companies moving to the one state that has the least amount of regulation (Delaware), so they had the best chance to screw us over with silent rate hikes, etc. If you think that led to more competition and better products from the credit card companies, then you’re gonna love when the all the insurance companies do the same thing.
.
But you’re not for the people are you Rusty? A third of Americans are parasitic “couch potatoes”, as you so compassionately referred to them. So as long as things work out for Rusty, America is fine. The rest of us can ‘eat @#$% and die’ as Rusty has also previously recommended.

Instead of burning Qurans, perhaps we can burn this healthcare law instead.
.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/8020296/Six-arrested-in-Gateshead-over-Koran-burning.html
.

Trying to get someone to pay for something based on a lie is called fraud, and you go to jail for it in the real world.

So, the question is: Why aren’t the Democrats in jail?

“Democrats are always wanting concessions from “middle of the road” Republicans. During the Obamacare fiasco, they never took any suggestions or ideas from the other side into consideration.”
.
And that’s the story of how America became one of the last industrialized countries to institute a national health care system.
.
That’s what happened, right?

At least the religious dude from FL had the guts to show his face when he wanted to burn the Koran. These guys not so much. So they’re brave enough to burn it, but completely chicken to stand for their ideas. I would say the same about anyone who use violance as a pretence for ‘right to protest’.

I would have to agree with decon. hc should not be free market if the a large company has to choose between you a person they never see and their bottom line their going to choose the bottom line. hc should not be about profit

“Trying to get someone to pay for something based on a lie is called fraud”
.
The Iraq war cost over 3 trillion dollars. We went to war based on the fraudulent claim that Iraq had WMDs.
.
Who would you like us to indict for that?

Dunno, meltdown,
.
Why aren’t Cheney and Bush in jail over funding for the Iraqi war because they used WMD as a rationale?
.
Isn’t THAT “trying to get someone to pay for something based on a lie”?

Great question. I checked the regulatory language itself – http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-15278.htm – and it doesn’t specify what counts as fraud and what counts as a simple mistake. The regulation does say that an enrollee must have 30 days notice that an insurer intends to cancel his or her policy. I assume this gives a person time to make the case o the insurer that he or she made an unintentional error and appeal, if necessary, to the state insurance commissioner with jurisdiction. But this isn’t a full answer to your very good inquiry. I’ve checked with HHS and will let you know when I hear back with a more complete answer.

Rusty, when you walk into a room and hear someone refer to “that big pr!ck”, you DO understand they aren’t referring to your “manliness”, don’t you?

First, thanks for weighing in on Decon’s good question.
.
I was looking around too and couldn’t find anything.
.
A question about your comment-”I assume this gives a person time to make the case to the insurer that he or she made an unintentional error”- would you double check that the burden is on the insuree rather than the insurer?
.
I thought I read that the company needs to make the case.

“Trying to get someone to pay for something based on a lie is called fraud, and you go to jail for it in the real world.

So, the question is: Why aren’t the Democrats in jail?”
.
Trying to gin up opposition to a democratically-elected government and undermine the health of the nation for personal political or financial gain, based on lies, is traitorous and you get hung for being a traitor.
.
So the question is: Why aren’t the Republicans…“

The reason there’s still a need to protect against “race to the bottom” under the GOP plan is that it assumes the ACA is repealed, Stuart Zechman.

Thanks so much for responding to commentary, Kate Pickert, we look forward to whatever helpful information you can provide from HHS, as well as checking into the veracity of their specific claims.

Agreed. Thanks for looking into this stuff and reporting on the impact of the proposals.

Thank you so very much for responding to commentary with that important clarification, Kate Pickert, it is greatly appreciated.

Thank you, Kate. You and Paul brought up great point about who bears burden of proof, need to clear this up. “Guilty until proven innocent” is a bad way to run things.

then why isnt bush and the rebulicans in jail we have been paying for this lie they called the war that he started for years

Ok, how do you make it a “right”? Do you even understand what a right is?

No, or you wouldn’t even ask should heathcare be a right.

You don’t have rights from government. You have favors granted for expectations of support.

How would you like to enforce your “right” to healthcare? Are you going to mandate that there needs to be enough doctors? Are you going to force them to provide care? Are you going to have prisons for doctors that don’t perform procedures?

You would HAVE to have enforcement in order to create your “right” to healthcare.

Once again, you cannot start with a false premise, and make it work.

But, you don’t care about that. You want the ends. So, you will justify the means to that end. How Machiavellian.

You can’t play the Bush/Cheney red herring.

Obamcare is a fraud, and everybody knows it.

The typical response from right wingers:
.
1) No. Its not written in the Constitution™ so it doesn’t exist. This is also why there are no laws about airplanes. Because airplanes aren’t mentioned in the Constitution™ they don’t actually exist. Its a collective hallucination from your socialist masters.
.
2) No. She’s a lazy couch potato parasitically living off of hard-working Americans because she’s too lazy to work and drives a Cadillac.
.
3) Free Market™!!!!1!
.
This has been your automated right-wing response system. If this was an actual right-wing response, you would’ve been personally insulted and told where to go.

You can’t play the Bush/Cheney red herring.
.
Why not, meltdown?
.
It fits. And better than your example.

I would agree with filmnoia we should ask these questions and hope that some day people smarter than us come up with the right answers.So that my kids dont have to worry for their childrens health because they cant afford the health ins. Like the worring i do every night when i go to bed because i dont have it and can’t afford it

But, you don’t care about that. You want the ends. So, you will justify the means to that end. How Machiavellian.
.
You’re slipping, meltdown. Your insults are losing their “pizzaz” and your points are, well, rather pointless.
.
Do try to keep up.

Just breezed through this, been there, seen the predictable comments. Know what rusty and his right wing groupies will say, know what sz with the centrist rant will be, as well as afguy and the other rational comments.
.
I will just thank Kate for not 1 time but 2 defending her post. More please.

What’s there to pay for? We still don’t know what’s in Obamcare.

Have they filled in the blanks yet? No.

I was going to write a post about how unworkable the health care plan in the GOP’s new “Pledge to Plague on America” is.

Heh. Fixed.

And the answer to everything IS…

Blame Bush.

“Instead of burning Qurans, perhaps we can burn this healthcare law instead.”

While we’re burning things how about some copies of the Bible and the US Constitution as well.?
What goes around…….

The Nazi regime was bad. The Inquisition was bad. Book burning were part of both. Bad. I am opposed to book burnings. If you guess that I am not right wing, that I am not religious, that I am not Republican nor the subsidiary Tea Party, you are correct.

Thats rite blam bush is the answer. He deregulated all that he could and look how well that went for us. Deregulation might have worked in the 40s and 50s when companies thought they owed the people who worked for them and the people who bought their product or services something,now days the only people they think they owe is the ceos and major stock holders every one elese can go to hell

Wow, check off one item on the list that ‘ol hippo and I agree upon. Amazing.

“No, or you wouldn’t even ask should heathcare be a right.

You don’t have rights from government. You have favors granted for expectations of support.

How would you like to enforce your “right” to healthcare? Are you going to mandate that there needs to be enough doctors? Are you going to force them to provide care? Are you going to have prisons for doctors that don’t perform procedures? ”

Typical right wing twaddle, but momentomori said it much better than I can.
Essentially what is being presented is the stark ugly face of Darwinism at it’s finest. No civic responsibility, no “we’re in this all together”, just a “screw you, I got mine” mentality. Unfortunately for you, your breed, Jerkus Americanus, is dying out. I just can’t wait until your kids have to learn Mandarin and Punjabi just to be able to speak to their bosses.

afguy:
.
They also wonder when YOU walk into a room why a man is wearing a dress and size 13 high heels. Do you really think you are fooling anyone?

Typical crying from a leftist. When you tell your child no, they bang their head on the floor.

What is, is. You want to reinvent the universe to a manmade vision of paradise. When the universe smacks you in the head, you just ignore it.

I never said we couldn’t improve healthcare.

But, try as you may, twist logic and stand it on its head, you can’t make a wish into a right. But, you won’t stop trying.

Actually, this November 2nd we get to push you libtarded trolls back into the holes your crawled out of like a swarm of locust.
.
Pests are usually the same. They come out every 7 years or so, and finally they crawl back from whence they came.
.
Bye bye!!

They also wonder when YOU walk into a room why a man is wearing a dress and size 13 high heels. Do you really think you are fooling anyone?
.
Sorry, Rusty. I only wear size 10-1/2 shoes. As for the dress, I don’t have the legs for it. Sorry to ruin the fantasy for you.
.
You’ll have to get your “tingle” elsewhere…

Just curious… what kind of male spends the afternoon visualizing another guy wearing women’s clothes?
.
You really need to get out more…

Was this press release written by Kate Pickert for Obama or was it written by Obama for Kate Pickert?

Pickert asserts (predictably): “They want to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but how will they pay for it? The Congressional Budget Office says the law will reduce the federal deficit by about $140 billion over ten years, so repealing the law will add to the deficit.”

Pickert will be the last person on earth who thinks that Obamacare “will reduce the federal deficit by about $140 billion over ten years”.

Can we get Pickert to identify a single government program that has “reduced the federal deficit”? Good luck.

I never said we couldn’t improve healthcare.
.
True, meltdown, you didn’t…
.
You just been dwelling on the reasons why we shouldn’t try… and we just can’t seem to find any instances of you saying we should.

The consumer protections u are so against, has helped to ensure that my car is safe; my brother didn’t put his new born into a poorly made crib or car seat; even the drinking glasses I just bought are free from sharp edges–and if any of those items are defective, I get my money back and can could even file a complaint for any harm that might have been done by the use of a defective product.

I guess when decondiva gets his/her ego stroked a little, she can see clearly what is the difference between those of us who are all for individual responsibility, and those who like decondiva are wanting the government to provide for them.
.
That is the definition also between a free market and the principles of capitalism, and what is the difference between a socialist government which everyone works for the government, including all the businesses and then shares equally all of the profits or problems.
.
I guess it doesn’t matter to the late comers to this county like decon, or those who have gone to Africa to become “bearded Marxists”, but this country was started and founded on free market principles and capitalism.
.
Now those who were born here did not have a choice, and I suppose we should give them a choice. We should simply terminate their citizenship and give them a one-way ticket to China, Russia, France or even England perhaps just to name a few. That way they can chose from a strict socialist government or one of the neo-socialist countries who are currently trying it, but failing miserably at it. (If they are smart and honest, they will admit all attempts at the Government in control of everything or even partially does not work over time. Ask Castro if you need a reference).

DOH!! afguy, you were the one fantasizing about my PENIS, dork. Well before I put you into your dress-up clothes I am sure you are so fond of.

I’m sure lovely Kate is busy right now (perhaps heading out to pick up stir fry for dinner, either take out or groceries to make it herself), but why don’t you ask Bill Clinton? He eliminated the deficit before leaving. What did W do with the deficit (W and Paulson’s TARP thingy aside, like that matters)?
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administration_was_the_federal.html

“Pickert will be the last person on earth who thinks that Obamacare “will reduce the federal deficit by about $140 billion over ten years”.”

.
Actually I think it will be Karen “The Shill” Tumulty, but that is just my opinion on who will be the last person. I think Pickert is just still trying to hold up to the standards that Tumulty trained her with when she left school and came to TIME.com a few months ago.

Why would you know what is in it? It’s only a federal statute that you can look up.
.
If you are waiting for ACA to come out as a graphic novel or cartoon, don’t hold your breath.

“Actually, this November 2nd we get to push you libtarded trolls back into the holes your crawled out of like a swarm of locust.”

Whoa there boss! Once you’re able to dust the rust off your brain cells and stop dribbling your bile, do you think you can add anything whatsoever constructive to the discussion? You know, something like “the Constitution is like the Bible, it’s immutable, and no where does it say we have a right to life and liberty, and therefore healthcare can’t be a right.” You know, say something pithy and original.

No, I referred to “the big pr!ck” in the room and THAT was most definitely NOT what I was talking about. (And neither would anyone else, I can safely assume…)
.
Keep up, Rusty… you’re embarrassing yourself.

How about Sledge to America? Only a change of a single letter.

You’re still one apology short to KT, Rusty…
.
“Man up” and offer one…

You really need to have some honor and finally apologize to Tumulty, Rustydog.

A more recenet article from Reason concerning the Republican plans:
http://reason.com/blog/2010/09/22/as-the-gop-gets-ready-to-revea?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reason%2FHitandRun+%28Reason+Online+-+Hit+%26+Run+Blog%29

“Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is one of the most famous phrases in the United States Declaration of Independence, and considered by some as part of one of the most well crafted, influential sentences in the history of the English language[1]. These three aspects are listed among the “unalienable rights” or sovereign rights of man.”

.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life,_liberty_and_the_pursuit_of_happiness
.
Ah, the pure essence of what has made America what it is. The defining words which separated America from all other countries before or after.
.
However, filmnoia, you do have the right to life and liberty as it is defined in the Declaration of Independence. The rights as they are written in the Constitution by our Founding Fathers ensure we continue to have the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness forever and ever. Well at least until libtards decide they do not like those rights, and want to have power and control (tyranny) over us as individuals.
.
The pursuit of happiness does not automatically say that the government has to hand it over to you. It doesn’t even guarantee that you should have it whether you can afford it or not. It merely allows and affords you the opportunity to get it for yourself, if you want to put in the hard work and dedication to get it.
.
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, not some perverted form of socialism where everyone is part of some big collective, and we all jump in the same boat together to sink or swim.
.
Once liberals like you realize that the dream of America is about what YOU can do for yourself, NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU then we shall move forward and beyond where we are today.

”
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, not some perverted form of socialism where everyone is part of some big collective, and we all jump in the same boat together to sink or swim.”

Yeah, so I suppose this country reached some degree of success by everyone doing their own “thing,” kind of like they did during the Depression and WWII.
Universal healthcare has nothing to do with socialism.
Socialism is a means of production. Those on the Right think that by using the word “socialism” is supposed to be a big debating point.Take a look at modern day France, Canada, the UK or Germany and ask them whether they think they live in socialist countries. They would look at you like you had two heads.
And, by the way, what’s with this “libtard”. Can’t you discuss things without name calling? Are you still in junior high or just in your dotage?

Perhaps when the majority of the LIBTARDS on this site begin to debate with respect on here with those of us with differing opinions, then I will lose the LIBTARD label for your freaks.
.
They started it. I am finishing it. Got it?
———————————————————————-
So far as the neo-Socialist European Union, believe me, those who live there will gladly say they are living under a perverted form of Socialism / Capitalism. Why do you think the Unions are all protesting in Greece right now?
.
God why are you people so dumb?

I supposed poor Rusty thinks the Federal Highway System™ is a communist plot to allow our armed troops to invade our own country faster and suppress the peasants with full fiat. It did start during the Red Scare ‘50’s, yes? Coincidence? (never mind who was President when it began, shhh) He probably also forgets that the Constitution gives The Govt.™ the power to steal money from We The People at gunpoint collect income taxes.

Rusty still hasn’t? KT, if you’re reading this (for solemn amusement, no doubt), did Rusty EVER apologize to you, even privately: email, twitter dm, or send flowers?

“Universal healthcare has nothing to do with socialism. Socialism is a means of production. Those on the Right think that by using the word “socialism” is supposed to be a big debating point.”

.

“Although some people refer to universal health care as socialized medicine, the concepts are not completely synonymous. The term “socialized medicine” is primarily used only in the United States by those who do not support the idea of universal health care. Outside the US, the terms most used are universal health care or public health care. The actual definition of socialized medicine is somewhat varied and inconsistent in usage, though it generally describes any system of health care that is publicly financed, government administered, or both.
.
For some, socialized medicine is specific to systems in which the government both operates the health care facilities AND employs the health care professionals. In the United States, examples of this type of care are the United States Veterans Health Administration, and the medical departments of the US Army, Navy, and Air Force.
.
Others consider socialized medicine in broader terms as any system that is partially or totally funded by government although health care is provided by private business. Examples of this type of health care system in the United States is Medicare, Medicaid, and the US Military’s TRICARE.

.
http://www.healthpaconline.net/universal-health-care.htm
.
You call it ToMAto…………I call it TOmato.
.
Once Universal Healthcare is enacted there will no longer be any free market recognition of healthcare as we have today. Healthcare innovation will dry up and simply blow away.
.
Eventually our Government will have no choice what-so-ever but to become fully involved, taking over all hospitals and employing Doctors, Nurses and anyone else who works in the healthcare field.
.
You WILL end up with SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. Count on it.

I’ll answer that one myself. HELL NO. And, further more, why should I?
.
Tumulty is and always will be a liberal shill. Even more so now since going to the Washington Post.

Seconded. I got tired of these comments last winter – they are even more tiresome now. And it was a good post to begin with.

You forgot to remind us that “the sky is falling, the sky is falling”, Chicken Little.
.
Check under your bed for Commies tonight before you say your nightly prayers to that big photo of yourself.
.
And don’t forget to go “potty” before bed… wouldn’t want any accidents if you hear any strange noises.. might be them sneaky Muslims comin’ to steal your bodily fluids.

You WILL end up with SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. Count on it.
.
…so what’s wrong with that? Seriously? Many other countries, even socialized ones, have higher life expectancies. Even our own CIA admits we’re NOT #1… https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html …but instead of whining about moving to Europe, how about trying to help raise our own status here by providing more / better HC to everyone, not just RW apocalyptic seed growers?
(how cool is it to link to the CIA? but other lists per google confirm we’re not at the top either)

Wait a second, Rustydog…
.
Did you just say that our fine military’s TRICARE health care plan is socialism?
.
Did you just call our fine men and women in uniform –the ones who created this great American system of ours– socialists?

The European countries that have “socialized medicine” are functioning democracies. If the system is so onerous, why don’t they ever vote to change it? Is it even a campaign issue in those countries?

Does one of our more reactionary, elitist, commentaters here concern himself that Sarah Palin might find the epithet “libtard” offensive?

“Once Universal Healthcare is enacted there will no longer be any free market recognition of healthcare as we have today. Healthcare innovation will dry up and simply blow away.”

Innovation will always be there, because it’s in the human gene to always look for discoveries. The free market (driven by Wall St. investors) and universal healthcare don’t mix, it’s incompatible. No one’s health should be sacrificed by their inability to pay. If you believe that then you are saying that some people’s lives are worth more than others. A real red-blooded American perspective. So I guess you are one of those that believe that if one is poor, or not so poor, but have lost their health coverage, then that’s just “tough.” There is always that trusty emergency room.
Notice how I can disagree without resorting to name calling, but I can see where with others you make that very difficult. Did your third grade report card say “does not get along well with their playmates”?

…the dream of America is about what YOU can do for yourself, NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU then we shall move forward and beyond where we are today.
.
“Ask NOT what you’re country can do for you… ask what YOU can do for your country.”
.
We went to the moon in less than 10 years with the philosophy described above, Rusty.
.
Somehow your personal “Let’s all look out for number one” creed doesn’t have the same ring to it. And, based on the last couple of decades or so, it hasn’t done the country a lot of good either.
.
But, by all means, continue to demonstrate what a self-absorbed, unthinking jerk you are…

Stay classy, Rusty… you’re truly an inspiration to us all here in the Swamp.

Who are the 35 million, is the first thing to ask. Those who are unemployed probably plan to be employed by 2014 and believe they will be insured anyway. The others are wondering if they will be able to afford it when it becomes available.
.
No one banks on something they do not have. Will it matter at the polls? Who knows. How many vote?

Why “bad/inadequate ideas” are embraced by the GOP (and the DLC):

“Public opinion on issues such as inequality has not shifted over the past thirty years; most people still think society is too unequal and that taxes should be used to reduce inequality. What has shifted is that Congressmen are now much more receptive to the opinions of the rich, and there is actually a negative correlation between their positions and the preferences of their poor constituents (p. 111). Citing Martin Gilens, they write, ‘When well-off people strongly supported a policy change, it had almost three times the chance of becoming law as when they strongly opposed it. When median-income people strongly supported a policy change, it had hardly any greater chance of becoming law than when they strongly opposed it’ (p. 112). In other words, it isn’t public opinion, or the median voter, that matters; it’s what the rich want.”

http://baselinescenario.com/2010/09/13/the-importance-of-the-1970s/

h/t Avedon

And why should health care be a part of that free market system? Health care is an essential need to everybody. Why should a few companies and their stock holders be able to rake in huge profits off something we all need at some point in our lives?
.
If health insurance companies were never allowed to move from being non-profit agencies to for-profit corporations, we wouldn’t be having this debate because the companies would have kept their prices as low as possible.
.
It is synonymous to if the agency I work for became a for-profit business. Gradually, the pursuit of profits would make it impossible for us to serve the very mentally ill community we were formed to serve.

To answer your questions:

1. Yes, everybody should have the right to quality, affordable health care.
.
2. N/A
.
3. No. The quality of care should never be determined by a person’s ability to pay. As Americans we are guaranteed 3 basic right–that of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. By denying a poor person the same care a wealthy person can easily pay for, we are denying that poor person his/her basic rights.

I read that at Avedon’s too, JC.
.
She doesn’t agree with me about everything, but she was great to talk with when we were guests on Virtually Speaking together, and she’s been fantastic in the chat stream during the live shows.
.
Everybody here who has the slightest inclination toward movement liberalism should read her blog.

Well, I could have h/t(ed) you too, as you first brought AC to my attn. My fellow Maryland native turned expat.
.
I also like her reaction to the above passage. Finished off with a Ian-Welsh-like hint of collapse.

Cenk Uygur demolished the free-market HC “system” talking points …in 2007! And it’s still applicable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/socialized-police_b_55698.html
Maybe Cenk and Kate can interview each other and swap ideas.

Everybody here who has the slightest inclination toward movement liberalism should read her blog.

Linky please……..

Ian and I have been discussing via email today the Administration’s naked propaganda, and my response to some of the folks on “our side” who are willing to sell it.
.
Although, just as with Avedon, we don’t necessarily agree, it’s gratifying to have the praise of someone of the caliber of Ian Welsh, I’ll be honest.

Oops, sorry diecash1!
.
Here’s the very influential (in liberal blogosphere terms) Avedon’s Sideshow:
.
http://sideshow.me.uk/

No problem. Thanks for the link. I’ll check it out.

Perhaps when the majority of the LIBTARDS on this site begin to debate with respect on here with those of us with differing opinions
-
Sorry, rusty. I judge people on the content of their character. As a willfully ignorant racist hateful dirtbag, you’ve got a loooong way to go before anyone outside your own little world will respect you.

Liberals are running as fast as they can from Obama care and the rest are totally loosing it. Here is one of them totally in a full scale panicked rage

Head Of Ohio’s Democratic Party Is Using The F-Bomb To Describe Americans!

http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.com/2010/09/head-of-ohios-democratic-party-is-using.html

So if a repeal of the bill happens, isn’t it also potentially correct to say that the cost of our insurance which is now drastically rising or is threatened to drastically rise will stop?

lol
.
No, seriously. That’s the stupidest thing I think I have ever heard someone postulate. When has the cost of insurance ever gone down, for any reason other than a corresponding decrease in benefits?

Linked to it yesterday, old news. He’s talking about lying right-wing Teabaggers.
.
No wonder you’re offended.

They started it. I am finishing it. Got it?
.
Wait, I’m confused. How are you going to finish it? Will there be a happy ending?

Just out of curiosity, does anyone else here read Slacktivist?

Cliff, never heard of it. A synopsis/link? Are you meeting Joe to beer and darts while he’s in state?
.
SZ, the chat-stream is only in 2nd-Life? Any other way to submit questions, before or live?

Make that a “for” not a “to”

Actually Libtard is not an epithet. And has absolutely nothing to do with Sarah Palin. See post 24 belown

The terms “retard” and “tard” do not necessarily refer to the mentally handicapped. The words simply mean “slow,” “hindered,” or “late coming” (c.f. “tardy,” and Fr.: Je suis en retard! = I’m late!) For example, to say the ignition timing on an auto engine is “retarded” means that fuel ignition occurs later than specified by the manufacturer. It says nothing of that car’s ability to do math or make macaroni pictures. Similarly, to “retard” music is to make it move at a slower tempo. It doesn’t handicap the music. Thus, to call a mentally handicapped person retarded (i.e. “slow”) is actually a euphemism, as it avoids describing the source of his or her “slowness.”

If the words “tard” and “retard” have invariably come to mean something offensive, it is due to poor English teaching and even poorer learning. But if you care to be offended by mere words, and words that are misunderstood at that, then go ahead. I can’t stop you. (And then guess whose ignorance is awesome now?)

This does, however, underscore a problem in this country with people who seek to strangle language in pursuit of some political agendum. Designating words that are PC or not PC based on their undesirability is no different than the thought and word control described in Orwell’s 1984. A language expresses more than ideas. It expresses cultural values and world views. Hence, forcing people to refrain from using words, or forcing them to use other words in lieu of those in the current lexicon, forces them not only to change the way they think, but to change the way they view the world and their place in it. Thought control is not conducive to liberty. And just imagine: You thought you were a liberal.

No, I’m not meeting Joe for a beer. I’m far too grubby of a peasant.
Plus I’m not sure I could stand Joe’s advice on how to run my life (seeing as how he’s a universal expert); I get plenty of that from my friends.
.
http://slacktivist.typepad.com/
.
It’s interesting in that the guy who writes it is a liberal Christian.
.
The blog first came to my attention as a place to read a very thorough dissection of the Left Behind books – the blog writer is familiar with (but not sympathetic to) the strain of Christianity that produces these kind of media, so it’s a great peek into a subculture that’s very alien and yet very close to home.
.
I’ve just started reading it in general, since I like the way he writes. Very clear and concise.

Name that tune:
.

I would ask the president to show decency in this process by eliminating one member of that inner circle, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, and not allow Rahm’s continued indecent tactics to cloud efforts. Yes, Rahm is known for his caustic, crude references about those with whom he disagrees, but his recent tirade against participants in a strategy session was such a strong slap in many American faces that our president is doing himself a disservice by seeming to condone Rahm’s recent sick and offensive tactic.
.
The Obama Administration’s Chief of Staff scolded participants, calling them, “F—ing retarded,” according to several participants, as reported in the Wall Street Journal.
.
Just as we’d be appalled if any public figure of Rahm’s stature ever used the “N-word” or other such inappropriate language, Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities — and the people who love them — is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking.

A patriot in North Andover, Massachusetts, notified me of Rahm’s “retarded” slam. I join this gentleman, who is the father of a beautiful child born with Down Syndrome, in asking why the Special Olympics, National Down Syndrome Society and other groups condemning Rahm’s degrading scolding have been completely ignored by the White House. No comment from his boss, the president?

You can retard the ignition timing on a car engine.

Refrigeration can be used to retard the growth of the bacterial culture.

Liberals retard the economic growth of the United States. Hence, the natural fusion of the word into Libtard.

I hope that our liberal comrades “open minded” sensibilities can stand the use of a word in the English language, or has this stretched the liberal “tolerance” to a breaking point and you want to haul all users of the word off to the gulag?

Thanks for the link. Will check it out. I have family here who are both Baptists and Socialists, so I’m familiar with the juxtaposition.

You have completed such an eloquent explanation and definition of “Libtard”, I have copied and pasted it into my favorite new word dictionary.
.
I wonder if Bill O’Reilly will use it at the end of one of his shows soon?
.
Excellent job!! liberalmeltdown.

Gregory Hines would be SOOOO proud of you after that, meltdown…
.
Best example of impromptu “tap-dancing” I’ve seen in months.

JC:
.
SZ, the chat-stream is only in 2nd-Life? Any other way to submit questions, before or live?
.
Actually, there is a chat stream that Jay also has up on his monitor at blogtalkradio, so you can submit questions during the live show (there’s no pre-show question gather of which I am aware).
.
This Sunday it’s Avedon & Crooks & Liars’ Susie Madrak (the one who just asked Gibbs if he knew what “hippie punching” was during a conference call):
.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/virtuallyspeaking

Let me see if I can go you one better.
.
A racist is not a bad person. “Race” can be a “contest between a group of people or objects” or “a subset of human beings by appearance or physical characteristics”.
.
So, if I just choose the first meaning, a “racist” is just a participant in an innocent contest. The fact that it is universally understood to mean someone who discriminates against a group because of their appearance is due to poor education on their part, not that I am “cherry-picking” the definition that casts me in the best light.
.
What you just did is called “parsing”, meltdown. Get over yourself. The term is used often enough here in the discussion that everyone knows its intended meaning…
.
And it AIN’T a compliment.

See above.
.
I doubt your English or debate teacher would allow you to get away with the logical gymnastics you’re trying to apply here – that “libtard” is just an innocent choice of words on your part.
.
You’d be writing on the board after school for a week.

My personal doctor, a general practitioner, told me that he would like to be paid the same way the fire department and police department is paid… through taxes collected by the local government.
HIs opinion, and he’s an excellent doctor, is that health care is not and should never be considered a business. If you are in it to make a fortune, you’re in it for the wrong reason.
And, btw, he’s American born and bred. Not an import.

I would add that my Republican friend who has the same doctor thought I was lying when I told her what he said. I told her to ask him herself. She did. She hasn’t had much to say about killing ‘obamacare’ since.

“1% would be a bare minimum, but implemented across the country, this one thing could have a major impact on the cost.”

You left out the ‘woulda shoulda’ part.

You are a dimwit

Your doctor is unaware of the impending crisis if Obamacare is implemented, vinnie. The ramifications of this bill will impact millions alright, but in a very negative way. Most of us enter medicine for all of the right reasons and treating our patients with care and concern is our primary motivation. With this current legislation, this aspect of our practice may be lost forever. We simply cannot absorb millions of NEW patients without sacrificing the time we normally allocate to our existing patient base. Coupled with the emergence of MORE Insurance company power to limit our ability to treat and council. The hardest hit segment will be our senior citizens as fewer physicians will be available to treat them. We currently have over 500,000 physicians opposing Obamacare and you can go to Docs4PatientCare, to see why we feel so strongly about this exceedingly poorly written legislation.

Yeah, many would like to be paid the same way the Fire Department and Police are also. I might add that 10 million unemployed would all take that pay.

http://www.calwatchdog.com/2010/09/23/pensions-crushing-san-jose-city-voters-eye-reform/

City payments for retirement benefits have tripled over the last 10 years even though our workforce has declined dramatically, and we have billions of dollars in unfunded liabilities that the taxpayers must pay. The average cost to the City of San Jose for a police officer or firefighter is over $180,000 per year. Benefits, primarily retirement costs, are nearly 50% of salary.

Just wanted to provide an answer to the very good question posed here about rescissions. I’m told that the decision on whether false information on insurance enrollee forms constitutes fraud or just error will be made by state insurance commissioners. A person notified that his or her insurance policy is being rescinded will have to appeal to their state insurance commissioner and the burden of proof will be on insurers to prove fraud was committed.

Thanks for update, Kate. Sorry for delayed kudos, just read this. This is important stuff.