APP - Harkin says bribes are just "small stuff"

apple0154 said:
I would rather see those requiring help receiving it even if that means the occasional person abuses the system rather than by ensuring abuse does not occur it results in some people in need not being helped.


.
Click to expand...

Because you buy power with other peoples money.

Totalitarians LOVE IT when the population is dependant.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Because you buy power with other peoples money.

Totalitarians LOVE IT when the population is dependant.
Click to expand...

More nonsense.

People want to improve their lives. The ones who are dependent on government help are ill or uneducated or, in some way, having difficulty getting ahead. Instead of continually seeking ways to cut their benefits by way of adding entitlement restrictions we should be helping them. Empowering them. Not belittling them.

A healthy, happy person is not going to be content to live at a subsistence level.
 
apple, sorry to interupt in this thread again but what's your take on Obama promising to air the health care deliberations on C-SPAN and now not doing it from a leadership perspective?
 
Sorry to interupt a second time apple but as I think about it are you in favor of an imperial presidency where Congress and the Fed are suppose to do what the President says because he is the Supreme Leader? That's the impression I have gotten after our discussion of what leadership entails and the role of the President.
 
cawacko said:
apple, sorry to interupt in this thread again but what's your take on Obama promising to air the health care deliberations on C-SPAN and now not doing it from a leadership perspective?
Click to expand...

My way of thinking is the health care debate is like a trial. Many government reps are lawyers backed by big money and powerful interests. Having the debate public would be like having a trial where everything is admissible and the jurors going home every night to watch the spin on the news. Add to that people contacting the jurors and trying to persuade them to vote a certain way and you can see it's highly unlikely "justice" would be done.

Waiting lists become rationed care. End of life counseling becomes death panels. Whatever story can best be spun to incite and shock will make the news.

If universal medical was something new, never tried or implemented anywhere else, then a full examination of everything, regardless of how far-fetched, would be appropriate. If it took years, so be it. But such is not the case.

There isn't any country one can point to and say it switched back to the old system or any country in which the majority of citizens want to switch back. Universal medical has proven itself to be the most economical and efficient system in practice today.

With the current debt and the economy being sluggish if health care doesn't pass "today" it will be buried for a long time and history has shown us it doesn't take much to bury it.

I think one has to realize it's not about negotiating the best plan. It's about crossing the line Senator Harkin talked about. There are still a number of years before the plan goes into effect during which there will be plenty of time to seriously study other universal plans and do the necessary fine tuning.

Not one opponent has said let's take the French plan and change "this" or let's take the British plan and change "that" or the Australian plan or the Canadian plan and make adjustments.

So, to answer your question airing the deliberations on C-SPAN would be the death knell and that's not an option. It is better for Obama to break his word on airing the hearings than to let them go ahead knowing we'll end up with the same old, same old.

We must forge ahead.
 
apple0154 said:
My way of thinking is the health care debate is like a trial. Many government reps are lawyers backed by big money and powerful interests. Having the debate public would be like having a trial where everything is admissible and the jurors going home every night to watch the spin on the news. Add to that people contacting the jurors and trying to persuade them to vote a certain way and you can see it's highly unlikely "justice" would be done.

Waiting lists become rationed care. End of life counseling becomes death panels. Whatever story can best be spun to incite and shock will make the news.

If universal medical was something new, never tried or implemented anywhere else, then a full examination of everything, regardless of how far-fetched, would be appropriate. If it took years, so be it. But such is not the case.

There isn't any country one can point to and say it switched back to the old system or any country in which the majority of citizens want to switch back. Universal medical has proven itself to be the most economical and efficient system in practice today.

With the current debt and the economy being sluggish if health care doesn't pass "today" it will be buried for a long time and history has shown us it doesn't take much to bury it.

I think one has to realize it's not about negotiating the best plan. It's about crossing the line Senator Harkin talked about. There are still a number of years before the plan goes into effect during which there will be plenty of time to seriously study other universal plans and do the necessary fine tuning.

Not one opponent has said let's take the French plan and change "this" or let's take the British plan and change "that" or the Australian plan or the Canadian plan and make adjustments.

So, to answer your question airing the deliberations on C-SPAN would be the death knell and that's not an option. It is better for Obama to break his word on airing the hearings than to let them go ahead knowing we'll end up with the same old, same old.

We must forge ahead.
Click to expand...

So in essence the people's voice shouldn't be heard? How'd you feel about the pill bill Tom Delay jammed up our *ss during a private vote in the middle of the night?

Doesn't it scream out to you that if you are so afraid the people won't like what their elected officials are doing in their name that they have to hide it something might be a little off?
 
Waiting lists are A SYMPTOM of rationed care. care will be rationed. The death panels are the panels of experts who decide set the policies on who can receive which treatments. They will be deciding who dies. It's a death panel. They already tried to outlaw mammograms once to save money.
 
cawacko said:
So in essence the people's voice shouldn't be heard? How'd you feel about the pill bill Tom Delay jammed up our *ss during a private vote in the middle of the night?

Doesn't it scream out to you that if you are so afraid the people won't like what their elected officials are doing in their name that they have to hide it something might be a little off?
Click to expand...

I'm sure the proposed bill isn't anywhere near perfect but it comes back to what Senator Harkin said. We have to cross that line between health care being a privilege or a right. Once it's established it is a right then the current bill can be worked on and all people's input welcome.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Waiting lists are A SYMPTOM of rationed care. care will be rationed. The death panels are the panels of experts who decide set the policies on who can receive which treatments. They will be deciding who dies. It's a death panel. They already tried to outlaw mammograms once to save money.
Click to expand...

If a person does not have the money for health care are they not on a "waiting list", waiting to acquire enough money?

Doesn't every medical plan have experts who decide which treatments they will pay for? From interviews I've seen on TV and experiences of a family member it's not unusual for insurance companies to automatically deny coverage and wait to see of the client contests the decision.

By virtue of a plan being universal it has to cover more illnesses because it covers a more diverse group of people.

Finally, every country that implemented a universal plan never switched back and none are in the process of doing so. What more proof is needed?
 
apple0154 said:
If a person does not have the money for health care are they not on a "waiting list", waiting to acquire enough money?

Doesn't every medical plan have experts who decide which treatments they will pay for? From interviews I've seen on TV and experiences of a family member it's not unusual for insurance companies to automatically deny coverage and wait to see of the client contests the decision.

By virtue of a plan being universal it has to cover more illnesses because it covers a more diverse group of people.

Finally, every country that implemented a universal plan never switched back and none are in the process of doing so. What more proof is needed?
Click to expand...

The mythology of the "death list" concept being a sole result of the Obama health care plan has already been discredited, debunked, clarified and resolved by at least 2 months. To repeat these accusations is just sheer neocon parroting.
 
apple0154 said:
I'm sure the proposed bill isn't anywhere near perfect but it comes back to what Senator Harkin said. We have to cross that line between health care being a privilege or a right. Once it's established it is a right then the current bill can be worked on and all people's input welcome.
Click to expand...

You've become an idiot.
Go back to being cute, yoiu were much better at that.
 
apple0154 said:
If a person does not have the money for health care are they not on a "waiting list", waiting to acquire enough money?

Doesn't every medical plan have experts who decide which treatments they will pay for? From interviews I've seen on TV and experiences of a family member it's not unusual for insurance companies to automatically deny coverage and wait to see of the client contests the decision.

By virtue of a plan being universal it has to cover more illnesses because it covers a more diverse group of people.

Finally, every country that implemented a universal plan never switched back and none are in the process of doing so. What more proof is needed?
Click to expand...

We always have the right to pay out of pocket. This plan will eventually stop people from getting care even if they have the funds.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Just let me know, when you want to blow me.
Click to expand...

First you comment on my cuteness and then spin it around as if I was commenting on yours.

Typical Repub/Con tactic. Did it ever cross your mind maybe that's why Obama doesn't want to entertain the idea of a circus when it comes to health care?

There's no time for such childish nonsense.

Change. It's long overdue.
 
apple0154 said:
First you comment on my cuteness and then spin it around as if I was commenting on yours.

Typical Repub/Con tactic. Did it ever cross your mind maybe that's why Obama doesn't want to entertain the idea of a circus when it comes to health care?

There's no time for such childish nonsense.

Change. It's long overdue.
Click to expand...

you = stoopid
 
apple0154 said:
First you comment on my cuteness and then spin it around as if I was commenting on yours.

Typical Repub/Con tactic. Did it ever cross your mind maybe that's why Obama doesn't want to entertain the idea of a circus when it comes to health care?

There's no time for such childish nonsense.

Change. It's long overdue.
Click to expand...


Is this your way of playing hard to get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top