Yes I vote Pres Obama…to protect his ppl,ALL his ppl.The poor,the middle class,the jobless…the 1's that need our help..I vote 4 humanity
— Ellen Barkin (@EllenBarkin) September 26, 2012
Get that? The President no longer works for us but instead he is our King and we are his property.
HIS PEOPLE
Just insane
I don’t know where else to post the following, but this is currently empty space; so I’ll put it here:
We’ve argued a lot about health care reform. If anyone is interested in reading doctors arguing health care reform, here’s a link to the current issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. The NEJM asked both Obama and Romney to provide statements stating their respective positions on healht care. Both did, and both statements have reader comments coming in and being posted.
The link below is to the comments following Romney’s health care statement, but you can easily navigate from there to the Romney statement, itself, and to the Obama statement, and to comments to the Obama statement. The first of the comments appearing to the Romney statement is by me:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1211516?query=TOC&activeTab=comments&page=&sort=oldest
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
Here’s one of the 47% Romney spoke so inelegantly about.
She is going to vote for Obama because Obama Gave Her A Phone.
Romney didn’t, so Romney ”sucks.” (To quote her.)
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
Larry, while you keep beating the drum for Obamacare, many of us who actually work, including me, are already living with the negative consequences of the law, and most of the regulations haven’t even been written yet.
Doctors may believe one thing(and I’d like to see a true, objective polling of those in favor and those who disagree with Obamacare), but in the end, it comes down to the customers themselves, their patients. That is true of any business. You might believe that you have the greatest thing since sliced bread going, but if the customer isn’t buying it, you’re gonna fail. And right now, many customers aren’t buying what Obama, the liberal/progressives, and yourself, are trying to sell.
What the “liberal progressives” are trying to “sell” is RomneyCare, otherwise known as the Heritage Foundation “sensible alternative” to HillaryCare, with this “sensible alternative” previously endorsed by Grassley, Dole, and Gingrich, among others.
Right now the “customers” only know what they are being sold by ObamaCare opponents. For example, ObamaCare is being blamed for steep rate increases. The insurance companies themselves state that the reasons for premium increases (which have been going on for a very long time) have virtually nothing to do with ObamaCare. Last night, I went to a brain tumor conference. The neurooncologist from Duke spoke about Avastin being a “game changer” in glioblastoma. The cost of Avastin (which patients are going to be staying on for the rest of their lives) is $20,000 every two weeks, according to the Duke oncologist (a very famous guy, who was featured in the past on a “60 Minutes” episode).
There are lots and lots of reasons why health care costs are going up, but ObamaCare is one of the least.
We’ve spent well over a trillion dollars in response to 9/11, an attack which killed 3,000 people. Every year, 45,000 people die because of a lack of health insurance.
We’ve argued this extensively in the past. I don’t think that either of us really has anything new to offer. I just thought that people might be interested in the statements of Romney and Obama and on the reaction of physicians to these statements.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
That’s BS, Larry. The company I work for had no option for the so-called “Cadillac” plan they offered in years past, and my own rates have gone up substantially, as compared to pre-Obamacare passage. And it was all due to the passage of Obamacare, as both the HR dept. and the insurance company themselves noted to us. And I am not the only one in the country who has been affected by it.
Methinks that you might be too close to the situation, Larry, as are your links “proofing” your viewpoint.
I will say again, Larry; The customers aren’t buying what you, Obama, and the liberal/progressives, are trying to sell. Whether some of that is due to Obamacare opponents or not, it makes no difference.
My guess is that history will reveal Obamacare to be the biggest boondoggle the US government has ever perpetrated on the populace, and generations from now will be vilifying those who worked so damn hard to get it passed, despite over half the country, if not wanting it voted down, at least wanting the government to give the public a chance to actually see what was in it before passage. Instead, we got Pelosi telling the country that passage of the bill comes before seeing what is in it and how it will affect us.
The customer is always right, Larry. Even when the customer is wrong(although I don’t think that’s the case here).
As for RomneyCare, you will find, if you choose to do so, or you can take my word for it, that I believe Romney isn’t much better than Obama, when it comes to political ideology. And that is despite our esteemed MSM painting Romney as an “extreme” conservative, of which he isn’t anywhere close to that. Hence, I don’t think much of RomneyCare, either. And, it seems, the customers in Massachusetts, who actually foot the bill, don’t think too much of it either.
Hi John,
Health insurance premiums spiked markedly in 2011. This was as a result of continuing health care inflation, but also because insurance companies spiked premiums in anticipation of ObamaCare rules that required future justifications of rate increases higher than 10%. So they hiked their rates, before rules came in which would make it harder for them to hike their rates.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/business/health-insurance-costs-rise-sharply-this-year-study-shows.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
The White House claimed that premiums would start to moderate in 2012, and this claim has been proven to be correct:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/27/health-insurance-premium-update
http://www.kff.org/pullingittogether/altman_premium_increase.cfm
You claim that RomneyCare is unpopular in Massachusetts. Rather than me rebutting this, I’ll let Mitt Romney, himself, do it for me:
http://mittromneycentral.com/resources/romneycare/
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
My own Blue Cross Blue Shield premiums have gone up every year for years. The rapid escalation in premium increases began long before anyone had ever heard of Barack Obama or Obamacare. Rising medical service provider fees and prescription drug costs were clearly a major driving factor.
Aargh!
Obamacare is not health care. There is nothing in Obamacare about providers of care. Nothing. No new doctors, no new nurses, no new administrators, nothing. Read the bill, if you have the time.
There is a provision for 14,000 new IRS agents to collect the insurance premiums, however.
Obamacare will provide no new services to anyone.
Obamacare is a Federal takeover of health insurance.
No more, no less.
And, further, purchase of the Federal health insurance will be mandatory.
Can we please stop whining and deal with facts?
Folks, two obama cultists just highlighted the point of this thread. Thanks greg and Larry.
Larry, more people are killed by doctors each year than the alleged 45,000 who died (again) allegedly due to lack of health insurance.
And for the umpteenth time, the popularity of something doesn’t mean it’s worth a darn.
NY Post? Wh.Gov? You’ll swallow anything that reinforces your delusional world view.
Hi, Hard Right.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Item: Auto crash deaths are going up in people who wear seat belts (click it or ticket), while they are going down in people who don’t wear seat belts:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Government-Survey-Reveals–by-Martin-Hill-080608-450.html
From the above, you might conclude that (1) there’s really not much difference between wearing a seat belt and not wearing a seat belt, and, in any event, as cars are getting better, it’s looking like it might soon even be more advantageous not to wear a seat belt.
But what’s missing?
The denominator.
So, death numbers are in the same ball park for seat belt versus no seat belt, but 4 times as many people wear seat belts as don’t wear them; so your chances of dying are 4 times as great if you don’t wear a seat belt, compared to if you do.
Then there is this:
Since you also don’t appear to believe in medical care, it’s entirely understandable that you wouldn’t favor any plan to expand access to health care services. Presumably, you aren’t in the least bothered by the concept of “death panels,” since you’d think it advantageous to be denied medical care.
By the way, what is your explanation for the following data?
http://vaperforms.virginia.gov/images/graphs/HealthFamily/Cardiovascular-RatesbyState.png
http://vaperforms.virginia.gov/images/graphs/HealthFamily/Cardiovascular-RatesbyRegion.png
or:
(showing cardiovascular death rates, by year, with cardiovascular disease being the nation’s number one killer):
http://www.pfizerplus.com/images/value_of_medicines1.jpg
A single example. We can go on to more, but, first, I’d like to hear your explanation for the above data.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
@mathman:
I agree. It is all about control. If they can control this aspect of your life, they will be able to do it in other ways.
Just wait until those obamadeath care taxes (included in the law), which about 12 of the 22 will affect us kick in, and oh of course the Bush tax reprieve to expire. That will be a big chunk out of your pay check, well that is unless you are sucking off the teat of the government.
According to the ‘right-leaning’ Rasmussen poll, ” Most voters still want to repeal President Obama’s national health care law, but voters are now evenly divided over whether repeal is likely.” http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law
And it will become more popular as time goes on. And the more radical right-wingers on this site will add this to their repertoire of lost causes the they will continue to argue against (i.e., the Civil War, the Vietnam War, Social Security, Medicare, etc.).
[Note: Curt, you know absolutely nothing about what’s typical leftist.]
That’s cute larry. Because I am against forcing everyone to buy health insurance, I am against medical care? That’s a rather sad attempt at distortion even for you. All that straw must be itchy.
And to your claim that if it’s popular it must be good:
http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20120810/NEWS0107/208100401/
Oh and libtard pile of #2, we know you and your kind far better than you do.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
So says the leftist who comes here daily, leaving his droppings around the site, telling conservatives what is “typical” about them.
Pot, kettle, I think you get the idea.
Perhaps, as the debate continues to rage, two very real facts should be brought in.
1: Yes, premiums are going up with, or without, Obamacare. That’s because O’healthcare, touted with lies that it will reduce premiums, really doesn’t do anything to curtail the costs of administering medical services. The rising cost of medical services is what is driving up premiums.
2: O’healthcare isn’t anything but a voluminous bill constituting new higher tax plan, a tax mandate, and the expansion of the third entitlement welfare program, Medicaid. Mittens should know about that… it’s exactly what he did in Mass, insuring the State residents on the federal taxpayers dimes. The problem with this entitlement is we are already being sunk by the other two, and adding a third is like putting concrete shoes on the US economy.
By 2020, 41% of the estimated population will be on a government healthcare program, paid for by a dwindling labor force with lower wages. And that’s likely a rosy figure since there are more employers who will be dropping their employee group plans and paying the lesser amount in penalties instead. The fiscal waterloo is as plain as the nose on the face when looking in a mirror.
Larry, I know you view O’healthcare strictly from a compassionate and emotional perspective. But the fact is, we can’t afford Medicare and Social Security in it’s present incarnation, and we damn sight can’t afford adding Medicaid to that financial burden… much as you’d like watching taxpayers subsidize everyone under the sun. You need to separate emotions from fiscal realities. And until you can do that, you are just another part of the entitlement mentality that is sinking this country, just as it’s sinking Euro nations.
@MataHarley:
It’s not so much the people like Larry that are the real problem. It’s those who subscribe to the “fairness” doctrine the left preaches about, that uses the tactic of playing on people’s emotions to advance their cause. As for Larry, I believe he does care about the people involved, but lets that emotion twist and spin his viewpoints on what is actually being accomplished by Obamacare.
And besides, I’d like just one of those liberal/progressives to tell me how I care any less than they, if I’d rather give true charity to, say, a Catholic health organization or hospital, rather than be forced to fork over the fruits of MY labor to the government.
Hi Mata and JohnGalt:
Rather than me making the same arguments I’ve been making for years, in response to you guys making the same arguments you’ve been making for years, I’ll refer for your consideration this thoughtful op-ed, written by an American Enterprise Institute conservative.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/opinion/sunday/why-obamacare-is-a-conservatives-dream.html?pagewanted=all
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
Thank you for sharing that. I found this passage to be particularly insightful:
@Larry, it seems I have to remind you once again, the original Heritage plan was written by an economist, and embraced as an economic cure.. not a Constitutional stand.
This is plainly noted in Kleinke’s article you linked:
Now maybe I’m not your average AEI type “conservative” because I didn’t support it back in the 90s, and I still don’t support it today. And unlike Kleinke, who does an offensive and unflattering broad stroke characteristic, which @Tom points out above, it has nothing to do with controlling women’s bodies.
This all is a dollars and “sense” issue to me, combined with an inherent belief in a limited central government as founded. We cannot afford the entitlements we have, and we sure can’t afford adding the third massive leg of Medicaid to the mix either. Nor is the central government supposed to be in the business of being a health insurance provider, nor a pension plan.
Just to drive home my point on the new, third entitlement that is ObamaCare, you need only read Kleinke’s article last week about the Wall Street rush to buy up Medicaid managed care companies.
Gee, what a shock. Tom supports a bigoted view of Conservatives. Projection as usual on his part.
@MataHarley:
ObamaCare Is Pro-Market Like the Berlin Wall Was Pro-Migrant
Pretty good fisking of that Kleinke article
OPENID.AOL.COM/RUNNSWIM
FOX ANNOUNCE THE MAJORITY OF DOCTORS WILL VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY,
WOULD YOU BE AMONG THEM?
Thanks for the reference to that Cato Most Wanted, Curt. Yes, Kleinke is one of the right leaning types that is a member of what Cato calls “the Church of Universal Coverage”. It’s the “economist” in him. Doesn’t take a rocket scientist, or master mathematician, to figure out that if you want to try to pay for a losing proposition, you force everyone to cough up some cash in some way.
The problem with Kleinke and others is that they refuse to recognize that you can continue to rob everyone blind, but it still does nothing to curtail the costs of administering medical services for the expected larger drain on the system. They only attempt to figure out ways not to pay medical providers, or to pay less, as the answer.
Our problem is one of demographics… more being added on to an already unsustainable system, and supported by a smaller and declining labor force. The math just doesn’t work out.