posted by Helen at 6:08 AM
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Contributors
Previous Posts
- Uh-oh....:Here's a new warning from health experts...
- Michael Barone, author of The Almanac of American ...
- It seems like everywhere you turn, you are suppose...
- Thank you Massachusetts!
- "I got too many Brown voters."
- Why men use prostitutes?
- "I seriously wanted to punch Oprah after watching ...
- BaltoNorth blog: Martha Coakley, the Amirault ca...
- ''They're not going to save you any money. I can s...
- Is Statism the new normal?
23 Comments:
TO: Dr. Helen, et al.
RE: Weeeeelllll.....
Democrats begin discussing smaller health bill -- article linked to by Dr. Helen
....I'll believe it when I can see it.
RE: Additionally
Why is it that people habitually ASSUME good when they see something like this?
Remember Obama's campaign of "Hope and Change"? Idiots ASSUMED it was going to be GOOD change. And look what we got for their idiotic habit.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Statistically speaking, half of all 'change' is for the worse.]
Limbaugh read this yesterday...Boston Globe columnist Brian McGrory compares Scott Brown to a hollow womanizer and the Massachusetts voters as confused victims.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/20/swept_off_our_feet/
though the term "date rape" is not used, there's a clear inference of date rape or sexual exploitation in the article.
This is the liberal shtick - when the election doesn't go their way, they argue the electorate was duped, fooled, flim-flammed, smooth-talked, misinformed or just stupid.
Yeah no. Good news is when they completely dump their bill and let rational minds begin making changes to the healthcare system (adding in tort reform, allowing interstate sales of insurance, allowing small businesses to pool their liabilities, etc.). Any cutting out of pork, rot, or corruption from the current bill (no matter which part), only ends one up with less of it, not a better product pound for pound.
Dump that bathwater, whole, and then I will be happy.
Just because I like to eat a steak every now and then, it doesn't mean I want a whole cow jammed down my throat. Yes, there are problems with health insurance - health care is a completely different matter. They can be addressed one by one instead of trying to seize control over the entire health care system. You could almost certainly gain bipartisan support for most of these issues. The current 2000+ page monstrocity is a classic example of overreaching and corruption.
"It could focus on curbing insurance company practices like denying coverage to sick people..."
That is not INSURANCE which is necessarily purchased before the liability is known. What they want is cost sharing, with a particular group of people (the insurance company) required to assume the costs for a known liability.
This is equivalent to saying that we make a law that if you are sick and you knock on your neighbor's door, he must take you in and treat you. Sure, you are willing to pay your neighbor $20 per day, but he may have to spend $1000s per day to treat you. Do you really think this is right? I do not.
Insurance companies are in the business of insuring against UNCERTAINTY, not against known liabilities. Once the liability is known, the "pre-existing condition" is diagnosed, then the liability is established and the insurance company is out of the game. This is why people are advised to get insurance when they are young and healthy, although many do not. They prefer to assume the risk themselves, but it is a matter of risk taking. That is what insurance is about -- risk taking. It is not about paying for known liabilities.
The Won and the Democrats wish to destroy the insurance industry by asking it to do what it is not designed to do, and cannot do.
It's better news than what we had been getting and some changes do need to be made. Doom lists some good starting points. But, I'm still not sure I trust the yahoos in Congress to come close to doing it right.
Other than the case of children born with health problems, ordering insurance companies to provide coverage to people with preexisting conditions would be the same as ordering them to insure a house after it has burned down. It's a complicated and emotional issue.
TO: Topher, et al.
RE: Typical
This is the liberal shtick - when the election doesn't go their way, they argue the electorate was duped, fooled, flim-flammed, smooth-talked, misinformed or just stupid. -- Topher
They're 'projecting'. Look at what happened with NY-23, late last year.
The female 'Republican' dropped out and endorsed the Democrat over the Conservative. This based on what the Democrat was saying he'd not vote for Obamacare or a lot of other conservative sounding comments.
THEN, minutes after he's sworn in, he reversed himself on EVERYTHING he'd been saying during the campaign.
And these polyps think Republicans are the 'flim-flammers'?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Every violation of truth is not only a sort of suicide in the liar, but is a stab at the health of human society. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson]
DADvocate,
Absolutely. That is why, in the end, at this time, I am against any "health care bill" that might be suggested, even if it proposed to start on some of my list. These buffoons and criminals can't even figure out how to steal quietly or well, with both houses and the white house (sic), why would I trust them to honestly legislate well.
TO: DADvocate, Doom, et al.
RE: More To It....
These buffoons and criminals can't even figure out how to steal quietly or well, with both houses and the white house (sic), why would I trust them to honestly legislate well. -- Doom
...than that.
Once ANY such bill is in place, they'll 'quietly' start modifying it to be more like what they wanted it to be in the FIRST place.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Bad law is more likely to be supplemented than repealed. -- Oaks' Laws]
My respect for Speaker Pelosi has grown. She told the truth to a reporter. A good start.
Trey
"We're not in a big rush," Pelosi said. "Pause, reflect."
Was Pelosi lying when she said the bill had to be passed ASAP, or is she lying now?
TO: TMink, et al.
RE: I Don't....
My respect for Speaker Pelosi has grown. She told the truth to a reporter. A good start. -- TMink
....trust her. Let's see if she tries to pass a joint-session bill in the dark of night.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[My favourite mythical creature? The honest politician.]
TO: randian
RE: EXCELLENT!!!!
Was Pelosi lying when she said the bill had to be passed ASAP, or is she lying now? -- randian
A very good point. From my perspective, she WAS in earnest in the former instance. So, NOW????!?!
Three guesses. First two don't count. Why? Because if they push forward, as Obama said they were going to yesterday, they lull US into a false sense of security. A place where we won't call and bother our poor Congressmen and Senators telling them, "DON'T GO THERE!!!!!"
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Honest Politician - One who when you buy him, stays bought.]
P.S. I think the current Congress of the Democrat persuasion, IS being 'an honest politician', in the tag-lines sense. And they were bought LAST year.....
My respect for Pelosi will grow when I know she is in her grave, but not much before that time. She has worked tirelessly to destroy this nation. She is an evil woman, perhaps even more evil than Harry Reid, and that is really reaching.
How could anyone who has grown up with the all benefits of liberty in this country be so determined to assure that future generations are denied those benefits?
TO: Dr.D
RE: The BIG Question
How could anyone who has grown up with the all benefits of liberty in this country be so determined to assure that future generations are denied those benefits? -- Dr.D
RE: There IS an Answer....
....and you—in my honestly held opinion—touched on it.
She is an evil woman.... -- Dr.D
Hard to grasp. Unless you have a firm grasp of Christian ethos. And in this day an age, that's rather hard to come by. Why? Because people don't care much for the idea that there is such a creature as Satan. But there you have it. And if you accept it, you'll see how a LOT of things that don't make much sense, suddenly DO 'make sense'.
As someone once said, and was used in the latest Star Trek movie....
When all the other possibilities have been eliminated, what remains, however improbable MUST be the truth.
But this is a topic for a different thread....
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Satan's greatest trick was convincing people that he doesn't exist.]
P.S. But having encountered some of his lieutenants on occasion....I know better.
When all the other possibilities have been eliminated, what remains, however improbable MUST be the truth....
'cept we can never really know when all other possibilities have been eliminated. This idea really sheds no light at all
The Medicalization of Maleness.
Chuck, I will NEVER trust her. But before she made that statement I thought she might be constitutionally unable to tell the truth. I see that she is. Hence my growth in respect for her.
That respect is miniscule, but knowing that she can tell the truth is a start.
Trey
I like what Dennis Miller said, on the Oreily show. He said look into Nancy P's eyes and you'll see that their is nothing there, she has a blank cold stare and that is true!
TO: Quasimodo
RE: Yeah...
cept we can never really know when all other possibilities have been eliminated. This idea really sheds no light at all -- Quasimodo
...Right....
Only to those who, probably, couldn't pull a train-of-thought into the station with a nuclear-powered ElectroMotive locomotive.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[That man couldn't hold a note with a pair of pliers.]
Chuck, last I knew, EM builds large diesels, nothing nuclear at all. Pretty nice machines though.
TO: Dr.D
RE: I Know
EM builds large diesels, nothing nuclear at all. -- Dr.D
I was being facicous.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Where is Mr. Fusion now that we REALLY need him?]
Post a Comment
<< Home