Just what this nation needs.... more private health insurance.

Sheesh.

Whether or not you agree with the republican opposals is one thing. Lying about them is another.

In fact, the GOP budget projected that Medicare spending would rise 88.5 percent during the 10 years covered by the GOP budget proposal with outlays going from just under $427 billion in the current fiscal year (which ends Sept. 30) to more than $804 billion in fiscal 2019. Remember, this is the budget plan that the DNC's ad says amounted to a vote to "abolish" Medicare.

The ad also pictures former president George W. Bush as the first example of a Republican who "opposed Medicare." In fact, Bush pushed through and signed the largest expansion of Medicare since its inception the prescription drug benefit.

I'm just wondering why Democrats have to lie so much.

Force of habit.

DNC Trying To Scare Seniors

Really? Have they started talking about 'death panels'?

You guys are pathetic. I hope that at least you're getting paid by the insurance companies for your efforts, otherwise you'd be doubly pathetic.

Have they started talking about 'death panels'?

Given the exhorbitant waiting times, ridiculous degree of rationing (especially when compared with the US system) and the fact that government calls the shots - the UK even has a cost matrix in terms of $ allowed to be spent relative to quality years of life gained - the term "death panel" is sadly appropriate.

What is pathetic is that much of your ilk acts as if a government takeover will result in Utopia, with no negative tradeoffs whatsoever. What is pathetic is the degree to which the DNC viciously attacks those who disagree with their wet-dreams of massive expansion of government. What is pathetic is how few liberals out there are willing to have an honest discussion about this. What is pathetic is President Obama, just 2 days ago, claiming the opposition has NO IDEAS, when in point of fact, the GOP has submitted 2 proposals that the DNC has chosen to completely ignore. All he had to do was claim the opposition's ideas suck. But no, he instead chooses to flat-out lie.

Let's put it this way. If I get the Health Care Insurance That I do declare is My Constitutional Right to I will be happier than a pig in slop. Mark My words in this here 09 09 09

Larry

"Whether or not you agree with the republican opposals is one thing. Lying about them is another"

Hypo crit

Hahahah

What is pathetic is that much of your ilk acts as if a government takeover will result in Utopia, with no negative tradeoffs whatsoever. What is pathetic is the degree to which the DNC viciously attacks those who disagree with their wet-dreams of massive expansion of government. What is pathetic is how few liberals out there are willing to have an honest discussion about this. What is pathetic is President Obama, just 2 days ago, claiming the opposition has NO IDEAS, when in point of fact, the GOP has submitted 2 proposals that the DNC has chosen to completely ignore. All he had to do was claim the opposition's ideas suck. But no, he instead chooses to flat-out lie.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ

The main obstacle that the insurance companies and their lackeys face is that other countries have found ways to provide an excellent level of health coverage to all their citizens without highly profitable private health insurance companies. From the get-go these companies and their lackeys have had to lie to the American public to put lipstick on their pig of an argument that private, for profit health-care is 'the best in the world'. So I find it funny that you would start crying about the 'lies' of the administration at this point. The level of your cynicism is astounding.

You know if Health Care didn't cost one red cent nobody would be bitching about Everyone being covered. But since it's a huge money maker and since this Contry is a capitalistc Country people are all up in arms about Everyone being covered by either private entities or the Fedral Government. If You try and take someones Free speech away they get all up in arms about it RIGHTFULLY So. cause it costs no monies they don't fret. Same holds true for the Second amendment. It only cost whatever the price of the gun and ammo is. But Health Care since it's a booming business people get all upset if You want to deprive these businesses monies.

Larry

other countries have found ways to provide an excellent level of health coverage to all their citizens without highly profitable private health insurance companies.

Excellent?

The average waiting time in Canada for care is 18 weeks.

18 weeks!

How you can call that "excellent" is beyond me.

In the UK, mothers are giving birth to babies in elevators and closets, due to a lack of bed space in their hospitals.

How you can call that "excellent" is beyond me.

Canadian cancer patients are quite frequently coming to the US for care, because their system doesn't adequately provide for their affliction.

Etc.

"The average waiting time in Canada for care is 18 weeks."

Who is 'flat out' lying?

The average waiting time in Canada for care is 18 weeks.

18 weeks!

How you can call that "excellent" is beyond me.

In the UK, mothers are giving birth to babies in elevators and closets, due to a lack of bed space in their hospitals.

How you can call that "excellent" is beyond me.

Canadian cancer patients are quite frequently coming to the US for care, because their system doesn't adequately provide for their affliction.

Etc.

#13 | Posted by JeffJ

That's bullshit and you know it.
I know it's bullshit from first hand experience and I challenge you to provide supporting evidence.
Next you're going to tell me how 80% of Americans are happy with their private insurance.
I can't believe you have the balls to come on this board and complain about lies, and then proceed to post some of the most egregious ones as facts.

Actually it ISN'T bullshit if you need surgery:

A typical Canadian seeking surgical or other therapeutic treatment had to wait 18.3 weeks in 2007, an all-time high, according to new research published Monday by independent research organization the Fraser Institute.

"Despite government promises and the billions of dollars funnelled into the Canadian health-care system, the average patient waited more than 18 weeks in 2007 between seeing their family doctor and receiving the surgery or treatment they required," said Nadeem Esmail, director of Health System Performance Studies at the Fraser Institute and co-author of the 17th annual edition of Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada.

This is funny. Dems have a majority and can pass anything they want and they continue to run negative ads about republicans. I guess they are just stuck in reverse gear.

Really?

Actually it ISN'T bullshit if you need surgery:

A typical Canadian seeking surgical or other therapeutic treatment had to wait 18.3 weeks in 2007, an all-time high, according to new research published Monday by independent research organization the Fraser Institute.

Here's a snippet on the Fraser Institute:

Looks like the source is biased.

I don't care if it is Mickey Mouse as long as the facts add up. I suppose you have opposing facts that debunk this? I will wait...

What you fail to mention is that the concern for wait times is for elective surgery.

Bullshit.

From the exact quote I provided above:

"Despite government promises and the billions of dollars funnelled into the Canadian health-care system, the average patient waited more than 18 weeks in 2007 between seeing their family doctor and receiving the surgery or treatment they required," said Nadeem Esmail, director of Health System Performance Studies at the Fraser Institute and co-author of the 17th annual edition of Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada

Check the italicized and bolded part. That word... what was it again? Oh yeah... "required". That hardly sounds like it means "elective" to me. You might want to clue me in on what dictionary you are using or what language you are speaking.

Your 'facts' didn't hurt my case as much as your lack of reading comprehension hurt yours.

After assertion from you about the word "elective", this closing remark by you has turned into a delicious self-retort.

Bullshit.

From the exact quote I provided above:

#19 | Posted by moomanfl

I'm not interested in the findings of or quotes from a conservative think tank on the problems of single payer health care, something they admittedly are opponents of. Maybe you should read the content of the other link you provided (here it is again) on the section regarding wait time problems before you shoot your mouth off again.

I'm not interested in the findings of or quotes from a conservative think tank...

Ahhh... ideology over facts. Gotcha.

Since it is acceptable to dismiss a source's claims simply on knowing their ideological position you certainly won't mind if nobody listens to you any more... you are obviously biased.

Seriously though, either you can debunk the claim or you can't. I guess by the substance of your post we know you can't.

Maybe you should read the content of the other link you provided (here it is again) on the section regarding wait time problems before you shoot your mouth off again.

That section says there are wait times for elective surgery... so what? It does nothing to debunk the claim of the other article and doesn't say there aren't wait times for required surgery as well.

Reading is fundamental... try taking a course.

Here... I will help you out. Try the very first paragraph from that link you are talking about. It talks about the wait times for the required stuff.

The 10 Year Plan outlines strategic investments directed toward reducing waiting times for access to care, especially for cancer, heart, diagnostic imaging, joint replacement and sight restoration services. To support the reduction of wait times, the Federal Government committed to investing $4.5 billion over the next six years, beginning in 2004-05, in the Wait Times Reduction Fund.

Now notice they are talking about spending billions to try and reduce the wait times. Of course maybe you think things like cancer surgery, or heart surgery aren't very time sensitive or required.

Now also that the first link I supplied was talking about the information in this exact paragraph. I will quote it again just so you don't miss it:

"Despite government promises and the billions of dollars funnelled into the Canadian health-care system, the average patient waited more than 18 weeks in 2007 between seeing their family doctor and receiving the surgery or treatment they required," said Nadeem Esmail, director of Health System Performance Studies at the Fraser Institute and co-author of the 17th annual edition of Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada

Wow... despite the billions being spent in the first paragraph I quoted, the wait times for those REQUIRED surgeries as late as 2007 were still on average of 18 weeks. Imagine that.

You truly are a shameless and moronic hack.

Here... I will help you out. Try the very first paragraph from that link you are talking about. It talks about the wait times for the required stuff.

So they are spending money to reduce wait times. What does this prove?

Now notice they are talking about spending billions to try and reduce the wait times. Of course maybe you think things like cancer surgery, or heart surgery aren't very time sensitive or required.

Unfortunately for you, they are talking about elective surgery.

Now also that the first link I supplied was talking about the information in this exact paragraph. I will quote it again just so you don't miss it:

You can repeat it as many times as you like, the fact remains they are talking about elective surgery (a type of surgery) and this remains a right-wing think tank. One of their stated goals (despite the wishes of the majority of Canadians) is to end single payer health care. Why should anyone believe what they say? Do you have access to their raw data? Their methods?

You have failed to prove that 18-week wait times are for emergency, life threatening surgery and your insistence on waving around a report concocted by a right wing think tank and some weak link with a government site as proof hasn't helped.
Perhaps you'd have better luck pushing your bullshit on someone who has not been treated in the Canadian health care system.

So they are spending money to reduce wait times. What does this prove?

It proves they have wait times for required surgeries... you know, like the ones they mention by name (ie. cancer, heart, etc.) instead of just "elective" surgeries like you tried to claim.

So the question is, was your claim that it was only elective surgeries a lie or just a case of no reading comprehension skills?

Unfortunately for you, they are talking about elective surgery.

Nope... that was a totally different section. There is nothing on that page to suggest that the first paragraph had anything to do with electives.

Imagine that! A page that can talk about more than one class of surgery! Wonders never cease.

So they are spending money to reduce wait times. What does this prove?

It proves they have wait times for required surgeries... you know, like the ones they mention by name (ie. cancer, heart, etc.) instead of just "elective" surgeries like you tried to claim.

So the question is, was your claim that it was only elective surgeries a lie or just a case of no reading comprehension skills?

Unfortunately for you, they are talking about elective surgery.

Nope... that was a totally different section. There is nothing on that page to suggest that the first paragraph had anything to do with electives.

Imagine that! A page that can talk about more than one class of surgery! Wonders never cease.

#24 | Posted by moomanfl

Are you trying to be funny? There is only one page dealing with wait times:

www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/qual/
acces/wait-attente/index-
eng.php

Maybe you mean the one in French? LOL!

All we have so far is that the Canadian government has spent $4.5 dollars to reduce the wait times for elective surgery. Your think tank source is not credible and your claims about the government site are at this point laughable.

Go to bed. You need the rest.

Some real info:

All we have so far is that the Canadian government has spent $4.5 dollars to reduce the wait times for elective surgery.

Yeah... cancer and heart surgery is "elective".

I can see it now: "You know, I was going to get that Winnebago but I thought I would get a triple bypass and a pacemaker just for the hell of it instead."

There is nothing on that page to suggest that the wait times only apply to elective surgeries.

Some real info:

www.ryananddebi.com

www.amsa.org

www.nowpublic.com

www.oregonlive.com

localhealthguideonline.com

By your own standards every single one of those sites can be ignored due to ideological bias.

By your own standards every single one of those sites can be ignored due to ideological bias.

#28 | Posted by moomanfl

My own standards include proof of bias. You haven't met those standards.
Your arguments are dead. You have nothing left but your small-mindedness, your ignorance and your fear. The core of the conservative mind.

My own standards include proof of bias. You haven't met those standards.
Your arguments are dead. You have nothing left but your small-mindedness, your ignorance and your fear. The core of the conservative mind.

Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2009-09-10 05:40 AM | Reply

AMEN

Wait Times in Canada
www.hc-sc.gc.ca
Sorry if the facts hurt.

Your link goes tio a Canadian government site that ackowkleges the wait times as an issue of concern for Canada and details a specific plan involving increased cash over a ten year period to ease sed wait times?

WTF does that 18 week figure even mean, btw?

Wait times are determined by need and circumstances and wait time for different procedures are all different.

Fact is Canada insures every Canadian for a smaller percentage of GDP that the US and does so w/o all the family destroying bankrupcis the American system tolerates due to corporate over-influence and an over-consolidation/collusion aspect to the industry that has created a virtual monopoly.

The fact that the American government has buckled to pressure from Big Pharma over and over again should prove instructive fer those who are really looking at this thing.

Sorry if the facts hurt.

Be Well.

Really?
#7 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2009-09-09 06:03 PM

Have they started talking about 'death panels'?
#7 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2009-09-09 06:03 PM

You guys are pathetic. I hope that at least you're getting paid by the insurance companies for your efforts, otherwise you'd be doubly pathetic.
#7 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2009-09-09 06:03 PM