yes. my solution to the plethora of problems in the healthcare debate is charitable hospitals

3/29/2010 9:55:57 PM

couldnt help it

3/29/2010 10:19:52 PM

great video on Romney defending his healthcare reform while trying to bash the virtually identical obamacare

3/30/2010 1:49:40 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/29/obomneycare-the-ultimate_n_517218.html

3/30/2010 2:35:22 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/29/sebelius-to-insurers-its_n_517683.html

Brief summation is that the HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is putting a warning out to insurance companies to quit looking for loopholes in the HCR package because she'll be writing regulations to close those as soon as they're found.

I worry that her mouth's writing checks that Mr. I-Cave-Under-The-Slightest-Republican-Pressure-Bama won't let her cash. She should take a walk down the street and ask Eric Holder how well it's working out for him.

[Edited on March 30, 2010 at 7:09 AM. Reason : /]

3/30/2010 7:09:11 AM

This back and forth was from another thread:

Quote :

"Optimum: Watch the Republicants negotiate in bad faith with the Democrats again (just like they did with healthcare reform), and then come out and say, "neener neener you will fail you socialist!" And before you call bullshit on that, let me introduce you to someone... Chuck Grassley."

Quote :

"aaronburro: too bad they never even got a chance to negotiate on healthcare when it mattered, if even at all"

Quote :

"Optimum: What do you call all of the months leading up to the August recess townhall bullshit? That wasn't a series of negotiations in committees?"

Quote :

"aaronburro: no, it wasn't negotiations that seriously included Republicans. They locked them out of the proceedings, for crying out loud"

Grassley was definitely not locked out of the proceedings of the Senate Finance Committee when the public option was dropped for his appeasement. Grassley later remarked that, regardless of what was in the bill, he would vote against it.

By the way, are there credible citations for all the reports of Obamacare back-room deals and bribery?

4/1/2010 10:51:15 PM

The funny part is that a lot of the more popular provisions in the bill (like kids staying on their parents health insurance until 26) were actually GOP ideas, but they will get absolutely no credit for it. They screwed themselves sooooooo bad on this one.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36138702/ns/health-health_care/

Quote :

"Congress voted to overhaul the health care system on a Sunday. On Monday, Patti Lawson e-mailed her employer's human resources office to ask how soon she could get her 22-year-old daughter back on her health insurance. In about six months, the new law will allow at least 2 million young adults to be covered under their parents' policies. These are the "millennials," those who came of age in the new century and now are struggling to get on their feet during the worst slump since the Depression."

[Edited on April 2, 2010 at 8:41 AM. Reason : :]

4/2/2010 8:40:37 AM

nvm

4/3/2010 1:29:44 PM

It'd be great if the MSM would focus on the substance of the bill, rather than the overheated rhetoric. Most of the headliner stories have been about the battle, and not about the content. It's only recently where they've talked specifics, and even that has been colored by partisan skew.

4/3/2010 1:41:54 PM

Pretty sure liberals don't want to talk about the specifics of the bill, because the bill fucking sucks. We've been over why the bill doesn't solve the problems, and will actually cause the problems to get worse, in this very thread. No one cares about those objections. It always ends up boiling down to "uhhhhh...the insurance companies are evil, so we have to legislate!" It's easier to just write off anyone that disagrees as a racist/tea party nazi/partisan/whatever.

It's too late for debate at this point, though. My only hope is that this gets to the Supreme Court and the unconstitutional requirement for people to buy health insurance gets shut down. If SCOTUS doesn't declare it unconstitutional, then we've entered a new era of mob rule.

4/3/2010 3:02:32 PM

You live in a fantasy world. Democrats have been falling over themselves on Sunday talk shows, blogs, etc., to talk about particulars. Wilfully ignoring that doesn't make your "pretty suredness" correct.

Quote :

"It's easier to just write off anyone that disagrees as a racist/tea party nazi/partisan/whatever."

Considering the behavior of the vocal elements of the tea party people, that's pretty much what happened. You can't tell us that calling Barney Frank a "faggot," James Clyburn a "nigger," or spitting on others are the actions of a group of peep that are anything other than what you described. Is that all of them? Of course not, but bringing up that point is just making your argument look foolish.

4/3/2010 4:13:05 PM

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233890

Quote :

"When asked about Obama's plan (without being given any details about what the legislation includes), 49 percent opposed it and 40 percent were in favor. But after hearing key features of the legislation described, 48 percent supported the plan and 43 percent remained opposed"

That was a couple months ago, but still an interesting result which would seem to go along with what Optimum was saying.

4/3/2010 6:22:32 PM

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.

A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

4/4/2010 3:50:20 PM

why didn't anyone think of that earlier?!? all i need to do is CHOOSE a job that provides it. it's so simple!

4/5/2010 2:23:27 AM

DIBS ON CEO!

4/5/2010 2:32:34 AM

Quote :

"all i need to do is CHOOSE a job that provides it. it's so simple! "

Is there a govt official that helps you CHOOSE what to eat tonight? Or by luck do you somehow manage in this cruel world.

4/5/2010 10:09:19 AM

There are government programs that will help you eat a meal tonight if you can't afford it.

4/5/2010 11:31:43 AM

I hear rumors of private and nonprofits that will do that too. wierd huh.

But my question was directly to sarijoul who doesnt seem able to CHOOSE anything without help.

4/5/2010 5:45:26 PM

I could be wrong, but I think sarijoul was suggesting that obtaining a job with those benefits isn't as simple as just choosing one.

4/5/2010 6:28:36 PM

I get that, however picking an insurance plan is as easy as picking a cell phone carrier, without the commitment. (for most, esp the young/healthy)

This is to his response to going out and shopping for it or getting a job with one. He took the victim role, not surprising, of being helpless of not being able to CHOOSE a job with health ins, while ignoring the fact he can CHOOSE to buy his own. Like he can choose his own meals without assistance. Im assuming, maybe he cant.

[Edited on April 5, 2010 at 6:44 PM. Reason : .]

4/5/2010 6:38:50 PM

Quote :

"Considering the behavior of the vocal elements of the tea party people, that's pretty much what happened. You can't tell us that calling Barney Frank a "faggot," James Clyburn a "nigger," or spitting on others are the actions of a group of peep that are anything other than what you described."

too bad there is no evidence that this actually occurred. hundreds of cameras, and not a one picked it up. amazing!

4/5/2010 8:29:13 PM

Quote :

" In 2009 alone, 936 people signed up for coverage with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts for three months or less and … [paid a monthly premium of] $400, but [had] average claims [that] exceeded $2,200 per month. … Governor Deval Patrick recently filed legislation that state regulators believe will help fix the problem, by restricting insurance enrollment to twice a year for people who buy on the open market and allowing waiting periods before coverage kicks in. … It would also bring back the rule allowing insurers to exclude coverage for preexisting conditions for six months, or impose a similar waiting period under certain conditions for people buying coverage on their own. … Consumer advocates said they aren’t convinced that a lot of people are gaming the system, and they said that many of the individuals buying on the open market are likely those who are between jobs, new to the state, or have some other legitimate reason to buy coverage for a short period."

http://theincidentaleconomist.com/gaming-the-individual-mandate-in-massachusetts/

4/5/2010 9:32:13 PM

If you are really between jobs, doesn't COBRA let you use your previous insurer for a while?

4/5/2010 9:59:37 PM

for $texas

4/5/2010 10:02:11 PM

Understandable, but still, an option.

4/5/2010 10:06:08 PM

^^^ There is also temporary insurance from most companies as well, which I had when I was between jobs. It was real simple, I called up my company and said I was going between jobs and wanted to know what their temporary insurance options were. They had a simple $2000 deductible plan that covered 100% of everything past the deductible for $130 / month that I could remain on for as long as a year.

4/6/2010 7:38:59 AM

Quote :

"for $texas "

Not really, Cobra is being subsidized up to 80%, I believe, now. Had a patient talk about Cobra one day and we searched for other insurance options but the subsidized cobra was, by far, the best deal.

4/6/2010 9:09:24 AM

Remember kids, Healthcare Reform is a BFD.

And the winner is...
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/fbtshirtpollwinner/

4/13/2010 9:57:53 PM

I am very tempted to order one of those shirts.

Very tempted indeed.

Take the warhbblgrbll, turn it into lulz. That's the way you sell an idea!

4/14/2010 9:49:51 AM

Limbaugh thinks the Icelandic volcano eruption is God's response to healthcare reform in America...
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201004160035

Conservatives, please, please defend him.

4/17/2010 8:22:11 PM

I assure you that, if there was a God, and it was to reply to the healthcare bill, I think it would do more than set off an active volcano in an isolated area on another fucking continent that appears it will result in about a weeks worth of inconvenience.

Instead, I think the proper response would be something like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ_sBTSfXQ4

4/17/2010 8:56:52 PM

I love how God is punishing Europe for the US doing something.

4/17/2010 9:12:50 PM

I know. But it's just the typical Rush Limbaugh non-sensical pandering that God fearing christians buy into. The idea that God would punish a country for trying to expand coverage Americans is a bit contradictory to what the Bible teaches about the religion...

But no matter what Rush says, there will be sheeple who will take his word like that of God...

4/17/2010 9:21:06 PM

Quote :

"Limbaugh thinks the Icelandic volcano eruption is God's response to healthcare reform in America..."

Now that cant be right. I saw a scientist on the news saying it was from global warming. no shit, im sure rush was joking, this idiot was not.

4/18/2010 12:05:17 AM

Someone blaming global warming for a volcano eruption is pretty hard to defend. If anything, the volcanic debris in the air will have an effect on global warming, not the other way around.

4/18/2010 12:21:26 AM

^I agree. There is a chapter in Superfreakonomics about how after these eruptions large amount of sulfur is put into the stratosphere which has shown to lower global temp. So one of the "solutions" if you think we have to do something quickly is to put more sulfur into the stratosphere and control how much goes up.

It should be interesting to see what happens from this eruption.

4/18/2010 10:15:20 AM

^thats such an idiotic statement. Sulfer is highly toxic for starters and blocks incoming radiation which would have a hugely negative biological effect on the planet (not even including the sulfuric acid rain). This is the kind of thing that nearly wiped out all life 65mya so suggesting it could somehow help us is idiotic.

The scientist was probably claiming global warming reduced the size of the glacier on top of the volcano allowing it to erupt early due to less pressure on the magma pocket.

4/18/2010 11:19:30 AM

Wow, so much ignorance. We do have search engines.

The idea is to put sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, extremely small amounts (in effect, diverting the current emissions of an average coal fired power plant higher into the atmosphere). Acid rain would actually decrease, since the gas in question would now be out of reach of rain. And I was unaware putting just a few tons of a SO2 into the upper atmosphere would be extinction worthy, since we already emit thousands of tons of SO2 into the lower atmosphere with minimal devastation.

4/18/2010 11:39:19 AM

so2 has to be converted into acid rain for the cooling characteristics to take place. thats where you're messing up.

and minimal devestation? have you been up to mt mitchell lately?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTIaQHEYwV8

4/18/2010 11:50:08 AM

we pump far more tons of sulfer into the atmosphere than they mention pumping into the stratosphere. And here is the kicker, we actually have proof this works, and its low cost.

You can find a lot of GWers trying to dismiss it, but they do have an idea that would work if we really fear the doomsday scenerio. imo

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1931993,00.html

4/18/2010 12:01:32 PM

We're not going to cut our hand off to keep our foot from itching.

4/18/2010 12:06:33 PM

WTF are you talking about?

4/18/2010 12:08:33 PM

The problem with the sulfur idea is that it's risky. We know the earth works great without it, it's been like that for years, we could put sulfur up there and it might work, or it might cause some problem that's way worse, so I say let's see if we can keep it from getting too bad just by turning our lights of and using light colored shingles and shit like that.

4/18/2010 12:11:08 PM

I can understand that arguement, however we KNOW what happens, nature has been doing it for us. They arent suggesting that its the solution, only that if you believe in this doomsday idea that we do something that WORKS and is CHEAP to buy time. Instead of relying on carbon credits to save us quickly. haha

And really we are dumping much more into the atmosphere already, they just want to put it higher so it will do some good.(again, if you believe we need to cool things off quickly)

[Edited on April 18, 2010 at 12:17 PM. Reason : .]

4/18/2010 12:14:58 PM

and we have already DESTROYED entire ecosystems because of so2. I don't know what pllanet you live on but I live on one where sulfuric acid is poisonous to terrestrial life forms.

4/18/2010 3:04:21 PM

Quote :

"so2 has to be converted into acid rain for the cooling characteristics to take place."

acid rain is rain, it falls from the sky. Water on the ground, whatever it's chemical make-up, cannot have a cooling effect.

Quote :

"The problem with the sulfur idea is that it's risky...or it might cause some problem that's way worse"

I guess you have read nothing about this at all. Nature has done this experiment several times already, we have seen and measured the effects. Do you have any possible mechanism for this technique to cause a problem? This technique is cheap, proven effective, we understand the science behind it, and the effect goes away quickly should we ever choose to turn it off.

4/18/2010 4:04:49 PM

Why is the Healthcare Thread now a global warming thread?

4/18/2010 4:10:11 PM

Because mambatroll is at it again.

4/18/2010 4:13:23 PM

It is not the only reason. People are also bored with healthcare, but the GW thread is too far to scroll to.

4/18/2010 4:22:03 PM

sulfur dioxide has to mix with water and become some sulfate aerosol to have a cooling effect. plain so2 doesn't have a cooling effect before this happens. the biproduct is sulfuric acid which leads to acid rain. Until you realize this, you will continue to sound dumb.

4/18/2010 4:39:51 PM