Message Boards » General Topics » News and Views

Thread: Apocalypse Now


Reply to this Thread Reply to this Thread Search Forum Search Forum Back to Thread List Back to Thread List

Permlink Replies: 39 - Last Post: Mar 20, 2012 7:49 PM Last Post By: Sean
Gramps


Posts: 14,434
Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 14, 2012 10:10 PM
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Has anyone noticed how the conservatives are increasingly using apocalyptic language: "If we don't win this election, it will be the end of America as we know it."? "If Obama wins again, capitalism will be no more." "The economy will certainly tank if he has a second term."

It is true America is changing, but I would not say it is for the worst. As America has become more diverse it has become richer. As more people have gained equal rights our society is taken to a new level. Capitalism has evolved over time. It is stronger now than it was at the beginning of the Obama presidency, and far better than it was during the Reagan administration.

Want to know why so many Republican states have been pushing Voter ID laws? Because they fear they are losing the culture wars. One way to hold on to the power for just a little longer is to prevent Hispanics (in Texas) or blacks (in Carolina) from being able to have a voice in where this county should go.

Same with the do nothing congress. As long as they can keep the progressive agenda in check. Better to fight for what we know than what we don't.

The diatribe we have heard from conservative commentators against women are an attempt to "put them in their place."

Frankly, I look forward to the election. I hope the Republicans will nominate a clearly conservative candidate so the electorate can have a choice between holding on to the past or moving into the future.
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 14, 2012 10:28 PM   in response to: Gramps in response to: Gramps
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
funny on my facebook page.

daylight savings time - if democrat move clock ahead one hour
if republican move clock back 200 years.

i don't approve of either.
4Annie

Posts: 882
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 16, 2012 6:31 PM   in response to: Gramps in response to: Gramps
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
I'm inclined to think that the conservatives are speaking of themselves...what they personally will lose. Now, when I hear one of them use Barry McGuire's "Eve of Destruction" as their election theme, then I may put a little (emphasize little) credence in the claim!

Ever notice that those using sound bites cannot formulate a debate-type conversation. Once you swallow a pill, it disintegrates...same with spouted statements.
opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 16, 2012 10:06 PM   in response to: Gramps in response to: Gramps
  Click to reply to this thread Reply



The foundation of American principles is the Constitution, not the President, so I find this offensive.

This President has not exemplified the will of our constitution. The Founders created the American political order that would preserve natural law (right to life) and natural rights (preservation of marriage).
They also ensured a federal government that respected God given right of all Americans. They sought to restrain the government and to prevent it from gaining to much power.

63% of americans believe we are heading the "wrong direction" as a country. (Rasmussen)

The federal government should be restrained to provide a military, stable currency, and allow it's citizens to live freely (and not infringe on the right of others).

Yet this President seeks to greatly expand the role of government with a resultant loss of civil and religious liberties. That is why the motto "we hope he fails" is still true today.

Gramps


Posts: 14,434
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 12:42 AM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
According to this Snopes Article the flag was a gift that to Lake County Democratic Office. The Executive Director did not realize such a flag may be against the law in Florida. It was taken down immediately after Veterans Groups objected. There is no indication that Obama was involved in getting the flag. It was a mistake. (As if Bush didn't make mistakes--like sending troops into Iraq).

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/photos/flag.asp

Yes, 63 percent of American feel we are headed in the wrong direction, but that is primarily because of the intransigence of the Do Nothing Congress. When congress refuses reach compromises for the good of the country, we are headed in the wrong direction.

When you look back over the past 60 years you will find that much of the government expansion was during Republican administrations. Even the current Republican candidates what to use government to intrude even further into the private lives of individuals.

It was WE THE PEOPLE that formed the government. While the Declaration of Independence refers to a Creator, the Constitution, which is the foundation of the government has no mention of God. Even the Bill of Rights does not claim God gave us the rights that are listed. If we would insist on natural law women would end up barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. They would not be able to own property without the permission of the her husband. We would still be allowed to own slaves (which has been around since creation, to use your term). Voting would be only for the landed gentry (women not allowed). Public education would be unheard of.

Not all Americans had God given rights under the original constitution: slaves were counted as three fourths of a person; women did not have the right to vote until the early 1900's,

Our common rights have evolved over time, and will continue to develop. We fought a civil war because the rights of individuals were being trampled. The civil rights era challenged defeated those who tried to claim natural law (after all God made the white man superior). The races weren't supposed to intermarry (it was against natural law). To use the natural law claim to continue to deny rights to individuals who seek to be married is arrogant and very weak.
4Annie

Posts: 882
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 6:01 AM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
If you find this offensive, then why did you post the photo? Would not a descriptive phrase sufficed?

Just an aside, another interpretation is that the U.S. flag is higher (taking precedence) and the lower "inspired flag" (implementing), suggesting the true meaning of what the flag stands for.

Remember, there theoretically are 37% who do agree with the direction this country is going. They, too, are covered by the U.S. Constitution.
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 8:09 AM   in response to: 4Annie in response to: 4Annie
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
I only saw 1 pictures with 2 flags and it was sort of unclear.


Most pictures only show one flag, the one that offends. There are two flags. The U.S. flag flying distinctly above the offending flag. There are also T Shirts sold with the same picture on it.


I sure don't recomend either the flag or T Shirt. But I think it behooves anyone having a problem with it, {and I can understand why} to be fair and show both flags as they were flown in front of the building..

opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 10:55 AM   in response to: 4Annie in response to: 4Annie
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Yes the flag should be respectfully destroyed and those responsible prosecuted.

However Americans should be upset at our country being transformed into a socialistic state.

We should be appalled by the government control of 1/3 of our economy. Obama is not interested in our health just control of average Americans.

We should be ashamed at billions spent on "green energy" (think Solyndra).

This president does not deserve a second term with no accountability to voters.
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 11:34 AM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
I agree with you that Government accountablility is important and so is accountability of multi nationals, pharmaceuticals, insurance companies, etc.

I have friends who have been rescued from socialist countries and brought here by relatives. There is no comparison according to them. They feel they are blessed beyond measure to be in the U.S.

If we're transformed into anything it's more likely Plutocracy. Where the very rich rule. Or if some of the Republicans have their way a Theocracy, A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.

The government now is being controlled by very rich Corporations. And more so since the Pacs can give what ever amount of money they choose to.

I wonder how old you are . Of course you don't have to tell me but the way you post in "bumper sticker speak" leads me to believe you are quite young. Nothing wrong with it mind you . Just seems you don't do too much investigating of the facts.
opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 12:59 PM   in response to: Turtletoes2 in response to: Turtletoes2
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Name one Republican or party platform that advocates a Theocracy?
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 1:55 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
As far as I know the only label thrown around in a pejorative way is socialism.

I would say Santorum, a good Catholic boy is the closest to being a Theocrat through some of his messages. Now careful, I did not say he was a Theocrat, just the closest to it as much by what he ignores as what he says and does. Hard to tell what would happen if ever he was Pres.
opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 2:45 PM   in response to: Turtletoes2 in response to: Turtletoes2
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Santorum is honest and straight forward with a concise agenda.
Have you seen any of his debates?
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 5:28 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
He is making a lot of women both Dems. and Reps. pretty uncomfortable. Many feel he would inflict the Catholic Bishops agenda including no birth control, and no public schools and a bunch of other nos as well as a hawkish sentiment re. Afghanastan.

If I miss him at the boring debates, I can catch him on YouTube. I've seen too much of all the Rep. candidates and from what I've seen, none hold a candle to Obama. If he had a congress and Senate that would go along with him, He'd take women and men back 100 years to the bad old days..
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 3:55 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Have you read up on Santorums background ? Not so lily white.
Sean


Posts: 6,516
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 12:53 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
opto86 wrote:However Americans should be upset at our country being transformed into a socialistic state.

We should be appalled by the government control of 1/3 of our economy. Obama is not interested in our health just control of average Americans.


I love how Obama's implementation of a Republican idea -- making individuals buy health care by private insurance companies -- is now suddenly a government takeover of the economy.

What's the conservative alternative? Keep the taxpayer on the hook for people without insurance? Let them die on the sidewalk outside the hospital?

We should be ashamed at billions spent on "green energy" (think Solyndra).

Solyndra is a drop in the bucket compared to the literally billions of dollars that are wasted in military weapons programs.

This president does not deserve a second term with no accountability to voters.

No accountability? Really? Are the Democrats going to have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate? Are there not going to be elections in 2014 and 2016? Is all government activity going to take place in secret?

Seriously, you are getting a bit paranoid..
opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 1:17 PM   in response to: Sean in response to: Sean
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Again what Republican is for private health insurance mandates?
Gramps


Posts: 14,434
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 6:13 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
The first Republican to advocate for a national health insurance was Teddy Roosevelt. Dwight Eisenhower also wanted to see it. Richard Nixon talked about it. Then there were the Rockefellers, Danforth, and so on. As much as Romney wants to deny it, the Affordable Health Care Act was patterned after the health care law he signed into law.

While I am at it, the Constitution does authorize Congress to regulate interstate commerce and promote the general welfare of the nation. As much as the natural law people want to redefine what this means, it does give the Federal government a wide berth.

You may have missed this story too: Obama Administration Says Cross San Diego Cross Should Stay
opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 8:00 PM   in response to: Gramps in response to: Gramps
  Click to reply to this thread Reply

The Constitution created a national government with a legislature of limited and enumerated powers.

The Supreme Court has recognized this, as Chief Justice Marshall stated: "The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written."

And he also said "should Congress, under the pretext of executing its powers, pass laws for the accomplishment of objects not entrusted to the national government; it would become the painful duty of this tribunal, should a case requiring such a decision come before it, to say that such an act was not the law of the land."

Fortunately some legislative powers remain beyond Congress's reach and that will (hopefuly) this include health care proposal.

Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 2:38 AM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Charles Grassley, Mitt Romney
opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 12:48 PM   in response to: Turtletoes2 in response to: Turtletoes2
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
RE: Charles Grassly- He changed his mind about 3 years ago.

He said in 2009- "an intrusion into private life ......While recognizing that there is "certainly a principle of personal responsibility that applies here," he contended that "individuals should maintain the freedom to choose whether to purchase health insurance coverage or not."

RE: Mitt Romney- He clearly states he is not in favor of a federal mandate.
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 2:45 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
both of those men are millionaires - and of course republicans.

why in the world would they care about whether we, the little people, have health insurance or not. they got theirs.

medical care is out of sight. boss had shots in his knees in january - series of three in each knee, cost $3000. hooking him up to the machine that guided the placement of the needle was $300 each time.

good thing we have insurance - our portion was only $476. take that out of a social security check. and we are fortunate. neither of our sons has any medical insurance. we hope and pray neither of them gets sick. the grands are on michild - covers hospitalization i understand - but they drive miles to a doctor - only one in the county that participates in the program. my sister's grandson is on medicaid - they drive him 80 miles to a dentist - only one that will take medicaid. she drives him because his father can't afford the gas. or to take the time off work.

yup- they are millionaires and we are little people - of no account.

obama should have gone for single payer - put everyone on medicare and one entitiy pays the bill. everyone pays a premium according to their ability. 1.43% for medicare today does not cut it.

i like that statement about choosing to buy insurance - the choice isn't the issue - it is cost versus wages. too many people can't pay rent, buy food and still pay for medical insurance. let alone think about purchasing a fuel efficient car. wages are not going up - buying power isn't either.

Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 3:57 PM   in response to: wanderer in response to: wanderer
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
obama should have gone for single payer - put everyone on medicare and one entitiy pays the bill. everyone pays a premium according to their ability. 1.43% for medicare today does not cut it.
i like that statement about choosing to buy insurance - the choice isn't the issue - it is cost versus wages. too many people can't pay rent, buy food and still pay for medical insurance. let alone think about purchasing a fuel efficient car. wages are not going up - buying power isn't either

Do you know what happened to single payer, why it wasn't presented ?

It seems nurses, doctors, etc. were for it. Maybe to good a plan.
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 4:07 PM   in response to: Turtletoes2 in response to: Turtletoes2
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
From Wikipedia

Public opinion in the United States
According to the media criticism organization Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a 1987 New York Times/CBS poll showed 78% of people saying that the "government should guarantee medical care to everyone."55 Between 2003 and 2009, 17 opinion polls showed a majority of the public supports various levels of government involvement in health care in the United States.16 Many polls, such as ones administered through CNN,56 AP-Yahoo,5758 New York Times/CBS News Poll,5960 and Washington Post/ABC News Poll,61 Kaiser Family Foundation62 showed a majority in favor of a form of national health insurance, often compared to Medicare. The Civil Society Institute63 and Physicians for a National Health Program64 have both found majorities in favor of the government offering guaranteed insurance, and a Quinnipiac poll in three states in 2008 found majority support for the government ensuring "that everyone in the United States has adequate health-care" among likely Democratic primary voters.65

In contrast, a October 2011 Rasmussen Reports poll showed only 35% of respondents in favor of single-payer health care, with a plurality (49%) opposed.66 Politifact rated a statement by Michael Moore "false" when he stated that "[t]he majority actually want single-payer health care."67 Responses on these polls largely depend on the wording. For example, people respond more favorably when they are asked if they want a system "like Medicare," less favorably when stated as "socialized."67
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 5:35 PM   in response to: Turtletoes2 in response to: Turtletoes2
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
it is my understanding that rasmussen is not non partisan - that it leans republican.

they called me once to do a survey (i pay a lot of attention to their polls). second question i answered was democratic leaning and immediately i got a dial tone. the call was disconnected. did they hang up on me or was there a solar flare than interruped communications? we will never know.

wording can sway a lot of things.

notice how many people do not approve of the way obama is handling his job. like so many do not like him that he probably will lose the election.

but what did they ask? I don't care for the way he is handling his job - i wish he were more forceful and had more backbone and stood up to the party of no, including some of his own party members of congress. would i vote for him again? to quote the ex gov of alaska - "you betcha!"

i want to see what the man can accomplish - and hope that he has a more favorable congress - none of the other candidates do anything for me.

it is all in the wording. kinda like do you still beat your wife thing.
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 3:50 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Romney is poster boy for flip flopping. Basicaly it's the plan when governor he gave to his state. I know what he's saying now. Oh, it was only good for the state.

Grasley probably made a deal. You give me such and such and I'll stand with you on Health Care.

You simply can't go by what any of them say. So much back room dealing and arm twisting.
IMO when Obama made such a major thrust for health care, I think he was counting on Kennedy to still be here to do the arm twisting. Also, he was blind sided by the Republicans who voted NO for about everything.

They wanted him out even before he started. And, that was the big Rep. plan.Get rid of Obama. Some representation.
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 5:38 PM   in response to: Turtletoes2 in response to: Turtletoes2
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
the money has to be removed from politics.

and if you think that will happen - i have a bridge ----
Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 18, 2012 5:55 PM   in response to: wanderer in response to: wanderer
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Yep. Matter of fact with the super pacs, money is running it more then ever.
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 19, 2012 4:29 PM   in response to: Turtletoes2 in response to: Turtletoes2
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
$750,000 and no, they were not expecting anything in return. just good hearted americans. right.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-contractor-politics-20120318,0,5184326.story?page=1

Turtletoes2


Posts: 4,260
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 19, 2012 5:10 PM   in response to: wanderer in response to: wanderer
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Of course, of course. Just good ole American Patriots...
Sean


Posts: 6,516
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 19, 2012 8:49 AM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
opto86 wrote:Again what Republican is for private health insurance mandates?

There were plenty of Republicans that favored it right up until the point that Democrats -- namely Hillary Clinton and John Edwards -- began to embrace it during the 2008 campaign.

The individual mandate was the Republican alternative to the Clinton employer mandate in the 1990s. Look at the names that supported that bill: Bob Dole, Richard Lugar, Charles Grassley, Alan Simpson, Orrin Hatch, Larry Craig and many, many more. Mitt Romney -- then a Senate candidate -- said he supported the bill.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/a-lot-of-republicans-supported-the-individual-mandate/2011/05/09/AFi26Z0G_blog.html

Who else backed an individual mandate at one time? Rick Santorum!

"Santorum and Watkins both oppose having businesses provide health care for their employees. Instead, they would require individuals to purchase insurance." -- Allentown Morning Call, April 1994

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/09/401038/santorum-supported-individual-health-insurance-mandate-in-1994-republican-primary/

So the three top contenders in the Republican Presidential nomination all supported the individual mandate at one point.

The essential point here is that the individual mandate wasn't a quirky policy supported by only a couple of folks in the Republican party -- it was the party line. And they've flip-flopped on it. Big time.
opto86

Posts: 767
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 19, 2012 11:19 PM   in response to: Sean in response to: Sean
  Click to reply to this thread Reply

Several reasons for the flip-flops:

1) The overturn of ObamaCare of will be part the Republican party platform. Polls continues to show that ObamaCare is not welcome by the American people.

In a recent poll, 67 percent believe the high court should either ditch the law or at least the portion that requires nearly all Americans to have coverage. (ABC/Washington Post).

For me and many other freedom loving Americans, it offends a principled attachment to liberty and self government. This crosses the line in a citizen to State relationship that many Americans find troubling.

If the government can force to purchase (or tax us if we don't), it can force us to do anything.

2) Unkept promises. Obama promised to make healthcare more accessible and cheaper without increasing taxes or the deficit. "If you liked your doctor, of course you could keep your doctor" . No one would be made to do anything against their will.

Obama said you could keep your insurance yet the CBO now says 20 million Americans could lose their employer coverage because of ObamaCare.

These promises have all been broken.

3) The costs. Last week, the CBO estimated that costs, originally pegged at $938 billion, have now risen to $1.76 trillion. Congressional Republicans estimate the tab to be $2.6 trillion.

4) The Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality and/or Congress will act. Unfortunately, under Obama's failed leadership we've lost 2 years of potential health care reform.

There are many other valid reasons why many Americans are now opposed to this health care reform.


Gramps


Posts: 14,434
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 20, 2012 1:12 AM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Polls indicate most Americans like the provision that eliminates preconditions in health care.

Polls also indicate most Americans like the ability to care their children to age 25 on their health insurance.

The 20 million Americans who may lose employer insurance are those who have the "Cadillac" plans. Likely, what will happen is employers will offer something that is more basic and in line with the AHA.
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 20, 2012 8:55 AM   in response to: Gramps in response to: Gramps
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
i know very little about the details of the health care bill. but i do think that employers will drop coverage if they are able. bottom line - if they think they can eliminate health insurance and increase profitablily - they will do so.

heard the Diane Rehm show yesterday about Bell Labs. all the things they did for their employees to make them better employees and a better company. that doesn't happen anymore. companies are all about profit - to heck with their employees.

should have had a single payer - everyone on medicare. increase the amount paid through payroll tax to beef up the medicare fund. employers could pay much more into medicare fund and still less than medical insurance. i recall hearing that GM pays more in medical insurance than they do for steel - but - if that were to happen

Boehner would not have gotten $43,400 from blue cross
Cantor would not have gotten $15,000 from blue cross
Pelosi would not have gotten $10,000 from American Health Care Assn
McConnell would not have gotten $122,250 from kindred Healthcare.

i could not find a healh care provided listed in the top 20 contributors to Reid, Durbin, Schumer. this all came from the opensecrets website.

didn't Bob Dylan say money doesn't talk, it swears? looks to me that it swears pretty loud!
4Annie

Posts: 882
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 20, 2012 2:11 PM   in response to: wanderer in response to: wanderer
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
This article from my Republican representative on repealing the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) is rather illuminating:

www.forbes.com/sites/dougshoen/2012.03/15/the-final-push-for-ipab-repeal/
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 20, 2012 2:41 PM   in response to: 4Annie in response to: 4Annie
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
ran through that rather quickly - and another article on ipab - so am not real clear on this but have a couple of thoughts

why do they always have to attach bills to other bills - and normally they have nothing in common. why can't congress vote on issues by themselves?

second, if i understand that committee or whatever - it is made up of medical staff who will determine what to cut in medicare - as opposed to having congress cut medicare.

if that is correct - is congress afraid to take the heat? should business people be making the decisions instead of congress - or do i have that totally wrong?

off to do windows - it is a glorious day out - what ever happened to winter?
4Annie

Posts: 882
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 20, 2012 5:27 PM   in response to: wanderer in response to: wanderer
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Just what would Congress do without pork barrel politics? Hint: They would need to think independently and for the good of the country - in it's entirety, not just locally. And cut their spending and waste. I'm not so sure that the intransigents would be able to do so.

The panel hasn't yet been named; it is part of the health care reform to help reign in the cost expansion in Medicare. The belief was that physicians would be named, but they have a special interest in the outcome and many groups have come out against the panel.

www.ama-assn.org/anednews/2012/03/19/gvsa0319.htm is one such discussion.

Seems that part of the Republican agenda to dismantle reform is coming to fruition. Both sides of this equation have cooped our rights as patients to secure medical care from physicians we choose. And the move to change hospitals to for-profits will only make this more of a nightmare.

What Congress needs to do is elevate the reimbursement rates so more physicians and other "Medicare providers" will accept Medicare patients...the rates are so low that many simply will not. Congress is more concerned with reelection insurance by extending the legislation for 3, 6 months (it was included in the most recent extension of Unemployment) and not tackle the underlying problem, a confusing reimbursement formula. Until this is accomplished, expanding the coverage beyond the "elderly and disabled" could be a total disaster.
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 20, 2012 9:49 AM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
not sure if this has value or not -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/no-the-cbo-hasnt-doubled-its-cost-estimate-for-health-care-reform/2011/08/25/gIQAZj7FPS_blog.html

and another which i like better - think there would be more documentation for this than the above -

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43080

looks smaller than the numbers you posted.

Sean


Posts: 6,516
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 20, 2012 7:49 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
opto86 wrote:For me and many other freedom loving Americans, it offends a principled attachment to liberty and self government. This crosses the line in a citizen to State relationship that many Americans find troubling.

Choosing not to buy insurance isn't about "liberty and self-government" at all. It makes you a free rider. If you don't have insurance and suffer a catastrophic injury or illness, you've put the taxpayers on the hook for your medical expenses. Some liberty that is!

Obama said you could keep your insurance yet the CBO now says 20 million Americans could lose their employer coverage because of ObamaCare.

The facts are that nearly that many people -- at current rates of uninsurance -- would be losing their health insurance without ObamaCare over that time. The difference is that with ObamaCare, it will be far easier for them to get insured.

3) The costs. Last week, the CBO estimated that costs, originally pegged at $938 billion, have now risen to $1.76 trillion. Congressional Republicans estimate the tab to be $2.6 trillion.

Debunked in the link posted below. The costs have risen because it's looking at a different timeframe. What you don't mention is that the same CBO analysis shows that the deficit will be $50 billion lower than projected.

4) The Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality and/or Congress will act. Unfortunately, under Obama's failed leadership we've lost 2 years of potential health care reform.

Funny one. Republicans have no meaningful health care reform plan. Recall that their 2009 plan didn't reduce the % of uninsured and cut the deficit by less than ObamaCare.
4Annie

Posts: 882
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 4:16 PM   in response to: opto86 in response to: opto86
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
I think such a decision should wait until/if the actual status of the "offending" flag is determined, at least I conclude that this is the flag you are referencing...the piece of material with alternating red and white stripes minus the blue canton with the 50 stars on it.

Rather than changing the subject, would you please respond to my question as to why you posted the photo of the flags if you find it to be offensive.
wanderer


Posts: 5,067
Re: Apocalypse Now
Posted: Mar 17, 2012 6:35 PM   in response to: 4Annie in response to: 4Annie
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
made me think of a family story - this posting of that offensive flag.

old aunt talked and railed about a man on the radio named arthur godfrey (he sang a little ditty called i'm my own grandpa). anyway she would carry on and on about how awful he was and this and that. when she got through with her discourse she would say - and you should hear what he had to say today!!

he was so bad - she just could not turn the program off. like if that flag was so offensive why was it brought to our attention and not just dropped.

someone would have taken care of it and it seems they did.