“Keep Your Gov’t Hands Off My Medicare” cont…

There is a lot more truth to this ad than fiction, Ms. Pickert. Many doctors ARE refusing to accept new medicare patients and cutting 500 billion from the program certainly does NOT help our seniors. They are, by far, the ones getting short changed by HCR and if you think they are not cognizant of this fact, then you are badly mistaken. Premiums are escalating precipitously and the insurance companies still run the show, so it is not just the seniors getting hurt by this massively inefficient bill. The American public has bean dealt a woefully weak hand and the majority are pretty upset by it. (and rightly so)

Thanks, Kate (btw, please post some “1000 words” captions, share your dark humor with us beyond barely tolerating whiny comments and insults du jour). Would the VA actually be closer to Socialized Medicine™ since it has HC providers too, not just payments, etc.?
.
Also, there are many TP’ers who ARE on the public dole in some form: Social Sec., Medicare, etc. Do you (or stuart or others) have some hard numbers / “tea leaves” estimates on this contradiction: those who say keep govt. hands off while taking handouts? Thanks for your thoughts, Kate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/us/politics/28teaparty.html

Kate Pickert:
.
You write:
.
“It’s kind of surprising that Democrats never tried to sell their health care plan using the popularity of Medicare.”
.
Putting aside the merits and problem of Medicare (as you have) for a moment, why is it at all surprising to you that the Democrats who proposed, wrote and ultimately ensured the passage of this legislation such that it bears no resemblance whatsoever to Medicare do not then attempt to exploit Medicare’s popularity to sell the program?
.
Ordinary people are certainly not stupid enough to fall for that sort of bait-and-switch, are they?
.
How could these particular Democrats possibly run as the brave centrists who defied their base’s call for a Medicare-for-all program to compete with private insurance oligopolies, and then turn around and run on the out-of-control “entitlement” they obviously find so abhorrent?
.
More importantly, how could they run on the sacred promise of Medicare now, and then vote to cut and gut the program when Obama’s Catfood –sorry, “Deficit” Commission “recommends” that means for continued financing of our wars to the lame duck session?
.
Don’t you think that, even for this kind of Democrat, it would be a little…much, Kate Pickert?
.
Wouldn’t that be an even more offensive, dishonest contradiction than the Republican from Tennessee’s, so bald a lie that even a befogged, desperate public would call for these Democrats’ televised hangings?

Just a teensee quibble with your framing, deconstructiva.
.
When you describe the public insurance programs into which working people have been paying their entire lives as “on the public dole” or “while taking handouts,” as if these things are somehow welfare, or charity, that’s what rightist think tanks have been trying to get into peoples’ heads for decades.
.
These aren’t public charity programs. Working people put their money into these federally administered insurance policies their entire wage-earning lives, and then, because the programs work as designed, they receive that to which they’re entitled, just like you’re entitled to have your claims paid by any private insurance plan, just like you’re entitled to your 401k when you retire.
.
I understand that your point is to highlight the contradiction of people who say the government can’t do anything right, but still manage to do fairly well because New Deal programs are sound investments of their tax dollars, but that’s a far, far cry from “crying about Big Government while on the dole.”
.
It’s the movement right that seeks to define public insurance as a handout, and they’re doing a pretty good job.
.
If at all possible, it might be useful for you to consider the way in which you point out what seems like a huge contradiction in a way that doesn’t prop up the very lies those right-wing –and some centrist– think tanks, message shops and media love to tell about the success of the New Deal.
.
Again, not trying to jump down your throat, and fully got your original point, just trying to be helpful, deconstructiva.

Shorter: it wouldn’t please Village centrists or their corporate sponsors. It’s kind of surprising that a Washington journalist wouldn’t understand that.

Oh, if it isn’t Mr Doom and Gloom again.
.
Or am I supposed to believe Dr. Doom?
.
You were the one who told us that your “doctor friends” in Massachusetts had a six month waiting list to see a patient. When I told you that my then pregnant sister-in-law had no such problem and found the end of the article which said that the six month wait was only for the very first visit for people who used to have no access at all to a primary care physician and was getting shorter and shorter as time went on, you admitted your facts were from your failure to read the Wall Street Journal Article.
.
Medicare has always been weak at compensating doctors and the trend pre-dated HCR by more than ten years.

“Doctors Are Opting Out of Medicare
By JULIE CONNELLY
Published: April 1, 2009

EARLY this year, Barbara Plumb, a freelance editor and writer in New York who is on Medicare, received a disturbing letter. Her gynecologist informed her that she was opting out of Medicare. When Ms. Plumb asked her primary-care doctor to recommend another gynecologist who took Medicare, the doctor responded that she didn’t know any — and that if Ms. Plumb found one she liked, could she call and tell her the name?
Many people, just as they become eligible for Medicare, discover that the insurance rug has been pulled out from under them. Some doctors — often internists but also gastroenterologists, gynecologists, psychiatrists and other specialists — are no longer accepting Medicare, either because they have opted out of the insurance system or they are not accepting new patients with Medicare coverage. The doctors’ reasons: reimbursement rates are too low and paperwork too much of a hassle. ”
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/retirementspecial/02health.html
.
I would love it if the wingnuts who hold HCR exclusively or even directly responsible for the fact that doctors have begun to refuse medicare patients could explain why this Times Article from April 2009 states the problem as having been going on for years.
.
Clearly the problem is low reimbursement rates and ones which give bad incentives and not caused by the mandate that employers pay for employees health insurance.
.
That is far from saying that HCR has been what we wanted or even that it is a dramatic improvement, but, it is only tangentially related.
.
Next, Earl tells me how mean I am for saying that he isn’t a doctor and/or says that saying that he isn’t a doctor he can tell from his seat in his home means that I must be insane. Both of these things will take us away from the actual facts and back into juvenile mud slinging, which is what the far right wants.

“…cutting 500 billion from the program certainly does NOT help our seniors.”
.
Well guess what, genius: the Teatard candidates you hope will beat those terrible Democrats are the very ones who see Medicare as a unconstitutional, budget-busting social-welfare program they want to completely gut. Their corporate masters aren’t that thrilled about it either. They would much prefer profit-swelling voucher-type programs, which will be completely inadequate for patients, that “conservatives” want to replace Medicare with. Go figure.

Every TPer who doesn’t want the government messing with their health care should be obliged by cutting them from Medicare rolls.

The don’t try to use medicare as a talking point because it is broke.

The liberals robbed the money out of medicare and spent it.

Now they borrow from the Chinese, spend that, raise your taxes to keep medicare going, spend that, borrow some more from the the Chinese and then spend that, raise taxes again and blow that.

Why can’t I put MY money in a place where the freaking government can’t get their hands on it? Hell we would all be rich if we would have applied that money to a real retirement plan.

If you are going to take it, keep your damn hands off of it until I am ready to retire.

It has to stop

I will be the first in line, just refund what I have already put into it. I know for sure I could do a better job in the government.

I wounder how much I would have if I had started putting that money in a 5% CD when I was twenty?

I wounder if the Chinese will loan our government the money so I can buy dog food to eat when I am 70?

After the dang spending liberals spent it all

They don’t

…They don’t

The most laughable part of the following statement from Ms Pickert is that it is nothing short of a total LIE. Isn’t that right, Ms Pickert? The Democrats NEVER tried to sell their health care plan? LOL you are one big joke.
.
“It’s kind of surprising that Democrats never tried to sell their health care plan using the popularity of Medicare.”
.
If you are going to shill for the Democrats with this insane law, at least get a folksy sounding twist to what you write or maybe you can join Andy. Are you camera friendly Ms Pickert?
.

I have often wondered why Medicare and Social Security are going broke. All our working lives we pay into the fund, over 4% for social security and almost 2% of our income goes to Medicare.
.
Week after week, month after month we pay into these funds. But does the money stay in these huge funds?
.
No, you say? You mean it funds other government spending programs which have been allowed to pass which are not funded? Borrowed away but never paid back?
.
As Nancy said before the bill went into law. “There is so much fraud and abuse, more than 500 BILLION of fraud and abuse in Medicare that we can simply take it from Medicare to at least fund 1/2 of the cost for those who do not now have insurance”
.
But the money in these funds wasn’t Nancy’s or Barack’s money to spend like that. It was the money working people have paid in over the years, their entire working lives. But, now Nancy and Barack want them to give up some of that money so they can give it to people who now do not have any insurance.
.
Isn’t that how it goes my dear liberal friends? Isn’t that how at least 1/2 of the cost is being paid for?

The liberals robbed the money out of medicare and spent it.
Now they borrow from the Chinese, spend that, raise your taxes to keep medicare going, spend that, borrow some more from the the Chinese and then spend that, raise taxes again and blow that.

It’s this kind of idiocy that will have you “buying dog food” in your retirement. Unsurprisingly, your posts are entirely devoid of facts.
..
In case you missed it, Medicare is not a personal savings account, just as SS is not. Neither was ever intended to be.

Why can’t I put MY money in a place where the freaking government can’t get their hands on it?

You’re free to put “your money” wherever you like, after you pay your taxes, including those for SS and Medicare.

After the dang spending liberals spent it all

More fact-less drivel………….par for the course.

Shorter:
.
Obama and the Dem leadership were opposed to a program with a larger public sector component. In fact, they are opposed to Medicare as we know it.

new,

Another clip from you full of lies. As usual, you don’t list the source of this video.

Who produced it, Palin’s drones?

new,

You’re lying, and we know it.

Medicare & Social Security are not broke, and you know it.

http://www.spokesman.com/letters/2010/oct/22/dont-vote-politicians-who-will-change-social-secur/

http://blogs.reuters.com/deep-pocket/2010/10/21/will-social-security-be-there-for-todays-young-workers/

You post:

“There is so much fraud and abuse, more than 500 BILLION of fraud and abuse in Medicare that we can simply take it from Medicare to at least fund 1/2 of the cost for those who do not now have insurance”

You lie so much that I cannot accept this as a real quote, unless you tell where you got it.

Source, please.

After the government takes 50% of what I make, I can’t afford to invest.

Here is an idea, we could cut out NPR, and start sending out tax rebates.

I would love to get in there and start slashing, useless liberal programs; we would be out of debt in no time.

After the government takes 50% of what I make

That’s a flat-out lie or you’re just incredibly bad at math, take your pick.

I would love to get in there and start slashing, useless liberal programs; we would be out of debt in no time.

As disingenuous as you are, I’m confident that you couldn’t identify a so-called liberal program. Try cutting the Iraq war spending and letting the Bush tax cuts expire if you want to attack the deficit.
..
I’m sure this may come as a shock to you but Reagan and the disastrous Bush duo ran up the vast majority of our debt with programs that could hardly be described as liberal: Tax cuts for the wealthy, unfunded wars, rampant defense spending, all while cutting taxes…….brilliant! They were probably as good at math as you are.

According to the local paper, Bergmann pays herself as a campaign worker from her campaign contributions. Not illegal, but unsavory.
.
She’s also given little chance, so perhaps the above is a Hail Mary. Or perhaps she is exactly what she appears to be, which is nothing anyone should vote for.

Reminds me of the candidate in Delaware, O’Donnell, whose total taxable income last year was about $5,000.
Raiding campaign funds for living expenses? Definitely unsavory. Maybe illegal? We’ll see. Nothing anyone should vote for? Definitely.

stuartzechman, “there you go again”, to quote RR. Your GOP, or Teaparty, or just plain self-described conservative logic is just plain sad. You logical fallacy that the guy wanting the government to keep it’s hands off his medicare is not related to the issue of welfare. We can talk about welfare as just helping lazy ingrates next time, but this is about government involvement in insurance and providing a mechanism to finance care. If your going to tell us that government involvement, from either a full-controll to a regulated but not full-controll system is bad, then it wether you pay into it all your life and wether you just take without giving is not relevant. We are paying into insurance. If we had a single-payer system, distributed direct by government or by contract to the private sector, then we still pay all of our lives into it. So please, stop purposefully throwing out red herrings.