| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Snerk of the week
|
Snerk of the week
|
Snerk of the week
JustWait wrote:
In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:38:38 -0400, JustWait wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:20:51 -0400, JustWait wrote: So my point is, I am living this right now and I don't want government pencil pushers involved, not even a little bit... The end of life counseling, as written, would be *completely* voluntary. I'm sympathetic to your situation, and you have my condolences. It has to be a difficult time. Please tell me how the word "shall" makes it voluntary?? Shall refers to what the counseling consists of. If you read the first paragraphs, you will see that Sec. 1233 amends current law. To understand Sec. 1233, it has to be placed in context. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...40SZ9:e513253: Moreover, this is still America. We do not do eugenics. Democrats and Republicans should be agreed on that. It's not eugenics I am worried about. It is more on the financial end for the family. Seems all medicare wants to do with dad is take his home and send him off to die... We and his doctor see a year or two of quality life at home as long as he doesn't get into too much pain. You know damn well any government representative involved is going to be bound by regulation as to what they can and can't suggest, and of course all of that will be based on the bottom line.. The fool known here as JustWait thinks private health insurance companies are driven by something other than the bottom line. |
Snerk of the week
thunder wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:25:22 -0400, JustWait wrote: Yeah, dozens of amendments, all squashed.. Biparitzan my ass... Just because he says it doesn't mean it's true. The dems are not allowing the repubs a say, they won and they keep reminding us of that.. Bipartizan? snerk how rediculous... They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) Yeah, those damned liberals want everyone dead....... |
Snerk of the week
JustWait wrote:
In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:25:22 -0400, JustWait wrote: Yeah, dozens of amendments, all squashed.. Biparitzan my ass... Just because he says it doesn't mean it's true. The dems are not allowing the repubs a say, they won and they keep reminding us of that.. Bipartizan? snerk how rediculous... They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) So, now you don't support the end of life panels??? Sounds like all you really care about is squashing the competition and forcing your party views on everybody.. So, are you like Harry and Al Gore, just think you are smarter so we should all just shut up and pay up??? "forcing your party's views on everybody". The true meaning of reverseharryanism. |
Snerk of the week
JustWait wrote:
In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:20:51 -0400, JustWait wrote: So my point is, I am living this right now and I don't want government pencil pushers involved, not even a little bit... The end of life counseling, as written, would be *completely* voluntary. I'm sympathetic to your situation, and you have my condolences. It has to be a difficult time. Please tell me how the word "shall" makes it voluntary?? Simple. The word "shall" comes from a paragraph detailing HOW the doctors, etc. are to handle the situation should someone voluntarily want it. |
Snerk of the week
H the K wrote:
JustWait wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:28:49 -0400, JustWait wrote: You have sucked up party line like a good follower.. I predict a huge turn around again like 84... 3/4 of Americans are pretty upset at the dems in congress right now... Not only the Democrats in Congress, Congress as a whole. As for 1984, Reagan had a landslide victory, but it didn't translate to Congress. Republicans actually lost two seats in the Senate. Americans won't sit back while democracy is dismantled. Freedom of speech is being assulted as we speak... They are keeping illegal lists of the opposition and addressing them directly (very illegal and unconstitutional), kind of a "we know who you are" thing. Attacking private citizens from the Oval Office (illegal and cowardly) beating up black detractors on sidewalks, hiring union thugs to keep control at meetings, even The New Black Panther Party has been given free reign to patrol voting stations with weapons, opposition news agencies being called out from the Oval office, the list is almost endless already.. And you all were worried about us tapping out of country terrorists and a red herring "library card" law that in fact was never used... . Americans won't take it for long, thank God. Moron. Go pound sand. You are the moron. Your unions are falling apart. Your guy's "jam it down their throats" policy is finally meeting resistance from Americans who are waking up to the administration's bullying tactics. Wake up and realize that you are the one with oddball mindset. It's been fun toying with you but this crap is getting old. Bye! Plonk! |
Snerk of the week
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:38:22 -0500, thunder
wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:25:22 -0400, JustWait wrote: Yeah, dozens of amendments, all squashed.. Biparitzan my ass... Just because he says it doesn't mean it's true. The dems are not allowing the repubs a say, they won and they keep reminding us of that.. Bipartizan? snerk how rediculous... They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) More bull**** from thunder. Isakson had nothing to do with the language in the bill. Did you not know that? Have you been following the wrong news reports? |
Snerk of the week
|
Snerk of the week
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:24:47 -0400, J i m wrote:
H the K wrote: JustWait wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:28:49 -0400, JustWait wrote: You have sucked up party line like a good follower.. I predict a huge turn around again like 84... 3/4 of Americans are pretty upset at the dems in congress right now... Not only the Democrats in Congress, Congress as a whole. As for 1984, Reagan had a landslide victory, but it didn't translate to Congress. Republicans actually lost two seats in the Senate. Americans won't sit back while democracy is dismantled. Freedom of speech is being assulted as we speak... They are keeping illegal lists of the opposition and addressing them directly (very illegal and unconstitutional), kind of a "we know who you are" thing. Attacking private citizens from the Oval Office (illegal and cowardly) beating up black detractors on sidewalks, hiring union thugs to keep control at meetings, even The New Black Panther Party has been given free reign to patrol voting stations with weapons, opposition news agencies being called out from the Oval office, the list is almost endless already.. And you all were worried about us tapping out of country terrorists and a red herring "library card" law that in fact was never used... . Americans won't take it for long, thank God. Moron. Go pound sand. You are the moron. Your unions are falling apart. Your guy's "jam it down their throats" policy is finally meeting resistance from Americans who are waking up to the administration's bullying tactics. Wake up and realize that you are the one with oddball mindset. It's been fun toying with you but this crap is getting old. Bye! Plonk! Finally! |
Snerk of the week
JLH OPAof7 wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:24:47 -0400, J i m wrote: H the K wrote: Moron. Go pound sand. You are the moron. Your unions are falling apart. Your guy's "jam it down their throats" policy is finally meeting resistance from Americans who are waking up to the administration's bullying tactics. Wake up and realize that you are the one with oddball mindset. It's been fun toying with you but this crap is getting old. Bye! Plonk! Finally! Anything for you, buddy. :-) |
Snerk of the week
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote: It appears that Obamacare is in its death throes. The public option was the cornerstone of the plan and the basis for the rest of the plan. And, in light of the CMA's meeting this week where they are discussing the failures of centralized health care management and the need to move to patient centered health care. Nothing would please me more than to see morons like you lose their jobs, their health care insurance, their homes, and then be faced with a significant chronic illness for which they cannot afford treatment. Way to go Harry, avoid the issue and attack the messenger. It's really sad in this country that the only contribution the GOP makes is in the area fear-mongering, but they are good at it. The GOP is all about lifting all boats. We want everyone to have the opportunity to become rich. Conversely, you progressives, liberals, Democrats want everyone to become equally poor. I'm sure we will have some form of health care insurance reform moving through Congress this fall. No one expected it to do everything necessary at once. It isn't looking good for your side of the argument. You can't even get your message straight. One minute the public option is a requirement, the next minute it isn't a requirement and then it is a requirement. Obama just can't get his message out to his people or his people just don't listen to him. Either way it doesn't matter because it doesn't look good for you and your firends. |
Snerk of the week
H the K wrote:
thunder wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 00:13:15 -0500, jpjccd wrote: Quite a few people have thought this through. That's why there is a need for a public option. You think that the marketplace is competitive. The reality is it's reaching monopoly status. http://www.marke****ch.com/story/stu...monopoly-fears http://www.capitalgainsandgames.com/...s/1025/health- insurance- oxymoron http://ezinearticles.com/?Illinois-H...nies&id=271269 The marketplace is competitive. And as the first article intimates, among other things, antitrust legislation (or simply the threat of) is a capable tool to discourage monopolistic efforts. Likewise, the article illustrates state roles in managing the marketplace, and states have options available for their respective residents. The fact remains that states can determine their respective domestic insurers. A federal public option will follow the course I outlined above. It's a pernicious ploy, and it is a design for political gain, nothing else. It's inhumane. I'm sorry to disagree, but health care insurance is far from competitive. There's the McCarran-Ferguson Act, exempting much Federal anti-trust legislation from affecting the insurance industry. There's Ingenix, a wholly owned subsidiary of United Health, that provides the schedules used in determining reimbursement for out-of-network charges, used by most of the major players. Then there is the acquisitions, subsidiaries, and consolidation, resulting in a few major players. It ain't a competitive market. in fact, the only real competition is in the federally managed FEHBA program, where hundreds of insurance companies compete for the health care dollars of federal workers, who can pick the health care plans they want. What insurance company wants to get on the wrong side of the government? Not true in the private sector. If you get health insurance through your employer, you have no or very little choice. Your employer makes the decision. The employers are limited by the number of employees they bring to the insurance companies. There is no marketplace for health insurance consumers. The government at the federal and state levels has closed the markets to true competition. |
Snerk of the week
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:25:51 -0400, JLH OPAof7 wrote:
They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) More bull**** from thunder. Isakson had nothing to do with the language in the bill. Did you not know that? Have you been following the wrong news reports? Well, duh, Isakson is a Senator. The "death panel" in question is in the House bill. By the by, you are an interesting one to be calling bull**** on me, as you have continually passed these "panels" off as being mandatory, which they clearly are not. It's also interesting, that the amendment Isakson originally wanted, in the Senate bill, *would* have made the counseling mandatory. You'll also note, the amendment that finally passed, the amendment very similar to the House bill, was passed unanimously, meaning all the Republicans supported it. Gee, I wonder what has changed? http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_t.../13/mandatory- death-counseling-exposed.aspx |
Snerk of the week
In article ,
says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:25:51 -0400, JLH OPAof7 wrote: They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) More bull**** from thunder. Isakson had nothing to do with the language in the bill. Did you not know that? Have you been following the wrong news reports? Well, duh, Isakson is a Senator. The "death panel" in question is in the House bill. By the by, you are an interesting one to be calling bull**** on me, as you have continually passed these "panels" off as being mandatory, which they clearly are not. It's also interesting, that the amendment Isakson originally wanted, in the Senate bill, *would* have made the counseling mandatory. You'll also note, the amendment that finally passed, the amendment very similar to the House bill, was passed unanimously, meaning all the Republicans supported it. Gee, I wonder what has changed? They read the bill... http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_t.../13/mandatory- death-counseling-exposed.aspx -- Wafa free since 2009 |
Snerk of the week
JustWait wrote:
In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:25:51 -0400, JLH OPAof7 wrote: They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) More bull**** from thunder. Isakson had nothing to do with the language in the bill. Did you not know that? Have you been following the wrong news reports? Well, duh, Isakson is a Senator. The "death panel" in question is in the House bill. By the by, you are an interesting one to be calling bull**** on me, as you have continually passed these "panels" off as being mandatory, which they clearly are not. It's also interesting, that the amendment Isakson originally wanted, in the Senate bill, *would* have made the counseling mandatory. You'll also note, the amendment that finally passed, the amendment very similar to the House bill, was passed unanimously, meaning all the Republicans supported it. Gee, I wonder what has changed? They read the bill... http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_t.../13/mandatory- death-counseling-exposed.aspx Isn't it interesting how conservative dirtbags like JustWait, Herring, and a few others latch onto a bit of political flotsam and perseverate on it no matter what, even when it has been shown to be absolute bull****? |
Snerk of the week
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 06:24:57 -0500, thunder
wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:25:51 -0400, JLH OPAof7 wrote: They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) More bull**** from thunder. Isakson had nothing to do with the language in the bill. Did you not know that? Have you been following the wrong news reports? Well, duh, Isakson is a Senator. The "death panel" in question is in the House bill. By the by, you are an interesting one to be calling bull**** on me, as you have continually passed these "panels" off as being mandatory, which they clearly are not. It's also interesting, that the amendment Isakson originally wanted, in the Senate bill, *would* have made the counseling mandatory. You'll also note, the amendment that finally passed, the amendment very similar to the House bill, was passed unanimously, meaning all the Republicans supported it. Gee, I wonder what has changed? http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_t.../13/mandatory- death-counseling-exposed.aspx Hey - you were the one using the phrase, 'Isakson's "death panel" made it in'. -- John H "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -- Thomas Sowell |
Snerk of the week
H K wrote:
JustWait wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:25:51 -0400, JLH OPAof7 wrote: They weren't all squashed. Isakson's "death panel" made it in. ;-) More bull**** from thunder. Isakson had nothing to do with the language in the bill. Did you not know that? Have you been following the wrong news reports? Well, duh, Isakson is a Senator. The "death panel" in question is in the House bill. By the by, you are an interesting one to be calling bull**** on me, as you have continually passed these "panels" off as being mandatory, which they clearly are not. It's also interesting, that the amendment Isakson originally wanted, in the Senate bill, *would* have made the counseling mandatory. You'll also note, the amendment that finally passed, the amendment very similar to the House bill, was passed unanimously, meaning all the Republicans supported it. Gee, I wonder what has changed? They read the bill... http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_t.../13/mandatory- death-counseling-exposed.aspx Isn't it interesting how conservative dirtbags like JustWait, Herring, and a few others latch onto a bit of political flotsam and perseverate on it no matter what, even when it has been shown to be absolute bull****? We, the "conservative dirtbags", are winning this battle. It matters not where the language came from it only matters that it is the Democrats bill. The fact that the Democrats have shut the Republicans out of writing the bill isn't in the Democrats favor either. The Democrats wanted all the glory of providing "universal health care" and they are getting all of that glory and ignominy of the adverse nuggets that can be mined. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:58 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com