APP - snatching defeat from the jaws of victory

Damocles said:
This bill will not go into action for more than 5 years. Your own argument fails because you didn't read the legislation. If they pass this legislation right before the election cycle, it will remain one of the largest "oops" moments for a political party talked about for a long time to come. I'm cool with that. I hope all the Ds in Congress believe, like you do, that ignoring what their constituency tells them is the way to "win" when it is done right at the opening of an election cycle...
Click to expand...

hence my original post

how about a federal not state and federal version of medicaid

or a public option without gender bias, without refusing people that get sick too often or too much and refusing because of preexisting conditions or requiring insurance companies to do the aforementioned
 
Damocles said:
This bill will not go into action for more than 5 years. Your own argument fails because you didn't read the legislation. If they pass this legislation right before the election cycle, it will remain one of the largest "oops" moments for a political party talked about for a long time to come. I'm cool with that. I hope all the Ds in Congress believe, like you do, that ignoring what their constituency tells them is the way to "win" when it is done right at the opening of an election cycle...
Click to expand...

The town hall mob is not our constituency.
 
DonQuixote said:
hence my original post

how about a federal not state and federal version of medicaid

or a public option without gender bias, without refusing people that get sick too often or too much and refusing because of preexisting conditions or requiring insurance companies to do the aforementioned
Click to expand...
I'm all for a safety net system based on need that has a graduated form of premium payment until you reach a certain level. Fill the doughnut hole then attack the actual cost issue and come up with an actual solution that doesn't involve the government supposedly "competing" with private businesses.

Centralize regulations so that it is possible for smaller insurance companies to compete across the nation.. that is at least one step we can generally agree on.
 
DonQuixote said:
hence my original post

how about a federal not state and federal version of medicaid

or a public option without gender bias, without refusing people that get sick too often or too much and refusing because of preexisting conditions or requiring insurance companies to do the aforementioned
Click to expand...

One obvious advantage of expanding medicare to everybody would be that people already understand and don't fear the program. People would be able to keep their same doctor; they'd just be paying much less in taxes for healthcare than they were for insurance premiums, and they'd have a higher standard of care. Of course, any minor change you made would be hyperbolized to epic proportions, so you'd still be treading on thin water.
 
911America4EVER said:
The town hall mob is not our constituency.
Click to expand...
Nor is it the whole of those unsatisfied, just those more vocal. I don't pretend that they are the whole of the constituency, but they are a sign of the dissatisfaction and distrust that people have for leaders that are requested to vote on bills of such magnitude without having a complete knowledge or constituent input.
 
Damocles said:
I'm all for a safety net system based on need that has a graduated form of premium payment until you reach a certain level. Fill the doughnut hole then attack the actual cost issue and come up with an actual solution that doesn't involve the government supposedly "competing" with private businesses.

Centralize regulations so that it is possible for smaller insurance companies to compete across the nation.. that is at least one step we can generally agree on.
Click to expand...

while i am covered by medicare, the number of insurance companies that take medicare are limited to two because i live in a mainly suburban to rural area (santa barbara county, calif) the population density is just to low and too heavily elderly...or farming and students

most of the rest are mainly service/tourist industry with a scattering of aerospace/military
 
DonQuixote said:
while i am covered by medicare, the number of insurance companies that take medicare are limited to two
Click to expand...

I am puzzled by this statement.....what do you mean by insurance companies "taking" medicare?....do you mean administer it?....here in Michigan medicare is administered by BC/BS, but I can't figure a state would have two different companies administering it, that would be a major confusion.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I am puzzled by this statement.....what do you mean by insurance companies "taking" medicare?....do you mean administer it?....here in Michigan medicare is administered by BC/BS, but I can't figure a state would have two different companies administering it, that would be a major confusion.....
Click to expand...

in ca there are several insurance companies that administer medicare

they like the part 'd' pharma option...very profitable
 
DonQuixote said:
are dems ready to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory regarding health care...again

good grief, when will bho start cracking the whip over the congressional dems
Click to expand...


well, this is what bugged me about Obama from the very beginning. He's an incrementalist, a centrist, obsessed with mythical bipartishanship.

He never ran on universal healthcare, and he never held out a public option as a pivotal, key element of his campaign.

If democrats wanted somebody who was more cut throat, and was unabashedly for true universal healthcare, and a public option, Hillary Clinton, or some of the other choices were in that camp.

Obama was never going to pull an FDR and shove universal healthcare or a public option down the throat of the GOP.

Man, I knew there were going to be problems when Tom Dashle, and ultimately Kathleen Seblius were nominated for health secretary. Daschle is a tool who in in the pocket of big pharma. Howard Dean or Elizabeth Edwards would have been excellent choices for HHS secretary.
 
I listened to a guy who is on Social Security Disability tell me about how he is against "socalized medicine" and how Obama is taking his money to pay for this program and how Obama is nuthing but a socialist.
 
Jarod said:
I listened to a guy who is on Social Security Disability tell me about how he is against "socalized medicine" and how Obama is taking his money to pay for this program and how Obama is nuthing but a socialist.
Click to expand...


How about the teabaggers who were screaming for the government to "keep their hands off my medicare".

That's the thing about wingnuts. They support the New Deal, without even realizing it. They've been trained like mindless chimpanzees by Glenn Beck to rant and rave at the New Deal.
 
Cypress said:
How about the teabaggers who were screaming for the government to "keep their hands off my medicare".

That's the thing about wingnuts. They support the New Deal, without even realizing it. They've been trained like mindless chimpanzees by Glenn Beck to rant and rave at the New Deal.
Click to expand...
Teabaggers, I still giggle every time I hear that term.
 
Jarod said:
I listened to a guy who is on Social Security Disability tell me about how he is against "socalized medicine" and how Obama is taking his money to pay for this program and how Obama is nuthing but a socialist.
Click to expand...
Now that is just too darn funny, did someone in the audience point out his error?
 
Damocles said:
I don't know why, if one is the teabagger, the other is the teabaggee...
Click to expand...
That made me giggle, even more! The image just pops into my head and I don't think it is what they want me to think about when they are out protesting! Especially, the church folks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top