Obama Has Failed

[audtatious]

OK here is another group of experts that you are sure to approve of.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes...-plan/

They are part of the problem

I have yet to see those paid Republicans go through town breaking windows and such.....I see them expressing their Constitutional rights. I am for them letting the politicians speak and not drowning them out though. It must be hard for you to try and condemn those people when you support your own party doing the same thing.

[AZhitman]

Look at the old news clips of the civil rights marches and refusals to allow Blacks to vote or go to public schools and colleges and the people then look the same as the ones disrupting the healthcare town hall meetings.

Pure idiocy.

By your reasoning you can judge someone based on their appearance.

You're a closet racist.

[telcoman]

I have yet to see those paid Republicans go through town breaking windows and such.....I see them expressing their Constitutional rights. I am for them letting the politicians speak and not drowning them out though. It must be hard for you to try and condemn those people when you support your own party doing the same thing.

Yes they can yell and scream but they are not interested in hearing the facts on healthcare reform. They are more interested in destroying the Obama presidency because they are a bunch of sore losers and refuse to accept the back that the first black president is doing a much better job than our last one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08...paper

We won't need them anyway

[AZhitman]

Yes they can yell and scream but they are not interested in hearing the facts on healthcare reform. They are more interested in destroying the Obama presidency because they are a bunch of sore losers and refuse to accept the back that the first black president is doing a much better job than our last one.

So anyone who thinks this plan is a crock of crap is a sore loser and a racist?

Your ignorance offends me.

By the way, I made some great points about the topic above. How about you respond to them, since you're in here proclaiming knowledge?

What ARE the facts, Howie? I'm not yelling and screaming. I'm pummeling ignorant lefties with sound reasoning.

[audtatious]

Yes they can yell and scream but they are not interested in hearing the facts on healthcare reform. They are more interested in destroying the Obama presidency because they are a bunch of sore losers and refuse to accept the back that the first black president is doing a much better job than our last one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08...paper

We won't need them anyway

Wow, you sound bitter. What's wrong, the Hope and Change that has been unsuccessful getting you down? Learning that transparency to your Administration means something totally opposite of the dictionary? Realize that your selected President is not ending the war nor is he able to push forth the promised legislation even though he has full super-majority in Congress? Need a shoulder to cry on or someone to talk to about it? You can always call the Hannity Hotline and complain....I'd offer the number but you probably have it on speed dial

[szh]

Most of the 53% of Americans who voted last November would disagree with you.

Do you expect anyone who voted for President Obama is going to believe the same wacko's, wingnuts, teabaggers and other unintelligent people showing up with guns, shouting and otherwise disrupting town hall meetings?

I certainly dont!

Hmmm ... what else do you think is not right ... do you consider people who disrupt meetings with legitimate protests better or worse than people who physically attack innocent people and go rioting and damage property?

I wonder if some of the 53% were among the rioters noted here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26497298htt ... ead/364213

Do these actions reflect the beliefs of the entire Democratic Party and all its members and all the people who voted for Obama? If that is an unfair leap and extrapolation, then just how do you justify your similar positioning?

Z

[szh]

Yes they can yell and scream but they are not interested in hearing the facts on healthcare reform.

1. The facts are all too clear unfortunately. Have you read the details of the bill yet? You might want to do so.

2. In a democracy, all protest is legitimate - that is why we even let the Nazi party hold rallies, regardless of how wrong we consider their views as a nation.

They are more interested in destroying the Obama presidency because they are a bunch of sore losers and refuse to accept the back that the first black president is doing a much better job than our last one.

Huhn? I oppose the so-called healthcare reform bill because it has fundamental problems in its language, implementation details and potential outcome - too hasty and shoddy a piece of work to merit becoming law!

But, if you think that my opposition to this bill makes me a racist and sore loser, then all I can say is: I guess I should not be amazed anymore by your blind faith in Obama and the New Religion!

Z

[audtatious]

I missed his first tour, maybe I should make it a point to see the current one?

[AZhitman]

What I don't understand is, HOW can someone so adamantly support a bill they know little to nothing about?

Let's hear it, "reform supporters". Answer the tough questions, or you're just a blind sheep.

And is now REALLY the time we want to be ramming through legislation that could cost in the TRILLIONS of dollars? Really? Are we not in the midst of a recession? I recall the Lefties were saying we are, so let's assume that...

No, what this is is simple: It's called LOOTING. The Left has entered the store during a time of chaos and unrest... they know it won't be long before alarms sound and they're caught (or run out of office), so they're doing a "smash and grab" while they can.

Here's an interesting tidbit that Howie won't be able to intelligently counter:

60% of Americans polled OPPOSE passage of a healthcare reform bill that does NOT include bipartisan support.

The democrats should just ignore the wacko's step over the republican minority and push healcare reform and the public option into law.

That's your version of Democracy? You really do fail on several levels.

The good news? THEY CAN'T! HAHAHAHAHA!!!

There's not even enough consensus among Democrats to secure enough votes to make this happen!

Oh, and by the way: Remember when the current Administration had a 62% approval rating? It's slipped to 49%.

http://people-press.org/report...slide



There's some "Change" for you. You can only "Hope" to retain the White House if this trend keeps up.

Hugs & Kisses from the Center.

[audtatious]

Who knows. Plenty of Dems are saying they are going to simply push this through and make it law regardless of Republican support. There is also some "behind the scenes" scuttlebutt that they are going to try and lower the percentages required in order to get it passed (Reconciliation). To them, it's their way and screw everyone who does not share their point of view. Proof is that they have refused to put any Republican requested changes in the House bill and are constantly meeting behind closed doors to discuss the bill and changes without allowing Republicans to be involved.

For sure, smash and grab it is. I see 2010 going horribly for the Dems so they better get it done while they can and it seems they agree.

[AZhitman]

Now I feel sad.

Hope ol' Howie didn't go do something drastic like put a paper bag over his head and try to strangle himself with some 2-ply Charmin.

Eh, he's probably fapping to a picture of Nancy Pelosi. He'll be back.

[hannibal]

Good points.

Simply Un-American.

Think. The government should have a say in the profitability of a private corporation?

Shouldn't this then extend to, say. auto and homeowner's insurance? There's people out there who can't afford those either...

If YOUR FAMILY owned an insurance company, you'd want the government telling you how profitable it can be?

Yeah, you could consider that very unAmerican. So is not having a way for poorer people to get health care. Someone dying from a treatable condition because they had no way to pay for treatment is unacceptable as well IMO.

The government has a say in the abilities of many industries to make profits. This is done thru regulation. The conditions we place on corporations are not to directly limit their profit making abilities, but so they provide better service to their consumers, often in the form of lower prices for services or providing more services to more people at a given price.

Agreed 100%. However, blame the attorneys, not the insurers.

I know for a fact that my family has incurred costs WELL over a million dollars to our health care insurance company. We'll NEVER pay that much in premiums. We were quite fortunate, but that was by design - I chose to forego a higher-salaried job early on, and selected one with better benefits.

Sure, legal battles btw patients and insurers or provides take a toll on the system. This debate of tort? law reform centered around how to limit these huge punitive damages awarded to patients. Again, a form of regulation.

The insurer's have a part to play too. A profit seeking company has an incentive to deny care to improve its bottom line. In your example, I'm sure your insurer was aware that the value of your claims far exceeded the value of your premiums. This gives them incentives to deny care to lessen their loss and/or increase the premium they charge you.

The word "force" just reeks of government meddling in the free market system, which takes us one step closer to socialism. The end does NOT justify the means.

The only force being applied would be in the form of increased competition, a very free market ideal.

How about these ideas for lowering costs: How about easing some of the restrictions on insurers? Offering incentives for them to cover the indigent? Providing assistance to the uninsured by easing their tax burden? Limiting frivolous lawsuits? Holding people accountable for their stupid behaviors?

Some good ideas. Not sure which restrictions on insurers you're speaking of.

Incentives to cover the poor? If these incentives are not greater than the proposed cost of covering these people, no company would consider insuring this person. They would be willing to insure those with expected costs less than the incentive, and therefore leave the most in need of coverage without. This could work if the incentive was tied to the consumer's risk.

Easing tax burdens sounds like a good idea. But giving a family $100 a month in tax breaks isnt going to allow them to buy coverage at $200/mo. Maybe if we just maintain their current tax rates and provide insurance at $100/month? I understand this involves the govt in private lives, but giving money to the poor is not the explicit goal, but rather getting them health insurance. You could argue that a responsible family would take the tax break, give up other things, and purchase coverage.

The biggest question of them all:

WHERE does the money come from to RUN this "non-profit" insurer? From premiums? HA! You think the indigent and the working poor can pay big premiums?

Let me make it worse: Keep in mind, the "non-profit" insurer WILL be covering those who STATISTICALLY are the biggest risk. The working poor smoke more, drink more, work in more dangerous professions, don't exercise as much, don't eat right, tend to have more children, live in higher-crime areas, engage in more high-risk behaviors... the list goes on and on and on.

Thye certainly cant pay big premiums or they could get insurance without HC reform. Private insurers and providers seek profits. THe non profit insurer would eliminate those profits are result in lower premiums. How much lower I dont know, and I certainly dont know if the non profit insurer's premiums would be low enough to reach the target audience.

[audtatious]

Thye certainly cant pay big premiums or they could get insurance without HC reform. Private insurers and providers seek profits. THe non profit insurer would eliminate those profits are result in lower premiums. How much lower I dont know, and I certainly dont know if the non profit insurer's premiums would be low enough to reach the target audience.

Why vote something in as law when even those voting on the bill "don't know"? It's a "sling s*** against the wall and see what sticks" approach that leaves very little sticking and a huge mess for the population to deal with.

[AZhitman]

Yeah, you could consider that very unAmerican. So is not having a way for poorer people to get health care. Someone dying from a treatable condition because they had no way to pay for treatment is unacceptable as well IMO.

I don't disagree. But there are children starving as well... Is it the gov't's responsibility to take care of every unmet need?

The government has a say in the abilities of many industries to make profits. This is done thru regulation. The conditions we place on corporations are not to directly limit their profit making abilities, but so they provide better service to their consumers, often in the form of lower prices for services or providing more services to more people at a given price.

Mmmm, that's a stretch. Example plz?

In your example, I'm sure your insurer was aware that the value of your claims far exceeded the value of your premiums. This gives them incentives to deny care to lessen their loss and/or increase the premium they charge you.

But they didn't, and they can't. Regulations.

The only force being applied would be in the form of increased competition, a very free market ideal.

So, who provides the oversight, accountability and monitoring? The government. Hardly a level playing field. It's not "competition" if one is non-profit and one is for-profit.

Incentives to cover the poor? If these incentives are not greater than the proposed cost of covering these people, no company would consider insuring this person.

So if a private company won't do it because it's too risky (read - EXPENSIVE), why should the government? Aren't we already broke?

We need to take off our "Feel-good" hats here and be rational.

I certainly dont know if the non profit insurer's premiums would be low enough to reach the target audience.

Agreed. Neither do I.

I'd hazard a guess that the bean counters are scared to death of guaranteeing coverage to such a high-risk group...

Politically incorrect to say? Yep. Truthful? Yep.

[Kalypso]

read - IRS publication 6209

the united states is a corporation indebted and owned by the queen of england.

[Kalypso]

our government was never interesting in advancing us and giving us freedom.

the objective is to the contrary.

bye!

[Kohster]

Lol

I so very much doubt that we owe money to the UK

No most of our money goes in keeping a massive army - navy and air force. see how many billions it costs us. It costs 3 billion a year just for the UK to keep a thousand people and a flag over a lump of rock thousands of kilometers away. That is about £500 per family a year in the UK.

Actually Kalypso, its the other way around: they OWE US money.

It's money for weapons they've bought from us in WW2. And since when is paying off your debts slavery? If you own, you pay.


Modified by Kohster at 8:01 PM 8/19/2009

[szh]

I so very much doubt that we owe money to the UK

And, you would be mostly wrong - although "owe" is not the right word, I agree.

Some decades ago, we had a "America is for Americans" reaction to the deal where Sony purchased Paramount (or some such similar company). We were all upset that the Japanese were buying American corporations!

The roar was silenced when it was pointed out that UK companies and the UK government and the British Royal family owned a large chunk of America in the form of companies and capital - more than 10% as I recall.

The British Empire has been around a long, long, LONG time and they acquired massive wealth (much of it without compensation!) over the centuries ... and then ... invested it elsewhere!

Z

[smockers83]

I don't understand why we can't just build government run clinics for all the uninsured people to go to, and leave all the regular hospitals to the people with private insurance...I mean, we were ready to dump nearly a trillion dollars on the reform, why not throw up some new buildings with gov doctors and such?

Because that provides incentive to become uninsured to those that are insured, and you then move into a state-controlled health care system. That would be potentially worse than what's being considered now, in my opinion.

[srellim234]

Because that provides incentive to become uninsured to those that are insured, and you then move into a state-controlled health care system. That would be potentially worse than what's being considered now, in my opinion.

INCENTIVE to become uninsured???

The current private system, in many cases, has premiums that people cannot afford. The current private system, in many cases, makes it difficult to see the doctor of your choice, forcing people to accept whatever their employer can afford to offer. The current private system forces many people who can see the doctor of their choice to wait, sometimes for months or more at a time, to see that doctor or get the treatments approved that that doctor requests. The current system denies customers treatment, reimbursement for treatments given, coverage for what it deems is a "pre-existing condition". Those are either a forced lack of coverage which sends people to a gov't clinic or bigger "incentives" than what you are talking about.

The current healthcare mess is caused by the very companies that are now fighting tooth and nail to have the gov't bail them out by doing nothing. Their philosophy seems to be "Let 'em suffer, I want that money in the boardroom. Why? Because we CAN and get away with it by buying off the people who can stop us from raping the consumer."

Yes, there are always going to be a few moochers. Those percentages, however, are MUCH lower than the people that really need help.

[telcoman]

Eh, he's probably fapping to a picture of Nancy Pelosi. He'll be back.

Yes but only briefly. I don't have a lot of time to waste

1. The facts are all too clear unfortunately. Have you read the details of the bill yet? You might want to do so.

2. In a democracy, all protest is legitimate - that is why we even let the Nazi party hold rallies, regardless of how wrong we consider their views as a nation.

Huhn? I oppose the so-called healthcare reform bill because it has fundamental problems in its language, implementation details and potential outcome - too hasty and shoddy a piece of work to merit becoming law!

But, if you think that my opposition to this bill makes me a racist and sore loser, then all I can say is: I guess I should not be amazed anymore by your blind faith in Obama and the New Religion!

Z

No I haven't read the bill. I do not have that kind of free time. I put the trust to come up with healthcare reform in the POTUS.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08...=1&hp

Hey, I gave only my opinion. You and a few others here can disagree all you like but the fact remains that a majority of Americans failed to listen to the total BS coming from the right about President Obama and voted im into office.Go listen to the wingnuts and wacko's disrupting town hall meetings. All their doing with Nazi signs and screeming is turning more people against them.Obama will now do the right thing and totally ignore republicans with their do nothing agenda.

I suppose you support this also?

http://sickforprofit.com/ceos/

The same thing that occurred in finance and banking is occurring in healthcare and it needs drastic reform and regulation.

Cheers

Telcoman

[marlin29311]

Yes but only briefly. I don't have a lot of time to waste

No I haven't read the bill. I do not have that kind of free time. I put the trust to come up with healthcare reform in the POTUS.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08...=1&hp

Hey, I gave only my opinion. You and a few others here can disagree all you like but the fact remains that a majority of Americans failed to listen to the total BS coming from the right about President Obama and voted im into office.Go listen to the wingnuts and wacko's disrupting town hall meetings. All their doing with Nazi signs and screeming is turning more people against them.Obama will now do the right thing and totally ignore republicans with their do nothing agenda.

I suppose you support this also?

http://sickforprofit.com/ceos/

The same thing that occurred in finance and banking is occurring in healthcare and it needs drastic reform and regulation.

Cheers

Telcoman

Yes, because it's clear that everyone that loved Obama when he was voted into office still loves him now...

http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

Down to 51%....that's the lowest it's been ever.

[audtatious]

Anything you have to say after "I don't have time to read the bill" is a waste of text.

[hannibal]

Today, Obama guaranteed that some form of HC reform will be passed. I guess that means if no better ideas are proposed, the Dems are just gonna push their idea through. Its good to find a solution. Its not good if its not the BEST solution.

Greg, you mentioned regulation right after asking for an example. Another common example are pollution laws. A company would rather dump toxic waste than dispose of it properly as this adds to their costs and reduces profits. I think strengthening regulations on health care companies and insurers is a good start. You say they didn't skimp on coverage in your case. Thats fortunate. You also say they can't and that isnt true. I have no personal experience with battling a severe illness but Ive seen some horror stories about lengthy delays and being denied treatment. Imagine how hard it is to fight a legal battle against a corporation while suffering from an "uncovered" illness. This should not happen.

An example of competition between public and private companies could be the USPS and FedEx/UPS. I think the post office is actually a successful business in that it doesnt require constant help from the govt.

Oversight would have to be provided by the govt. I think this is the ideal role of the govt in health care: to ensure that private companies behave optimally. A LAST resort should be intervening in the industry in the form of taking over companies or creating a public competitor.

The biggest hole in this debate is that we havent seen any numbers. The economists need to get to work and figure out what conditions must be met for this to be successful. I too am waiting for Obama to quote some empirical study to add weight to his argument. He's taken the first step by addressing the issue, but that aint all it takes. Thats why I'm really disappointed to hear him say this will get passed regardless.

Debate, hear from the opposition, compromise... then make the best decision with all available info. Dont "reform" HC just to say you did it.

[telcoman]

Today, Obama guaranteed that some form of HC reform will be passed. I guess that means if no better ideas are proposed, the Dems are just gonna push their idea through. Its good to find a solution. Its not good if its not the BEST solution.

Greg, you mentioned regulation right after asking for an example. Another common example are pollution laws. A company would rather dump toxic waste than dispose of it properly as this adds to their costs and reduces profits. I think strengthening regulations on health care companies and insurers is a good start. You say they didn't skimp on coverage in your case. Thats fortunate. You also say they can't and that isnt true. I have no personal experience with battling a severe illness but Ive seen some horror stories about lengthy delays and being denied treatment. Imagine how hard it is to fight a legal battle against a corporation while suffering from an "uncovered" illness. This should not happen.

An example of competition between public and private companies could be the USPS and FedEx/UPS. I think the post office is actually a successful business in that it doesnt require constant help from the govt.

Oversight would have to be provided by the govt. I think this is the ideal role of the govt in health care: to ensure that private companies behave optimally. A LAST resort should be intervening in the industry in the form of taking over companies or creating a public competitor.

The biggest hole in this debate is that we havent seen any numbers. The economists need to get to work and figure out what conditions must be met for this to be successful. I too am waiting for Obama to quote some empirical study to add weight to his argument. He's taken the first step by addressing the issue, but that aint all it takes. Thats why I'm really disappointed to hear him say this will get passed regardless.

Debate, hear from the opposition, compromise... then make the best decision with all available info. Dont "reform" HC just to say you did it.

The republicans had eight years of almost total control and what did they give the American working people?

Two wars costing over 10 billion a month for starters!

Healthcare reimbursements paid out went from 90% to 65%Healhcare is bankrupting many families. Leave it to the right to do nothing and allow the healthcare and drug companies to earn huge profits, pay executives huge salaries, while having their own so called death panels. They are just like the hedge funds and banks that caused an economic meltdown.

One indicator that Obama is doing a decent job is the stock market.Is he perfect? No but he is doing a much better job than his predecessor.

My 401k has been going up since he took office.

Telcoman

[szh]

No I haven't read the bill. I do not have that kind of free time. I put the trust to come up with healthcare reform in the POTUS.

You are joking ... right?

Never mind ... 'nuff said ... the rest of your post must be obvious to Obama drivel then.

Z

[szh]

The same thing that occurred in finance and banking is occurring in healthcare and it needs drastic reform and regulation.

So, the country needs to implement the same utterly wasteful and inflationary practices beyond finance and banking too?

Sorry, NO! I detest and reject the wasteful economic "solutions" proposed by our current government. These will destroy the future for my son - the US will be paying off the national debt for too long and too painfully for his life to be good.

I mourn for my son's future life.

Z

[szh]

Hey, I gave only my opinion. You and a few others here can disagree all you like but the fact remains that a majority of Americans failed to listen to the total BS coming from the right about President Obama and voted im into office.

You sidestepped the point. It still does not give you right to call me racist because I chose not to vote for him back then, and still do not support him or his incorrect policies now.

Z

[telcoman]

You sidestepped the point. It still does not give you right to call me racist because I chose not to vote for him back then, and still do not support him or his incorrect policies now.

Z

I didn't mean to personally call you a racist. I don't know you!

I only meant that many attending and disrupting town hall healthcare meetings appear to me to be so unwilling to listen and ask intellegent questions & just shout down any congressman appear to me to be a bunch of racists oppossed to anything that President Obama is attempting to do.Carrying assault weapons and Nazi signs to townhall meetings is not only dumb but another example of a bunch of white trash racists.

They also don't understand that there are many bills being written in both houses that eventually will reach reconcilliation into one bill. There are constant changes being made daily.

At the end there is going to be a public option for those that wish to chose it. The 47 million without insurance are costing those of us with insurance every time they use an emergency room for routine healthcare.

I haven't heard one Republican offer any viable solutions. they are truly the party of NO!

Just my opinion

Telcoman

[AZhitman]

Yes but only briefly. I don't have a lot of time to waste

Bummer - Maybe your beloved POTUS will include Viagra as a covered medication in his healthcare plan.

No I haven't read the bill.

Then your commentary is useless. You're uninformed. Hell, my 11-year old daughter knows more about the healthcare reform bill than you do!!!

I do not have that kind of free time.

Too busy scouring the liberal media (what's left of it) for scandals and propaganda?

I put the trust to come up with healthcare reform in the POTUS.

Ah, blind faith.

Interesting how you can believe in Obama, but not believe in a Creator.

Ponder THAT for a moment.

The rest of your rant, much like your uninformed OPINIONS, are irrelevant, and will no longer be worthy of response.

I now see why you aren't able to respond intelligently on a point-by-point basis. You choose to remain ignorant and uneducated (and that's by your OWN admission).

I hope you don't have that kind of blind faith in your investment advisor or your beloved 401K administrator.