As for end of life counseling---IT ALREADY EXISTS-----it's called HOSPICE,,,,and they get government $$.......they are our Egyptian wailers/Jewish mourners etc etc.......
Healthcare reform means you are going to change how you take care of me
Health insurance reform means you are going to change how you pay to take care of me
APPLES AND ORANGES FOLKS.......
if you find your health important then that is what you should seek out as a priority......people have what they have people do what they do....
as a nurse I dont give a rats you know what, about your life choices to land you in the bed that I am to to take care of..... however, I am not the reason for your ending up there......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Healthcare reform means you are going to change how you take care of me
Health insurance reform means you are going to change how you pay to take care of me
APPLES AND ORANGES FOLKS.......
Very Very well said! This just about sums it up in a nut shell. We don't need healthcare reform....but we do need health insurance reform!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I am finally scared of a White House administration By Nat Hentoff
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | I was not intimidated during J. Edgar Hoover's FBI hunt for reporters like me who criticized him. I railed against the Bush-Cheney war on the Bill of Rights without blinking. But now I am finally scared of a White House administration. President Obama's desired health care reform intends that a federal board (similar to the British model) — as in the Center for Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation in a current Democratic bill — decides whether your quality of life, regardless of your political party, merits government-controlled funds to keep you alive. Watch for that life-decider in the final bill. It's already in the stimulus bill signed into law.
The members of that ultimate federal board will themselves not have examined or seen the patient in question. For another example of the growing, tumultuous resistance to "Dr. Obama," particularly among seniors, there is a July 29 Washington Times editorial citing a line from a report written by a key adviser to Obama on cost-efficient health care, prominent bioethicist Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel (brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel).
Emanuel writes about rationing health care for older Americans that "allocation (of medical care) by age is not invidious discrimination." (The Lancet, January 2009) He calls this form of rationing — which is fundamental to Obamacare goals — "the complete lives system." You see, at 65 or older, you've had more life years than a 25-year-old. As such, the latter can be more deserving of cost-efficient health care than older folks.
No matter what Congress does when it returns from its recess, rationing is a basic part of Obama's eventual master health care plan. Here is what Obama said in an April 28 New York Times interview (quoted in Washington Times July 9 editorial) in which he describes a government end-of-life services guide for the citizenry as we get to a certain age, or are in a certain grave condition. Our government will undertake, he says, a "very difficult democratic conversation" about how "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care" costs...........>>>>.....................>>>>...................http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/hentoff081909.php3
It IS about power and control.....the government is afraid to straight talk with the insurance companies and their gangsta gumbas.....we all know how incestuous the government it to capitalism....free capitalism--nah......the insurance companies are sitting back watching the government lift it's own skirt......
....who accepted lobby $$$$$????.......let's pull apart that web.....I would venture to guess that alot of our premiums go to lobby......and well,,,,they can say NO to the $$$$$.......a dog always returns to it's vomit.........
check out the car insurance industry,,,homeowners industry etc etc.........you dont get my vote with fear.......
come on guys/gals......list it, talk it, show it.........
Mr.Waxman wants to know about insurers $$$-----he may fear the $$$ trail........watch this closely-------they will try to use this against us.....they will 'divide' and conquer using our jealousy, greed, coveting issues.........
CHECK THE LOBBYISTS.........
SEE---it is no longer is about our healthcare but about the $$......the government wants to be sure that the 'stipened' they take now via regs,rules,fees etc will not be shown to bankrupt Americans......they are in the litterbox trying to cover their pile of sh*t......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama participated in a scripted online discussion of his health care overhaul with a friendly audience of religious voters and pastors Wednesday. It ended with him bemoaning those who bear "false witness" against his plans — and then making a claim of his own that's been widely shown to be false.
"There's been a lot of misinformation," Obama said, complaining about people who are "bearing false witness."
He said the first thing he wanted to correct was the idea that the proposed overhaul would force some people into different health care plans. "If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan," he said, repeating one of his stock lines.
That's not true, however, according to FactCheck.org, an independent truth squad run by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania.
"He can't make that promise to everyone," concluded FactCheck's analysis, one of several that point out that the Democrats' health care plan could lead to employers switching plans, and thus forcing their employees into different plans and perhaps to different doctors.
"Under the House bill," FactCheck said, "some employers might have to modify plans after a five-year grace period if they don't meet minimum benefits standards.
"Furthermore, some firms are likely to buy different coverage for their workers than they have now, or simply drop coverage and pay a penalty instead, leaving workers to buy their own private coverage or go on a new federal insurance plan."
Obama tried anew to knock down false assertions that the overhaul would create "death panels" that would euthanize old people. "That is just an extraordinary lie," Obama said.
He also noted that the proposed plan would ban financing health care for illegal immigrants, not provide care for them, as some have charged.
He also said that there would be no federal financing of abortion under the plans, a charge made again Wednesday by the Republican National Committee.
"These are all fabrications," Obama said.
He said he'd need help from the people on the call to correct the record, and prod Congress to pass a health care plan.
"I'm going to need the help of all of you," he said. "Knock on doors, speak the truth."
The 40-minute program, on blogtalkradio.com, featured testimonials about the need for health care changes from pastors and members of various churches, mosques, synagogues and temples around the country, all of them apparently supporters of Obama's proposals.
"I don't want my parents to die," said Karla Carranza, a 15-year-old who attends Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception in Denver. She said her parents are going without needed care because they lost their health insurance.
Many called for a health care overhaul in moral terms.
"We are in danger of losing the moral core of this debate," said the Rev. Jim Wallis, the president of Sojourners, a liberal Christian group. "This call shows how united the faith community is . . . . We are calling on people of faith to make our political representatives understand that the faith community will be satisfied with nothing less than safe, accessible health care for all Americans."
Midway through the program, Melody Barnes, the White House director of domestic policy, jumped in. She tried to remove any doubts that Obama wants the overhaul to include the option of a federal government insurance program for many Americans. "There have been a lot of questions about . . . whether the president is still committed to that," she said. "The answer is yes."
The program was sponsored by churches and religious groups including the National Baptist Convention, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, the United Church of Christ, the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the United Methodist Church and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good.
"We are in danger of losing the moral core of this debate," said the Rev. Jim Wallis, the president of Sojourners, a liberal Christian group. "This call shows how united the faith community is . . . . We are calling on people of faith to make our political representatives understand that the faith community will be satisfied with nothing less than safe, accessible health care for all Americans."
This is why folks dont go to church and why 'the church' has lost it's 'saving grace'.....they ARE no different than a company union
as for healthcare----Jesus was never concerned about legislating 'healthcare'-----"render unto God what is God's and render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's...."
my guess is that "the church" is changing it's God.........and......it's job description.......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
This is why folks dont go to church and why 'the church' has lost it's 'saving grace'.....they ARE no different than a company union
as for healthcare----Jesus was never concerned about legislating 'healthcare'-----"render unto God what is God's and render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's...."
my guess is that "the church" is changing it's God.........and......it's job description.......
Well said!!!
The last time the dems tried this healthcare fiasco was in 1994 with the Clintons. And what happened? HMO'S, INSURANCE BUERACRACY AND A REP TAKE OVER IN THE FOLLOWING ELECTION. The dems haven't learned a thing and obama is in way over his head.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
The federal government and our health care system can be summed up in one publication — the Medicare booklet sent out to people near 65. For anyone who’s ever received this, you [will] understand completely. It takes gobbly-gook to a new level. Page after page of double-talk and ramblings — all instructions meant to inform older citizens of their rights concerning their health care. It immediately reminded me of some recent political speeches we’ve heard. Who writes these government pamphlets? The same people who write the speeches? Confusion leads to chaos. Our government is giving us the same fast, slick talk that we usually associate with used car salesmen. I, for one, am not buying it. Funny, on one hand they are urging us to turn in our “clunkers”; on the other, they’re trying to sell us another one.
Let us be clear about the real purpose of the health care “reforms” being pushed down our throats by President Obama and Congress. The purpose is power, a vast increase in the power of government over you and your life. With this legislation, the president and Congress get to create numerous new bureaus staffed by thousands of individuals, each of whom owes his or her job to the politician and the political party that created the bureaus. With this legislation, you lose the power to make your own healthcare decisions. Those decisions are put in the hands of bureaucrats who “know what’s best for you.” In the end, if you don’t like the decision that you get from the bureaucrats, you will have only one place to appeal, and that is to your member of Congress. What a power trip for the politicians! This legislation, dressed as a set of noble goals, proposes a vast extension of the federal government’s reach into every home in the land. It intends to disrupt one-sixth of the American economy, with consequences that cannot even be imagined. Does the Congress really want better health care for individuals? Then, please toss this legislation and start over again. We don’t want to be indentured servants to the federal government.
Obama opponents may be misstating things, but so is he
The political cartoon in the Aug. 11 Gazette suggests that all the hubbub at the town hall meetings on health-care reform are the result of a great sending forth of harpies, by the Wicked Witch of the Right, to harry poor Barack and his little dog, Toto. If this is so, I have been dropped from Wicked Witch of the Right’s mailing list. I think, rather, that we are seeing a sincere and spontaneous reaction to some very bad ideas. It is probably true that the opponents of the Democrats’ proposals have an enormous amount of misinformation about them. If so, they have that in common with Congress. In effort to elevate the debate, i.e. to silence his opponents, Obama has established an e-mail hotline to report the lies being perpetrated about healthcare reform. Well, I love hotlines, having used Alan Hevesi’s to report Alan Hevesi. So, I e-mailed the White House to report some of the misstatements being made by the guy who lives up over the shop. For example: a frequently used line of Obama’s is — “If you’re happy with your current coverage, you can keep it.” Well, that’s good of him, but when the government enters a marketplace it disrupts it. It severely disrupted the health insurance industry in the 1960s with Medicare and Medicaid (two of the major reasons that health care is so expensive today) and it will disrupt it even further with any of the proposed schemes. The president cannot possibly know how the health insurance industry will respond to “reform” and, therefore, cannot guarantee that the health insurance you have now, that you like so much, will remain available to you. In other statements, President Obama has portrayed himself, in this fight, as single Spartan at Thermopylae, holding back a Persian army of special interests. Except that the AMA [American Medical Association], the pharmaceutical industry, and the trial lawyers have all bought into the deal. All of the health care proposals under Democratic consideration spread around a lot of tax money, an activity that attracts special interests as a scoop of ice cream on the sidewalk does ants. Here’s some advice for the president as he tries to stamp out misinformation about health care reform: Physician, heal thyself.
Insurance monopolies seen in some markets Backers say gov’t-run health plan fosters competition BY RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — One of the most widely accepted arguments against a government medical plan for the middle class is that it would quash competition — just what private insurers seem to be doing themselves in many parts of the U.S. Several studies show that in lots of places, one or two companies dominate the market. Critics say monopolistic conditions drive up premiums paid by employers and individuals. For Democrats, the answer is a public plan that would compete with private insurers. Republicans see that as a government power grab. President Barack Obama looks to be trapped in the middle of an argument that could sink his effort to overhaul the health care system. Even lawmakers opposed to a government plan have problems with the growing clout of the big private companies. “There is a serious problem with the lack of competition among insurers,” said Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, one of the highest-cost states. “The impact on the consumer is significant.” Wellpoint Inc. accounted for 71 percent of the Maine market, while runner-up Aetna had a 12 percent share, according to a 2008 report by the American Medical Association. Proponents of a government plan say it could restore a competitive balance and lead to lower costs. For one thing, it wouldn’t have to turn a profit. A study by the Urban Institute public policy center estimated that a public plan could save taxpayers from $224 billion to $400 billion over 10 years by lowering the cost of proposed subsidies for the uninsured, while preserving private coverage for most people. “Right now, there’s no incentive for insurers or big hospital groups to negotiate with each other, because they can pass higher payments on through premiums,” said economist Linda Blumberg, co-author of the report. “A public plan would have the leverage to set lower payment rates and get providers to participate at those rates.” “The private plans would come back to the providers and say, ‘If you don’t negotiate with me, you’re going to be left with only the public plan.’ ” Blumberg continued. “Sud..............>>>>...............>>>>...........Insurance monopolies seen in some markets
The convoluted commentary and writings of Carl Strock confuse me. His Aug. 11 column [“Yet another danger: health care”] rails against upset Americans exercising their rights under the Constitution. Strock follows the liberal attack dog formula, going after his favorite targets — Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity, Tea Party patriots, Fox News, etc. — and then he seems to endorse Obama’s health care plan along with any liberal government utterance regardless of its content. Angry citizens have only HR 3200 to go by, since the Senate has not released anything, while congressmen and senators at the town meetings quote from committee thinking and accuse the public of being wrong. What a farce! Strock seems to indicate the government could handle the plan best. Doesn’t he continually rail against teachers (government), child services (government), Schenectady police (government), firemen (government) Medicare/Medicaid (government)? I’m confused.
pay attention to who will be running for State Attorney General if Mr.Cuomo shall not seek AG....
Quoted Text
NU Online News Service, Aug. 24, 2:48 p.m. EDT
Eric Dinallo, New York’s former insurance superintendent, has filed papers to position himself for a possible Democratic primary run for New York State Attorney General.
Mr. Dinallo, who would be among what is expected to be a crowded field of candidates for the post, recently filed papers with the New York State Board of Elections to form a campaign committee.
But Mr. Dinallo said by e-mail that his action was conditional, and that “my intent is to enter the race to succeed Andrew Cuomo as New York’s next Attorney General in the event that he decides not to seek reelection.”
Although he has not announced a move for higher office, Mr. Cuomo is widely expected to run for governor amid rumblings that the party would like to see the incumbent Gov. David Paterson forego a run for the post.
Mr. Paterson was lieutenant governor until Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned after a scandal over his involvement with a call girl.
Mr. Dinallo is a former top associate of Mr. Spitzer who appointed him to the insurance post, which he resigned on July 3 to become the Henry Kaufman Visiting Professor of Finance at New York University’s Stern School of Business.
At the time of his resignation, it was reported by NU Online that Mr. Dinallo, who was a high-profile activist as superintendent, would likely become a candidate for the attorney general post.
Logged
