Free health care is ours for the taking; we need
only support current legislation. It makes sense
on so many levels; why can't reich-wingers grasp it?
Simply unbelievable.

A vote for free health care means:
1. NO to greedy hospitals
2. NO NO to selfish doctors.
3. NO NO NO to heartless insurance companies.

Be Well.

@Skip - you are an idiot

What we will have is

No Hospitals
No Doctors and
No insurance companies

see how this helps you when you get sick

What we will have is

No Hospitals
No Doctors and
No insurance companies

see how this helps you when you get sick

#2 | Posted by Thermo at 2009-11-29 10:44 PM

Prove it.

If you're going to make wild ass claims, at least back them up.

Other developed countries provide healthcare for their citizens and have done so for a very long time.

America supplies the health care via the ER to millions of illegal aliens and their children; education to those alien children and American prisons are full of illegal aliens who have committed the most heinous crimes imaginable and THEIR healthcare is provided for.

America also spends billions of dollars overseas to aid and assist people who absolutely despise America and, who invariably kill or maim or mutilate American citizens, businessmen, or soldiers.

America even paid for the college education and medical education and residency of Army Major Hasan.

American drug companies and hospitals and insurance companies have RAPED the U.S. Treasury and continue to do so under the status quo.

American manufacturers like GM have been bankrupted in part for providing for the healthcare of their workers.

Although America does not constitutionally guarantee health care for members of Congress or the President, these people certainly enjoy the best healthcare possible on the face of the Earth and these same politicians will readily deny American citizens the smallest portion of what they take for granted and demand for themselves and their families.

For these reasons, America is long overdue for healthcare reform.

Those who don't remember the Soviet economy seemed doomed to repeat it.

In the Soviet economy grain was MORE expensive than bread (one example of MANY). This was because the overlords wanted to keep basic food stuffs reasonably priced.

The result of those 'good intentions' was WORSE suffering.

A real, legit and honest NEED does NOT make something a "right". No even if it kills you.

#6
so you support death panels?

Depends what you mean by a "death panel".

No one has any right to tell me how I'll spend my money or use my purchased insurance.

If I'm on charity, however, I'm not owed a damn thing. Not even if it kills me.

This does not mean charity won't happen. It will. I had a job disappear from under me just as I had a cancer show up. The world is full of good people and I encountered a number of them. But I NEVER deluded myself that I was "owed" anything. I even refused some follow up care until I could pay for it. Yes, that added risk to my life, but I don't have a RIGHT to other people's money or service, not even for my life. AND YOU DON'T EITHER.

The docs are good people. As long as they can keep the doors open, they'll treat people, and balance it out by charging elsewhere. In some cases, like mine, their charity will be paid for in full (plus a gift). In others, it wont be, for good reasons and bad ones (kids from poor families being a good reason, deadbeats that feel that the world 'owes' them care being a bad reason....)

I agree this a sad story. The world is full of sad stories. It still doesn't justify the damage that would be done by turning over the health care industry to the government. The article states that the reason a surgeon will not operate is because reimbursements are low. That's Medicaid reimbursements. That one word being left out makes all the difference. What makes anyone think that's going to change?

There are already death panels. I have witnessed them at work firsthand with my grandparents and, now, parents. Right now, they are called "xxx insurance company".
And it doesn't matter if you have the finest policy. Or AAA policies. Or multiple policies. The way the insurance companies go about their murdering is by limiting surgical procedures, hospital stays, access to drugs, aftercare, nursing care and nursing homes. Like today's judiciary that has no effective citizen safety valve review since the abolishment of parole, it all depends on the "discretion" of the insurance company. That "discretion" is basically the interpretation of the rules by the insurance company. It is very much like going down to buy a car and you ask the price of the car and the salesman asks you: "How much ya got?"

At least with a real death panel, there would be an appeal process. With the "discretionary" hodgepodge insurance company interpretations of Medicare's rules, there is nothing but BS. And I mean tons of it. Meanwhile, you get to witness the un-necessary suffering of your parents and you know that in a few years, YOUR TURN IS NEXT.

#10 | Posted by XRESETX Flag: Newsworthy

you have to love the republican party screw em, they dont need health care, just a better diet

you have to love the republican party screw em, they dont need health care, just a better diet

#12 | Posted by Georgeisadrunk at 2009-11-30 07:32 AM | Reply | Flag: explains a lot

Try addressing the issue when you are sober, Georgie

Yep Republicans and some Democrats. Greedy bastards who think as long as they have theirs fuck You is what they say. It's sad that they have to be so greedy.

Larry

Last I checked, the Dumbos run the whole show. Every single bad case of people dying because the Dems didn't give them a whole bunch of free stuff, is their fault.

I'm waiting for the Dems to give me free car payments, rent, and chocolate ice cream.

Fortunately for the free-healthcare-for-everyone crowd, the country has a lot of money. It's not like we're running titanic deficits already just to keep tens of millions of government and university workers overpaid, and investment banks and hedge funds running. We need to find some use for these gigantic surpluses we've got going. May as well use it on health care.

Gobama! Godems!

Fortunately for the free-healthcare-for-everyone crowd, the country has a lot of money. It's not like we're running titanic deficits already just to keep tens of millions of government and university workers overpaid, and investment banks and hedge funds running. We need to find some use for these gigantic surpluses we've got going. May as well use it on health care.

Gobama! Godems!

Posted by rightisright at 2009-11-30 08:27 AM | Reply

You know what RIR I don't want to hear You bellyaching about the Pro Public Option crowd. You supported the Illegal Iraq War that will cost over 3 TRILLION Dollars if not more. You can support spending on killing people but You yell about Taxpayer money spent healing people. Unfuckingbelievable.

Larry

#16 | Posted by rightisright

When you've mastered that one-note comb buzzer you might consider moving onto the more versatile kazoo.

With an open health care system, at least we would get something for our money, unlike the biggest crime in the evolutionary history of man the fucking bailout, or the war in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Vietnam. Wall Street and this country's military industrial complex has sucked the life out of our standard of living. Lack of universal health care has compromised our competitiveness compared to other Industrialized countries. Its all bullshit and its bad for you.

Everyday someone dies crossing the street, there is no end in site of humman misery that the liberals won't try to explot.

If the same people who in charge of security at the state dinner the other night run the health care system John would still be left out on the street.

When you've mastered that one-note comb buzzer you might consider moving onto the more versatile kazoo.

#18 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Good arguement for "FREE" healthcare. You are right on track again today dok.

Free healthcare is not a "RIGHT". A lib grabing money out of my pocket is not a "RIGHT". Rights do not come at the expense of others.

if brownie were still employed by the u s government....blah blah blah. The moral question is, will the U S maintain a political/economic system where people are not able to get/have health insurance. pretty simple issue actually. three people who have no health insurance die in the emergency room for every one that has health insurance.

The free marketeers, seem to ignore the fact the business model for health insurance is not to provide health care, but to generate a profit from premiums. This is not free market economics. Ever looked at a hospital bill after the insurance adjustment? A $10K procedure reduced to $2K. The insurance middleman distorts the true price of medical care to make insurance necessary. If medical care isn't priced high people would only buy catastrophic coverage and insurance companies would not be so profitable.
Even more egregious to the uninsured is the fact that the contentedly insured are receiving untaxed compensation in the form of employer contributions to health insurance which are deductible to the company. Effectively this is a tax payer supported subsidy that the working uninsured are paying for.
Not to mention that more and more employers are reducing or eliminating health insurance benefits. The peak was around 62% in 2000 has been falling since.
The most adamant antagonists against a single payer system are only an accident or disease away from belief.
Why couldn't public and private payer medical care be structured the same as private and public colleges? They both exist and prosper in the marketplace.

Re: #18 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Rights are always at the expense of others, visit Arlington.

you are preaching to pukes who listen to sarah palin talk about death panels and they believe her. not a bright group. candidly, the majority of that group reflect that our college system us badly broken

#22 | Posted by Sniper

You've been ditching your reading comprehension course again, haven't you, Snoops?

The idiots will continue to rant. Let it be hoped that our lawgivers in Washington follow their common sense (!) - reform the health industry and ignore death panelists and fruitcakes who call mitigating corporate greed turning over their medical care to the dreaded government. These idiots will continue to fight tooth and nail against their own well-being. They deserve not to get it. herm

"You've been ditching your reading comprehension course again, haven't you, Snoops?"
#27 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Hey, fakedoc, try a little reading comprehension yourself.

From the story: "indeed, the closest E.R. has told him not to come back, he says."

Get that last part? "he says"

This whole thread is based on what one guy claims the ER told him and may not even be true.

ER's cannot turn down someone in an emergency.

Bullshit. Absolute Bullshit. ERs cannot turn anyone away. Period. Federal law. Please feel free to walk into any local hospital and read the clearly visible signs saying so. This kind of fallacious bullshit is getting really old. Unfortunately there are so many Obamabots putterfucking their way through life believing anything they're told by the NYT or the Huffington Post and slupring the KoolAid by the barrel. The cranial-rectal immersion of these fools is mind boggling, but understood, considering who they're electing these days.

If illegal aliens with no health insurance can get emergency care I'm sure that John Brodniak can also get care.

"ERs cannot turn anyone away. Period. Federal law."

That's about the dumbest justification not to fix the system I've ever heard: Gee, it's too expensive now, so let's go to the ER.

You can support spending on killing people but You yell about Taxpayer money spent healing people. Unfuckingbelievable.

Larry

#17 | Posted by LarryMohr
* * * *

Good thinking.

Imagine, if we hadn't bothered taking on the Nazis and the Japs and the Italians, then rebuilding Europe afterward, we could have had free health care for all Americans two generations ago!

That selfish bastard FDR. Germany never attacked us.

Make Love. Not War. So we can spend the money on me.

#29 | Posted by FreddyK

Jeezus, another candidate whose name goes finds a place on the ever-expanding roster of DR posters sorely in need of a reading comprehension class.

FreddyK - On a scale of 1 to 5, how successful would you rate the neurosurgical procedure that resulted in a separation of the connections coming to and going from your prefrontal cortex?

"That's about the dumbest justification not to fix the system I've ever heard"

I'm not trying to justify not fixing the system, it's fuckin' broke. But the basis of this argument, and so many others, is bullshit. At least argue with legitimate facts, not fantasies like these.

"FreddyK - On a scale of 1 to 5, how successful would you rate the neurosurgical procedure that resulted in a separation of the connections coming to and going from your prefrontal cortex?"

#35 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Don't care but I would rate your medical knowledge as a 0 on a 1 to 5 scale.

"FreddyK - On a scale of 1 to 5, how successful would you rate the neurosurgical procedure that resulted in a separation of the connections coming to and going from your prefrontal cortex?"
#35 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Don't care but I would rate your medical knowledge as a 0 on a 1 to 5 scale.
#37 | Posted by FreddyK

Soooo...that would be a 5 (maximum effectiveness) for execution and a 2 (mediocre) in the results department. Just checking. Thanks.

"Exotic Journeys to Wellness" Does this really sound like a journey for someone who "can't afford" health insurance? More BS. Anyone here willing to head down to Mexico because they don't like their local hospital, of a major medical center in a nearby city? Anyone? There's a reason people from all over the world come to the States for medical care. While I can't speak for India, it seems a well known fact that many Indians come to the States for their medical schooling. If their systems are so good, why is that? Which begs another question, what happens to the high-end medical centers and medical schools under a government-run health care system? It'll be a sad state of affairs when Mexico really does become a viable alternative to US care.

"Quite possibly the crappiest NYTimes column for Obamacare ever"

"How crappy is this piece? Let us count the ways:

1) Crappy journalism. Read through the column and you won't find a single doctor, hospital official, or Oregon Medicaid official quoted.

As for why Brodniak hasn't been able to get the surgery he says he needs, all we have is this:
John says the principal obstacle to treatment appears to be simply his lack of insurance.

And why won't any doctor do the surgery? All we have is what Brodniak told Kristof:
In August, he qualified for an Oregon Medicaid program, but he hasn't been able to find a doctor who will accept him as a patient for surgery, apparently because the reimbursements are so low.

2) Crappy emotionalism. The column leaves the tear-jerking impression that Brodniak is just inches away from dying for lack of health insurance and that he is a shining example of why, in Kristof's words, "universal coverage" is so "urgent."

But, um, Kristof himself reports an inconvenient fact in his overwrought column: Brodniak has government health insurance!

So, the problem isn't the absence of a government-run safety net. The problem is apparently too-low reimbursements in his case.

And Kristof apparently is too busy gnashing his teeth about heartless politicians and greedy doctors to think about what Obamacare would actually do to solve what he and Brodniak assert is the underlying problem.

3) Crappy follow-up. Kristof leaves the distinct and dire impression that Brodniak's wife and children were also cruelly left out in the cold and that only "universal coverage" can save them all!"

"Soooo...that would be a 5 (maximum effectiveness) for execution and a 2 (mediocre) in the results department. Just checking. Thanks."

#39 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Fakedoc you are a sad case. You didn't read the article carefully and when it's pointed out that the whole thing is a sham you try to deflect your poor reading skills with attacks.

Sorry you are such a loser!

"You didn't read the article carefully..."

Freddy, you poor, stoopid schmuck, I haven't commented on the article but on what other posters had to say. Grow a pair and tell your reading teacher you want a refund.

#26 | Posted by Georgeisadrunk

you are preaching to pukes who listen to sarah palin talk about death panels and they believe her. not a bright group. candidly, the majority of that group reflect that our college system us badly broken
-----------------
I think your post reflect that our college system is badly broken.

California has everything you liberals advocate, and is is on the verge of bankrupcy.

Texas on the other hand is the exact oposite, and is doing just fine.

So to say that people who don't support a Government take over of the health care sector are ignorant when all the big government states are in finacial trouble and have much higher costs of living, than I'd rather be ignorant.

PS: Freddy, I'm still giving your lobotomy a 5 (high) for execution but I think the results department score needs to be adjusted downward to a 1 (mediocre-minus). Nothing personal; it's a performance-based rating system.

You've been ditching your reading comprehension course again, haven't you, Snoops?

#27 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

And you have been laying on the sofa, licking yourself.

#46 | Posted by Sniper Flag: Getting Excited

"Freddy, you poor, stoopid schmuck, I haven't commented on the article but on what other posters had to say. Grow a pair and tell your reading teacher you want a refund."

#43 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Sorry, I appoligize. I thought you were with the program instead of off in la la land as usual.

My mistake for thinking you could stay on task, moron.

"My mistake for thinking you could stay on task"

Oh, Freddy, poor, falling behind, never quite catching up Freddy. Why do you assume that whatever simple-minded, mind-numbingly repetitious, dull-normal task you set for yourself -- each day, another herculean labor with which you must contend -- is the same activity in which everyone else either is or should be engaged?

Oh, right, 5 for execution on that lobotomy and a 1 for results. No further explanation required, Freddy.

"Oh, right, 5 for execution on that lobotomy and a 1 for results. No further explanation required, Freddy." (simple-minded, mind-numbingly repetitious)

#49 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Hurry with those fries fakedoc! The drive thru is backing up!

Rights do not come at the expense of others.

#22 | POSTED BY SNIPER AT 2009-11-30 10:47 AM

ahh.... actually, it does. Your right to do what you wish stops when it interferes with mine to do the same. It turns out that our whole system is based on a series of compromises...

go figure.

So, in this ever evolving country of ours, it becomes whatever we choose it to become (another benefit of a 'living Constitution').
If we choose to codify the explicit need to care for our brethren, then so be it.

Does that seem to conflict with the whole 'don't interfere with my rights' thing? Yes, it does. And the whole 'don't interfere with my rights' thing is also based on that 'living Constitution.'

Hmmm.... it'll be interesting to see which wins out...

I mean, it's not like we'd expect the Christiany-bootstrappers to actually want to pitch in to help the least among us -- like Jesus says -- right?