| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 5:35:42 PM |
I am so looking forward to the people of Virginia, New Jersey and New York electing REPUBLICANS to run the states! Virgina is no surprise. The year "The High Functioning Moron"/"Dubya" was elected, they elected a Democrat for Governor ... so what does that say about how they felt about "The Moron"?
A big message to the obammy and his liberal fools on the health care joke...no bill THIS YEAR...not any year! Governors don't have a vote on it, so who cares what party they represent?
I just can't get over the people in here who are so determined to keep the most vulnerable in our country from having affordable health care. The despicable remarks about how people are lazy and don't deserve it ... when a good number of them are our returning vets who either can't get work or who might be working for an employer who does not offer benefits. Falling behind in their finances while out fighting the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation ... now having to work for an employer who just doesn't think it's necessary to offer benefits.
Let's see, how does that work? "Too bad sucker! Better luck next time you leave on short notice to go fight for your country. We Republicans sucked you into the illegal war and pulled you away from your dear family ... and the employer you used to work for who was offering the benefits. And now that you're back, guess what? Now we just don't care if you don't have health benefits and you can't afford to buy them on your own. Better luck next time."?
I wonder ... what have any of them done to deserve to be treated like that?
Hmmmm ... what have any of us done to deserve to be treated like that? | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 5:51:48 PM |
If any part of the health care bill was unconstitutional the republicans would be all over it, it's just another delay tactic. The people will eventually see exactly what the elected republican's represent, big $$$$$$$$$$$$$
On the other hand, I have no doubt that it is unconstitutional. However, before you can file a case, there has to be damages. Years may pass as the case goes up the judicial chain, and in the end, it will be found unconstitutional but the damage will be done.
There is no constitutional basis for compelling the American people to purchase a product or service. As an aside, it has NEVER been done either. | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 5:55:01 PM |
What republican party? They are booting out their own party members to pull in supposedly independants
Are you talking about DeDe? She was about as much of a republican as you Earl. Notice who she endorsed when she dropped out of the race to avoid embarrassment? I (and many others) would vote for a true conservative independent over a RINO anyday. What a candidate stands for is more important to me than what letter follows their name.
I think you will eventually get the message when the health care bill passes
They'd better get crackin' then. Reid has doubts it will be passed this year.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 6:04:05 PM | They are booting out their own party members to pull in supposedly independants
I do not see an "I" after or before any of the winners names? The losers have a big ol "D" and the winners have a big ol "R"...
Nice job ...duck, cover and spin from the left!
Virgina is no surprise. The year "The High Functioning Moron"/"Dubya" was elected, they elected a Democrat for Governor ... so what does that say about how they felt about "The Moron"?
I love it...more spin and run...this is the first time in decades..DECADES...that the Office of Governor, Lt Governor and Atty Gen WENT TO one PARTY!THE PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING...THEY KNOW THEY MADE A MASSIVE MISTAKE ELECTING THE SOCIALIST PIG THAT IS THE obama...
I am a firm believer in taking care of our military cotter...As for the general public...it is called individual RESPONSIBILITY. Why should those of us who work our ass off and make a decent living, provide for our families, pay our bills ...why the hell should WE be responsible for those who do not, can't or won't?
Hmmmm ... what have any of us done to deserve to be treated like that?[/quote
You were born in a nation based on CAPITALISM..But we all know, you and the liberal left loons want to change all this...what has worked for over 230 years you want to destroy ...wealth redistribution...free everything...MASSIVE tax increases...to pay for you ........ | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 6:05:48 PM | What republican party? They are booting out their own party members to pull in supposedly independants
Are you talking about DeDe? She was about as much of a republican as you Earl. Notice who she endorsed when she dropped out of the race to avoid embarrassment? I (and many others) would vote for a true conservative independent over a RINO anyday. What a candidate stands for is more important to me than what letter follows their name.
If I remember correctly you said you were an independant? Hvw you now changed parties?
I think you will eventually get the message when the health care bill passes
They'd better get crackin' then. Reid has doubts it will be passed this year.
Good then that should give lots of people plenty of time to read it and eliminate some of that crying about having the bill jammed down their throats | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 7:02:42 PM |
If I remember correctly you said you were an independant? Hvw you now changed parties?
I'm not registered as a member of any political party, but I align more closely with and vote more often for republicans because at this point in time a vote for an independant is a wasted vote. But I certainly wouldn't vote for a republican with the ideology of DeDe Scozzafava. That would be like voting for a democrat. A very liberal democrat.
She is a RINO, a wolf in sheep's clothing. She'd pull an Arlen Spectre quicker than Arlen did.
Good then that should give lots of people plenty of time to read it and eliminate some of that crying about having the bill jammed down their throats
And give more people time to come to senses and see what an abomination this pile of paper really is. If getting people medical insurance is really the true point of all of this, let them raise the poverty level, remove all the conditions and stipulations and let those people get on the insurance that exists already. If reform is needed, reform what already exists----Obama now says it can be done in conjunction with the bills, so do it with what already exists. Quit messing with people who don't want their present situation threatened. Taxing those barely making it who are not able to afford insurance is ridiculous. Forcing people to buy insurance or be taxed is wrong. Forcing small businesses to offer HC is going to impede any growth in the economy.
The solutions are there, but this administration refuses to see it. They want control, plain and simple and will settle for nothing less. There are easier ways of getting the 30-45 million uninsured health care without jeopardizing the 280 milion or so who already have it. And creating needless burdens for the countless others who don't want it (weather democrats think it's their duty to impose it or not). | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 7:23:51 PM |
And give more people time to come to senses and see what an abomination this pile of paper really is. If getting people medical insurance is really the true point of all of this, let them raise the poverty level, remove all the conditions and stipulations and let those people get on the insurance that exists already. If reform is needed, reform what already exists----Obama now says it can be done in conjunction with the bills, so do it with what already exists. Quit messing with people who don't want their present situation threatened. Taxing those barely making it who are not able to afford insurance is ridiculous. Forcing people to buy insurance or be taxed is wrong. Forcing small businesses to offer HC is going to impede any growth in the economy.
The republican party fought health care reform for the last 40 years and they have had plenty of opportunities to enact reform, my question is why have they not taking on the task? My answer is obvious $$$$$$$$$$$$$$
The solutions are there, but this administration refuses to see it. They want control, plain and simple and will settle for nothing less. There are easier ways of getting the 30-45 million uninsured health care without jeopardizing the 280 milion or so who already have it. And creating needless burdens for the countless others who don't want it (weather democrats think it's their duty to impose it or not).
As I said above if the solutions were so obvious why did the republican party which has been in control for twenty of the past 28.9 years not enact reform. If their were easier ways of covering 3 to 45 million of those without insurance why did the republican party not take care of it? Health care reform did not start with this administration the democrats have been trying to enact reform since Kennedy. Your implication that this is about control is correct it is about controlling the cost of health care.
The Johnny come lately republican solutions came to late, it's time to make affordable quality health care available to every American | |
|
| |
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:26:21 PM |
I am a firm believer in taking care of our military cotter... Little do you know that there are a lot of "military" that are caught up in this just as there are general public.
As for the general public...it is called individual RESPONSIBILITY. Why should those of us who work our ass off and make a decent living, provide for our families, pay our bills ...why the hell should WE be responsible for those who do not, can't or won't? Your (and our) beloved military folks are involved in this as well. No longer serving, out on the economy, they have to take care of their families just as those of us who have never served.
We have former military families that are struggling to pay their bills and keep a roof over their head who have done everything right ... jumped through all the hoops, and yet they cannot get affordable health care.
What do you suggest? People should work 16 to 20 hours a day to be able to afford to buy the medical insurance they need and then it still doesn't cover everything because of pre-existing conditions? Or in the case of our military who were kicked to the curb, their pre-existing conditions that should be covered by the VA are being denied, and the health insurance refuses to treat them as well.
We're not talking about lazy good-for-nothings here. These are people who have worked hard and continue to do so and just can't afford it and their employers won't budge to offer them to be in a group to get affordable health care.
I've gotten to the point where I won't even consider a job if they don't offer benefits ... should it have to come to that? Those of us who work ... are not lazy ... want to pay our way and not be a burden on society ... we just want to be able to join a group and get affordable health care.
I don't think that's asking too much. | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:29:44 PM |
FINALLY! You get it ! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$............It will cost TRILLION...TRILLIONS....TRILLIONS........We can not afford it! Glad to see you have come to your senses
Sell your investments in the insurance and drug companies we will have health care reform with a public option, | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/4/2009 4:06:21 AM |
FINALLY! You get it ! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$............It will cost TRILLION...TRILLIONS....TRILLIONS........We can not afford it! Glad to see you have come to your senses
What we can't afford is to let health care reform fail, add another $995.00 x 200,000,ooo that each tax payer pays each year to pay for the uninsured and should become evident to even those most opposed to health care reform that the time for reform is now.
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=18346
Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report
Coverage & Access | Caring for Uninsured Costs Society Between $65B-$130B, Report Says
[Jun 18, 2003]
The estimated 41 million U.S. residents who lack health insurance cost U.S. taxpayers between $65 billion and $130 billion per year in lost productivity, according to a report released on June 17 by the Institute of Medicine, Bloomberg/Hartford Courant reports (Bloomberg/Hartford Courant, 6/18). The costs result because many uninsured U.S. residents do not receive adequate medical care, a trend that can lead to decreased quality of life and shorter lifespan, the report's authors concluded. The report, assembled by the 22-member IOM Committee on the Consequences of Uninsurance, found that each uninsured U.S. resident loses between $1,645 and $3,280 per year in lost wages and benefits and in the value that improved quality of life and longer lifespan would provide. The estimated cost in the report does not include the cost of medical care (Stein, Washington Post, 6/18). The United States would have to spend about $34 billion to $69 billion per year to provide required medical care to uninsured residents at the same level as those with health coverage, the report found (CongressDaily, 6/17). In 2001, the cost of medical care for uninsured U.S. residents totaled $98.9 billion, the report found ("Hidden Costs, Value Lost: Uninsurance in America," 6/17). According to the report, the United States spends about $35 billion per year to provide uninsured residents with medical care, often for preventable diseases or diseases that physicians could treat more efficiently with earlier diagnosis (Bloomberg/Hartford Courant, 6/18). The report also found:
Uninsured U.S. residents account for "well below half of average spending" for health care by all residents younger than age 65.
Uninsured U.S. residents pay out-of-pocket for 35% of the health care that they receive, compared to 20% for those with health coverage, but they have comparable total out-of-pocket expenditures.
Uninsured U.S. children face a higher risk of developmental delays than those with health coverage;
The cost of state health care programs "fall disproportionately on the local communities where care is provided."
High rates of uninsured residents can affect the financial viability of providers in local communities and can result in reduced access to medical care.
Public programs, such as Medicare, Social Security Disability Insurance and the criminal justice system, "almost certainly have higher budgetary costs than they would if the U.S. population in its entirety had health insurance up to age 65" ("Hidden Costs, Value Lost: Uninsurance in America," 6/17).
Reaction
Mary Sue Coleman, president of the University of Michigan and co-chair of the IOM committee, said that as part of health care reform proposals, Congress should consider the amount that the United States could save through expanded access to health insurance (Schmid, AP/Las Vegas Sun, 6/17). Arthur Kellermann, professor and chair of emergency medicine at the Emory University School of Medicine and co-chair of the committee, said that the "tremendous costs" of medical care for uninsured U.S. residents "are borne by all of us through higher taxes, higher insurance premiums and other mechanisms" (Bloomberg/Hartford Courant, 6/18). The report is the fifth in a six-part series on issues related to the uninsured population in the United States. The final report will likely identify proposals to address health care problems related to uninsured U.S. residents (Washington Post, 6/18). The report is available online. In addition, a HealthCast of the briefing to release the report is available online. | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/4/2009 7:21:35 PM |
I heard on abc this morning that pelosie has an 800 page amentment she wants to add to her crap bill
I just read that AARP is going to endorse the the house democrats and the health care reform bill
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091105/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul
WASHINGTON – In a coup for House Democrats, AARP will endorse sweeping health care overhaul legislation headed for a history-making floor vote, officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday. An endorsement from the seniors' lobby was critical when then-President George W. Bush pushed the Medicare prescription drug benefit through a closely divided Congress in 2003.
House Democratic leaders are hoping it will work the same political magic for them as they strive to deliver on President Barack Obama's signature issue.
An announcement from the 40-million member group is expected Thursday, said officials with knowledge of the group's decision. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the endorsement is not official yet.
Backing the 10-year, $1.2 trillion House bill is a tricky move for AARP. Many retirees are concerned about cuts in Medicare payments to medical providers, which will be used to finance an expansion of health insurance coverage to millions of working families who now lack it. Also, AARP says its membership is about evenly divided among Democrats, Republicans and independents, meaning its endorsement in today's highly politicized atmosphere could anger many members.
Floor votes on the House bill could come as early as this weekend. Obama planned to visit the Capitol on Friday, according to congressional officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the meetings have not been announced.
Asked Wednesday if Democratic leaders had the 218 needed for passage, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., responded: "We're counting. We're counting."
House leaders moved on Wednesday to shore up support for the measure among the Democratic rank-and-file, even as they sharpened their fight with the health insurance industry.
Last-minute changes to the legislation, released late Tuesday night, started a 72-hour legislative clock and cleared the way for votes as early as Saturday.
In a move aimed directly at health insurance companies, the revised House bill would launch a federal-state crackdown on what it terms "unjustified premium increases." Insurers have sought above all to block creation of a government insurance plan, which happens to be the top legislative goal for liberals.
Under the bill, insurance companies would have to publicly disclose the justification for premium increases before they go into effect. The federal Health and Human Services department would monitor patterns of premium increases, and could take action if the price hikes are out of line. The bill would also provide $1 billion to state insurance commissioners, allowing them to ramp up their own enforcement.
Democrats also strengthened a provision that would strip the industry of its decades-old exemption from federal antitrust laws.
Supporters said the tougher approach is needed to keep insurance companies from artificially boosting premiums in advance of the major reforms taking effect in 2013.
Other late changes to the bill, such as enhanced status for the government's office of minority health, were intended as sweeteners for supportive lawmakers, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
With no Republican backing for the measure, Democrats will need overwhelming support from their own. A festering intra-party disagreement over how to prevent federal funds from being used to pay for abortion remained unresolved Wednesday morning.
The House bill is estimated to expand coverage to about 96 percent of eligible Americans. Beginning in 2013, it would provide government subsidies to extend coverage to tens of millions who now lack it, and ban insurance company practices such as denying coverage to people with pre-existing medical problems.
For the three years before the federal aid starts flowing, the bill would set up a temporary "high-risk pool" through which people who have been denied coverage because of poor health could obtain a government-subsidized policy.
The bill would set up health insurance "exchanges" through which self-employed people and small businesses could buy coverage, either from a private insurer or a new government plan that would compete. All the plans sold through the exchange would have to follow basic consumer protection rules, making it easier to shop and compare among them.
The majority of middle-class Americans covered under big employer plans would not see dramatic changes. But coverage for the poor through Medicaid would be significantly expanded.
Seniors in traditional Medicare would get improved preventive benefits. Also, the prescription coverage gap known as the "doughnut hole" would be gradually closed. However, seniors signed up for private insurance plans through Medicare could lose some benefits, as the bill scales back extra payments that the plans have been getting.
In addition to raising money by cutting payments to hospitals and other medical providers, the House bill boosts taxes on upper-income earners. Democrats also moved Tuesday to close a biofuel tax credit loophole, raising about $23 billion to help pay for the legislation. | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:38:08 PM |
I just read that AARP is going to endorse the the house democrats and the health care reform bill
LMAO...that's funny...what I read in the article you posted was:
They spoke on condition of anonymity because the endorsement is not official yet
~ds~ | |
|
| |
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/4/2009 11:48:32 PM |
What broads are you talking about? Pelosi and Clinton???
This is the way you refer to ladies? Now every thing becomes a lot clearer, you do not like women in public office, it's not really health care you object to it's the fact that these two ladies have and are involved heavily and favor a public option | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/5/2009 12:23:17 PM |
This is the way you refer to ladies? Now every thing becomes a lot clearer, you do not like women in public office, it's not really health care you object to it's the fact that these two ladies have and are involved heavily and favor a public option
That was................a joke. I object to Obamacare period. I do love Michelle Bachman
I have three sisters and I love them dearly. One of whom is a liberal Democrat and has held public office! | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/5/2009 7:50:14 PM |
That was................a joke. I object to Obamacare period. I do love Michelle Bachman
It was a joke ?????????? I don't get the joke what is it? Do you like Michelle Bachman because she is a republican?
I have three sisters and I love them dearly. One of whom is a liberal Democrat and has held public office!
I have four sisters I have never called anyone of them a broad nor have I ever called any woman democrat or republican a broad.
Back to the topic it appears that AARP and the AMA are now supporting the Health Care reform bill | |
|
| |
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/5/2009 8:48:03 PM |
What broads are you talking about? Pelosi and Clinton???
I see two problems
1 You referred to two ladies as broads and then attempted to get out of it by saying you were joking instead of just apologising
Those who vote for this govt debacle better enjoy their time now, because we are going to scalp them in 2010.
2- The fact that the democrats are willing to push health care reform knowing that it might mean they are unseated just shows how willing they are to do the right thing for the majority of Americans .Unlike the republicans who only tackle issues like health care reform and illegal immigration to defeat any reform bill, they say health care reform and illegal immigration are important issues but their inaction while being in power for 20 out of the last 28.9 years indicates they are lying, if they are not lying then why have they not tackled these important issues while they were in power | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/5/2009 9:17:59 PM |
1 You referred to two ladies as broads and then attempted to get out of it by saying you were joking instead of just apologising
The subject of the thread has the word BROAD. It was a play on words. You let Grayson off for his whole "K" Street comment and he is not bit funny. | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/6/2009 6:24:58 AM |
You let Grayson off for his whole "K" Street comment and he is not bit funny.
Pirate...you were told about the liberal lifestyle of being two faced. You use the word broad...and one complains..yet, one of their liberal disciples Uses the word Whore and it is OK!
The poster above you said the demoncrats are willing to push{shove] health care reform down our throats and they are willing to lose their seats over it...I can tell you, if they do shove this crap bill through, they will bring about the end of their party...then conservatives and republicans and non liberal democrats can retake the congress and Senate...and get rid of this waste of TRILLIONS ...maybe in time so our kids can actually have a chance at life instead of having to pay for this debacle! | |
|
| Support broad in U.S. for public healthcare option
Posted: 11/6/2009 7:23:13 AM | Don't be so sure that the democrats are willing to sacrifice their seats for an unpopular health care bill. Those who will be competing in 2010 are at risk. When 20,000 people can show up in DC with only a week notice it sends a pretty strong statement. I suspect more than a few will be unwilling to fall on their sword for Pelosi or Reid but I guess we'll see. You might think altruism is a pervasive attribute of elected officials but if you think back to last January when the economy was tanking and these same elected officials all thought it appropriate to vote themselves a pay raise and more recently left themselves exempt from their new health care bill it might dawn on you to consider the self serving nature of our elected officials.
I for one would prefer government staying as far away from health care as possible unless they are willing to make health care costs, including insurance 100% deductable.
As for illegal immigration I don't understand why it's so difficult to secure our borders. Given all the rhetoric about terrorism you'd think this would be a primary concern and I wouldn't pin it on any one party, it's all of them who are leaving the doors unlocked, I don't think it's ignorance but I'd lay odds there's some self serving motive behind it. | |
|
Home
login 
