Losers: Hillary, McCain And Republicans

Well, the Indiana and NC results are in and the buzz is Hillary didn't accomplish enough to stop Obama with her slim Indiana win and huge NC loss. It'll be interesting to see what she does. The media is pouring on the heat for her to drop out.

As for Republicans, including McCain, they continue to be their worst enemy, not Obama. Gingrich issued a warning, but the bad news is everywhere for them. And McCain isn't doing very well for the nominee.

Add that to his poor performance as a fund raiser and the GOP has major troubles, indeed. Gee, does McCain think speaking at a La Raza event is going to get him the support he needs to win?

He can pander to that and other groups all he wants. Guess what? Come election day, the Democrat machine will turn them out for the Dems. And McCain's BS will just cost him support from the base.

Might we actually have a President Obama with the middle name of Hussein?

Don't kid yourself if you think he can't win. As if America needed a Carter II, and potentially worse.

Good grief. Hopefully something will change between now and November.

Comments

[Yoda]

"Just plain fucking sucks that we had to give up considerable income in order to get health insurance. "

"Considerable income" will buy a top shelf health insurance plan. You call Blue Cross(or whoever) select a plan, then send them a pile of cash in the $5,000-$7,000/yr range.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"I want to cold smoke it."

Harpie, I usually dont like smoked fish (too dry) but I may try that cold smoke sometime. Beautiful country up there you may find somewhere to leave Indiana for.

[jharp]

Willie,

Good luck fishing. I'm sure you know the cats are excellent eating and good for you.

Have fun. Next week I'm heading to the upper peninsula of Michigan for walleye, trout, and salmon. My goal is to catch at least one big salmon. (20 lb or so)

I want to cold smoke it.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Why on earth you'd have an issue with how I spend my time is unAmerican."

Harpie you've had a hard few days. Wish you could come be a red neck with us this weekend. We're going up river and camping on an island for da cats fishin', "Heap big fun on da byoh". It should look like an Alan Jackson video and make you forget all about politics for a few days.......

[templar knight]

In any event, you will have to discuss it without me, as I'm off to NYC. See 'ya Sunday.

[templar knight]

Looks like I hit a raw nerve, eh, Worst? The point of the article, at least in my opinion, was to show the hypocrisy of whites like you who always want people to have something for nothing, when that is not possible. Then when it comes crunch time, you're the one raising the most hell. My experience with people like you is that the article was on target. As in correct. As in accurate. As in bullseye. As in touche'.

[Worst President Ever]

Right - post an excerpt from a post titled "Free Healthcare" - end it with "Bingo!" then say gee, it's not really correct.

[templar knight]

I didn't say it was going to be free, Worse. I just quoted a post on the website "Stuff White People Like". You'll have to take that up with them, although I didn't interpret the article the way you did, as in free. Nothing is free. Someone has to pay.

[Worst President Ever]

Templar tells us lazy white people want socialized medicine becuase it's going to be free. SacTownMan tells us that countries that have universal health care have the highest marginal tax rates in the world - implying that passing universal health care is going to raise taxes and cost us more money.

So which is it guys? Is universal care free - like Templar says. Or is it going to bankrupt us all, like SacTownMan says?

[seekeronos]

"--- Key words being "rest of the liberal pack" ---"

For the most part here, I tend to think that this is so. Few liberals regularly posting here have gone out of their way to explain that they support single payer as an option apart from nationalizing the health care industry.

That said, I am still worried that even going to single payer wouldn't be a slippery slope for even more intrusive and expansive government: the more you tend to put all your eggs in the government's basket, the more likely it is that governments will abuse its power.

Additionally, universal health care is neither a God-given right, nor an enumerated power of the federal government according to the Constitution.

[templar knight]

Here's something pertinent to the conversation, from the Website, "Stuff White People Like":

"But the secret reason why all white people love socialized medicine is that they all love the idea of receiving health care without having a full-time job. This would allow them to work as a freelance designer/consultant/copywriter/photographer/blogger, open their own bookstore, stay at home with the kids, or be a part of an internet startup without having to worry about a benefit package. Though many of them would never follow this path, they appreciate having the option.

Though their passion for national health care runs deep, it is important to remember that white people are most in favor of it when they are healthy. They love the idea of everyone having equal access to the resources that will keep them alive, that is until they have to wait in line for an MRI.

This is very similar to the way white people express their support for public schools when they don't have children."

Bingo!

[jharp]

ET,

"What time is it where you are, jharp? isn't it past your bedtime? Oh, right. You don't have to get up for work in the morning."

I work for myself. And yes, I set my own hours as I have for the past 20+ years. You ought to try it.

"Loser."

I disagree. I think it makes me a winner.

[jharp]

ET say,

jharp says;

And why, might I ask, are our costs more than twice the rest of world for the same quality of care?

More unsubstantiated bs: "our costs more than twice the rest of world". MORE THAN TWICE as much? As THE REST OF THE WORLD? You are an hysterical bitch. No facts, just fury.

"...for the same quality of care..." misses my assertion that our quality of care is higher. Your anger is blurring your vision, man, calm down.

Yes, Mr. ET. I stand by my words. Per capital health care costs are twice what the rest of the world pays. The quality of care issue depends on the terms you choose to measure.

Infant mortality? We suck.

Life expectancy? We suck.

Advanced medical procedures? We're pretty good as long as your insurer chooses not to pay.

"Maybe you should get a job that gets you away from the computer more."

Or maybe not. It is my choice how much time I choose to spend behind the computer.

Why on earth you'd have an issue with how I spend my time is unAmerican.

[ET]

"Come back later when you've sobered up."

What time is it where you are, jharp? isn't it past your bedtime? Oh, right. You don't have to get up for work in the morning.

Loser.

[jharp]

SacTownMan,

Nothing personal as you are a fellow contributor on a weblog I like.

But your post made no sense whatsoever.

Just what were you trying to say?

"Per Capita spending includes the following fact. The 45 million that our left leaning friends like to cite includes:"

Come back later when you've sobered up.

[ET]

SacTownMan,

What should we learn from the Taiwanese model? Are you familiar with it? What improvements would you make to our current system?

BTW, I am from Davis, went to High School in Carmichael.

[SacTownMan]

So lets look at some more facts..

I spent time concerning the myth about our quality of health care being somehow inferior to the rest of the world. You can choose to believe whatever you want about the quality but it is simply a poor argument to make.

So then in an attempt to show the cost to every American as being something that could bring a HUGE tax increase the response is well
"And what, might I ask, has that to do with per capita health care expenditures." or

"Spending per capita and percent of GDP have nothing to do with tax rates. It's a MEASURE of how much is spent on an item."

Well lets try and enlighten a little furthur:

Per Capita spending includes the following fact. The 45 million that our left leaning friends like to cite includes:

Thirty-seven percent of that group live in households making more than $50,000 a year, says the U.S. Census Bureau. Nineteen percent are in households making more than $75,000 a year; 20 percent are not citizens, and 33 percent are eligible for existing government programs but are not enrolled.

So take some 200+ million Americans toss in 12 million illegal aliens, a bunch of losers that refuse to provide for their families that could afford it if they could give up the BMW and gym membership, and toss in a lot of people that are eligible for health care and don't get it and you have "highest per capita spending" statistic that keeps getting tossed around like some profound revelation.

Sure the government can spend a dollar for health care the same way I can but the point is: (and lets be very clear about this)

It's not your money! I hear the IRS welcomes your contribution if you are so happy to part with yours but I would really like to keep mine please!

[ET]

jharp says;

And why, might I ask, are our costs more than twice the rest of world for the same quality of care?

More unsubstantiated bs: "our costs more than twice the rest of world". MORE THAN TWICE as much? As THE REST OF THE WORLD? You are an hysterical bitch. No facts, just fury.

"...for the same quality of care..." misses my assertion that our quality of care is higher. Your anger is blurring your vision, man, calm down.

Maybe you should get a job that gets you away from the computer more. You add nothing to the debate, just insults and EXTREME assertions of GOP horrors. If you think I am in the minority for defending Bush from your vilification, so be it. You, sir, are irrelevant. Ranting in the wind.

Seriously, get a job.

[jharp]

Seeker,

I quoted you.

"Islamo and the rest of the liberal pack can get so adamantly rhetorical over how we need to implement socialized medicine"

Concerning "socialized medicine", I refer you to Islamoe:

"--- This isn't even about Bush. This is about the merits and flaws of socialized medicine versus the privatized hospital/insurance system in the states. ---"

Bring it up with the man upstairs. Key words being "rest of the liberal pack"

[Worst President Ever]

Here's where "Republican Fiscal Conservatives" are taking us:

US Debt January 22, 2001: 5,728,195,796,181.57
US Debt May 5, 2008: 9,352,382,329,893.86

I don't think we can afford any more "Fiscal Conservatives".

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

[jharp]

ET,

"jharp, you are obviously a bitter man."

Pissed off is a better term and if your not you have a poor understanding of what the GOP has done to us.

"By the way, quality costs money."

No shit. Hard to argue with such sound reasoning,

"Did you ever stop to think that our per capita expense is a function of the equipment and technology and education available to our practitioners?"

And why, might I ask, are our costs more than twice the rest of world for the same quality of care?

"The real question is about access to the high quality services we have developed, which we will solve."

Yeah, Bush and the GOP has really made a lot of progress solving the access problem. Please share with me exactly what they've done.

"Harping about expense is secondary."

So, I guess your idea is to continue paying more than double.

You and SacTown are fools. You are voting against your own best interest.

Are you a 29% er? You want more? Go for it. Fortunately you are becoming a minority.

[Worst President Ever]

Spending per capita and percent of GDP have nothing to do with tax rates. It's a MEASURE of how much is spent on an item.

As for Tax Cuts, so-called Fiscal Conservatives have spent more money we didn't have than any Democrat ever dreamed of.

REAL fiscal Conservatives pay for what they buy. They don't go out and borrow it and let their kids pay for it.

[seekeronos]

jharp said:

"---
seeker,

No one has mentioned implementing socialized medicine nor is any candidate suggesting socialized medicine.
---"

jharp, I know that *you* have discussed single payer with some fair amount of depth; and I am not altogether opposed to the *concept* of it. It is the implementation I am concerned about, as well as the general tendency of governments to expand their scope and said implementation far beyond the original mandate of need.

And while tossing up the 40,000,000 dead children who have been ruthlessly exterminated by the fiat decision of nine judges in 1973 may not be fair, I do reckon that it is easily an item traded off by some folks on the left in the name of a perceived, but unconstitutional presumption of a "right to health care access".

Concerning "socialized medicine", I refer you to Islamoe:

"--- This isn't even about Bush. This is about the merits and flaws of socialized medicine versus the privatized hospital/insurance system in the states. ---"

[ET]

jharp, you are obviously a bitter man. constantly on the attack with half truths and outright falsehoods, accusing everyone else of being idiots. I feel sorry for you.

By the way, quality costs money. Did you ever stop to think that our per capita expense is a function of the equipment and technology and education available to our practitioners? The real question is about access to the high quality services we have developed, which we will solve. Harping about expense is secondary. Having the Government take control of the system is stupid. Period.

SacTownMan, thanks for bringing some reason and objectivity to the thread. I met a healthcare consultant by chance in Pasadena a few weeks ago. He was traveling to Denver the next morning to meet with the Clinton and Obama campaigns. He had also consulted with the McCain camp. He stated that elements of the Taiwan model should and could be quickly and effectively adopted in the US. I asked him which candidate had the best plan. He is not happy with any of the solutions being proposed (like any good expert consultant, he claimed that he had the best answer. "Make me President for an hour and I would fix it"). But he clearly stated that McCain's proposals were the best of the bunch by far.

[jharp]

Sactown,

"They have some of the highest marginal tax rates in the world!"

And what, might I ask, has that to do with per capita health care expenditures.

Whether the government spends a dollar on health care or a private citizen spends a dollar it's still a fucking dollar.

The truth is we spend more than twice per capita what the rest of world does.

Is that so hard to understand?

[SacTownMan]

BDS man states,

"And no, it doesn't mean socialized medicine. Canada, Britain, France. Germany, Japan, Taiwan, etc. each has a different style system. They do have one thing in common though, they cover essentially everyone in their country for less than what we pay and still leave 40+ million uninsured.

And those are the FACTS."

Well there may be just a few more facts...

First you are right all of the countries you list do have something in common:

They have some of the highest marginal tax rates in the world!

http://www.worldtaxpayers.org/statmarg.htm

If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire then we will easily return to the Carter days of nearly a 40% MTR but I worry more about paying for your socialist agenda on the backs of the American taxpayer.

Perhaps you could use a little history about where you and your friends would like to take our country back to. You know the glory days of the Democrats in charge in the 40's and 50's. It concerns a little known story about Joe Lewis, the famous boxer. The MTR for the highest earning Americans during this time was 90%. Joe Lewis donated a huge amount of his winnings to charities at the outbreak of WWII and joined the army. He looked forward to living his life after the war but ran into a little problem with the taxman. In order to pay the bill he had to fight well past his prime and as a result a once proud, honorable American was nearly beaten to death. American's saw the injustice of paying for the great social experiment of the time on the back of a great citizen and.. ah hell just read the story and keep your greedy little hands out of my pocket!

http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=22

[Worst President Ever]

I guess only a Fiscal Conservative would buy something at twice the price everyone else is paying. That's essentially what we do with health care in the US.

And no, it doesn't mean socialized medicine. Canada, Britain, France. Germany, Japan, Taiwan, etc. each has a different style system. They do have one thing in common though, they cover essentially everyone in their country for less than what we pay and still leave 40+ million uninsured.

And those are the FACTS.

[SacTownMan]

Again with the hate! I am very impressed with your ability to use Google to reference a WHO study that rates Columbia higher because it cost less per capita than the USA. Perhaps if you read the article you reference you would realize the criteria they used was slanted against the good old USA. You may trust the UN and it's minions but I am less inclined to.

My experience with our health care system has been to help cure cancer in thousands of patients over the past twenty years. Innovations that I have been involved with have helped to increase life expectancy in countless patients over the years. I have an on-going dialogue with other cancer experts around the world so I speak from experience. How bout you pal?

I do have a problem with those that would sell our Democracy down the drain in favor of a Socialist state. I happen to believe that we live in the greatest country the world has ever known. An America based on, Democracy, individual freedoms, choice, and Christian values. I do choose to provide my family with medical insurance, but again it is my choice not one shoved down my throat by you or anyone else.

The SCHIP program has been a very good program designed to help ensure that uncovered children needing insurance could get it. The Democratic congress tried to use the recent funding bill as a tool to try and increase the scope dramatically to include adults and others that were never intended to be covered. As I recall the family that was trotted out as an example was able to obtain insurance but choose not to. The father choose not to work in a real job but sit on his ass and not spend his money on health insurance. I'm sure his $600.00/month F-250 pickup payment was more important than the health of his kids. Again it comes down to choice.

As someone that has devoted their life to helping others and making a difference in the world I would like to know what you've done in your life that anybody would give a damn about!

So spit out your hate, continue to bad mouth your country, hang out at conservative web sites and thank god that someone like me is out there to care for you and your family if you get sick!

[jharp]

"Islamo and the rest of the liberal pack can get so adamantly rhetorical over how we need to implement socialized medicine"

seeker,

No one has mentioned implementing socialized medicine nor is any candidate suggesting socialized medicine.

You'd better get to confession. If I'm not mistaken "bearing false witness against thy neighbor" is one of the top ten.

Seriously, how can you such a thing. I do not think it is stupidity.

[jharp]

SacTown,

"But if I still say "no I don't want it" and as a freedom loving, taxpaying American, I say go away I choose not to get it, leave me alone what next?"

And who is to take care of your children when you, Mr. Tough Guy with no insurance and thus denial of care, dies.

Or are planning to be one the government freebies treated in the emergency room when something goes awry.

You are foolish, stupid man. Your party is fucking you and you don't know the difference.

[jharp]

SacTown,

"But if I still say "no I don't want it" and as a freedom loving, taxpaying American, I say go away I choose not to get it, leave me alone what next?"

And who is to take care of your children when you, Mr. Tough Guy with no insurance and thus denial of care, dies.

Or are planning to be one the government freebies treated in the emergency room when something goes awry.

You are foolish, stupid man. Your party is fucking you and you don't know the difference.

[seekeronos]

Islamo and the rest of the liberal pack can get so adamantly rhetorical over how we need to implement socialized medicine, but they won't blink a nanosecond at the 40,000,000 murdered babies since Roe v. Wade.

After all, they were just "parasites" and "blobs of amorphous flesh", right?

Just a snip of the scalpel and away with that human life, much like a tumor or an intestinal polyp, or a wart.

[Worst President Ever]

We spend almost twice as much per capita on health care as most other industrialized nations. And we still leave 40+ million uninsured.

Researchers at Johns Hopkins Medical School estimate the United States spends 44 percent more per capita than Switzerland, the country with the second highest expenditures, and 134 percent more than the median for member states of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news03/health_costs.html
http://www.cfr.org/publication/13325/

[Lala]

ET -
Don't be so sure Hillary is toast

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/superdelegates-say-we-will-decide-2008-05-06.html

According to this article the super delegates will pick the nominee - to hell with the electorate.

[IslamoLlama]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=us+rank+health+care&btnG=Google+Search

Here, SacTownMan. Google is magic.
Seriously, pick your metric. Infant mortality, life expectancy, immunization, chronic disease...
The United States consistently ranks outside the top ten in any of these categories.

The fact that we did the Google searches a long time ago while you continued to plug your ears, shouting "We need more proof! I don't believe you!" doesn't say much about BDS. This isn't even about Bush. This is about the merits and flaws of socialized medicine versus the privatized hospital/insurance system in the states.

"-- Michael Moore's Cuba is great health care argument doesn't work with anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the facts! --"

Statements like this peg you for just as big a mindless hater as you try to label the "standard leftist". What facts? How does Michael Moore's Cuba fail to make a legitimate argument? What are you even talking about?

I don't have to look at a study to know I'm unhappy with my current health care options. The roulette wheel of "pay for overpriced insurance that may or may not actually cover you" or "suck it and die if you get ill" are both unsatisfactory to me. If you haven't heard all the insurance horror stories about being denied coverage, you haven't even been pretending to listen. If you haven't complained about your insurance premiums recently, you're either too rich or too dumb to know how high they've gotten.

That said, I'd be happy to use a few key strokes and summon up long lists of facts that support the general assertion that health care in the US lags behind the curve if I thought you'd bother to read them, much less give a damn and change your mind.

Since every WTO report and UN brief and Forbes magazine study and NYT article will be met with "LIE-BRUL FALSEHOODS THAT CLOUD YOUR MIND!" I'm saving myself a serious effort. We had the health care discussion two years ago and again four years before that. We all know what the conservative position is on the American system: "Fuck you, I've got mine."

So just drop the pretension of giving a damn. Quit pretending like you care about poor people in NO or LA or NY or Miami or Houston who can't get adequate coverage without moving into an efficiency apartment with a wife and six kids. We were all here for the Frost Family Inquisition and the SCHIP debates. We know you think people making above the poverty line should pay top dollar for premium care or suck eggs if they don't think they can afford it. Give it up. Drop the act. Take off the mask and let us all see the monster you really are, because at this point its less nauseating than hearing you put on a song and dance claiming you're something else.

[SacTownMan]

Just once can we discuss a point without the standard leftist response using baseless generalities such as:

"By pretty much any objective measurement, all nations offering universal health care not only spend much less per capita than we do, the also provide better care."

"pretty much any", followed by "all nations", and don't forget "spend less" but also "the(y) provide better care.

Your hypothesis is not supported by the facts only generalities. Michael Moore's Cuba is great health care argument doesn't work with anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the facts!

BDS is the disease that you suffer from and by all accounts you must be terminal!

[templar knight]

I, for one, would like to know how long this friend of the family waited for a heart operation, WPE. Hours, days, weeks, months or years. The wait for an uninsured man who is the husband of a woman who works at the same company as my wife had to wait 3 days for his heart surgery, and they carefully monitered him in the interim, just in case his condition worsened.

I also noticed in the Toronto Globe and Mail yesterday that hundreds of neo-natal premature babies in Canada were being sent to the US for treatment, because Canada's health care system was unable to care for them. Nice.

[Worst President Ever]

Hillary's not going to be the candidate.

By pretty much any objective measurement, all nations offering universal health care not only spend much less per capita than we do, the also provide better care.

Another anecdote: A good friend of my family died waiting for his heart operation here in the USA.

[ET]

Amen, SacTownMan. I had an attack of angina three years ago at age 43. I had and angiogram within 18 hours, open heart bypass surgery within 36 hours. My understanding from friends in Ireland is that I would have waited 6 months for those procedures because I never actually had a heart attack.

I wish we could discuss issues like healthcare reform, Iraq and taxes in a calm, thoughtful way during the general election. The problem is the liberals' need to simplify and vilify. "Obama will end the war, McCain will extend the war". "Obama equals healthcare for all, McCain means healthcare for none". Neither of these statements are true, no matter how often jharp and others repeat them. We need to stop sloganeering and solve some of these problems, but the libs can't get past their angry need to demonize someone because the world (or their lives) aren't perfect.

I predict Obama will implode in the general...Voters will see his ineptitude and fundamental hatred of America and migrate to the moderate McCain, who will reduce our presence in Iraq in an orderly fashion, hold off the most aggressive and destructive tax reforms and advance the cause of greater access to free market healthcare.

Thank God Hillary is toast.

[seekeronos]

"--- Wow. Failseek fails at tax law. Buffet's $100k salary actually lands him in the 28% bracket range. I'm not even going to delve into your other mistakes. Needless to say, you're wrong. Categorically, empirically, mathematically wrong.

I could go into all sorts of tax tricks about balancing your loses against your gains to make even the capital gains look smaller than they really are. I could talk about how mega-millionaires can use foreign accounts and LLCs to shield their wealth or take advantage of additional deductions. But the fact that you can't even get Buffet's salary bracket range correct seems to indicate that this would all float well over your head. ---"

Well, I guess it is safe to say that by your elitist calculus, I must be a fool.

So be it. I'm just a humble code monkey who leaves his tax details to (gasp!) an accountant, and I am going off of the little bit I do know:

The tax tables I looked at to do my math were from the IRS web site, and I took a guess that Warren Buffet was a "married, filing jointly".

Using that moneychimp site, one can see that at his income level, there is quite difference in how one files their marital status (and honesty, I don't see how the more expensive option outweighs the cheaper option, but that must be some dark tax accountant voodoo going on that my non-elite self doesn't see.

Actually, I have no idea nor care what Mr. Warren's filing status on his B-H salary is, and I am also well aware that ultra-rich guys like him have all sorts of ways of "cheating" the tax man... and that is not accounting for how he deals with his non-salary income from B-H.

My point is, all things being equal, someone making $100k/year will generally pay a skosh more in income tax than his secretary making only $60k.

The way I see it, he is just preening himself to be the uber rich guy with a sense of noblesse oblige for his poor overtaxed secretary.

And assuming that Mr. Warren is not an altruistic philanthropist bemoaning hs good fortune, but rather a primarily concerned with fattening his coffers and separating as much money from as many fools as he possibly can, then it is safe to say that he knows a far great deal more than even you, my dear accomplished accountant, and knows well how to (legally) structure his finances so as to preserve it from the depredations of Uncle Sam.

Now all that aside, I'd much rather see a constitutional amendment put up that overturns the 16th amendment, and a repeal of the federal income tax, or at the very least, a reduction in income taxes down to a top bracket of 10% and investment/capital gains to 5%... and a restructuring of the Federal Reserve (preferably a closing of the same) with the power to mint coins and print currency restored constitutionally to the Congress.

Lastly, I'd like to point out that "liberal elitist educations" are no guarantee of a person's final quality. "chris"/bob would be a shining example of that.

If anything, that education tends to make people more foolish for worshiping Man's flawed and sinful knowledge to the point of rejecting God - much to their eternal peril.

[SacTownMan]

A simple question about Clinton's "health plan". If I don't want health insurance what will the Democratic plan do? Answer: Easy, it will "require" me to get it. But if I still say "no I don't want it" and as a freedom loving, taxpaying American, I say go away I choose not to get it, leave me alone what next? Well that's easy they will just "garnish my wages". So now will we have every employer in the country expected to be a government "collection agency"?

I have worked in health care for the past twenty years. I interact with similar providers via internet work groups and meetings with others in our country, Canada, England etc. At a talk I gave in Inverness, Scotland in 2005 I shared our process for treatment of Head and Neck cancer and our technique. The talk discussed how we use MRI, CT and PET scans for the planning process. I was shocked to hear that the wating time for just a simple CT can be months and that few had the ability to do PET scans. You see with government run health care you are competing with everyone else for access to the scanner and the treatment facility. It's kind of like "take two asprin and watch the tumor grow and give me a call in a couple of months"

In this country if my doctor wanted a CT scan I would be laying on a table within 48 hours getting him the information he needs to save my life. Doctors in Germany went on srike recently because they couldn't survive on the wages they were forced to make. Patients in Canada cross the border in order to have CT scans done. My company provides some of the highest quality care available in the world and anyone who tries to convince you that things are better elsewhere are just blowing smoke and most certainly are not speaking from experience. America provides some of the finest, cutting edge health care in the world period, end of story!

[jharp]

JHarp: Show me where Hilda says "single payer"

Sadly, she doesn't. Nor does Obama.

Clinton's proposal. If you have a plan you like, you keep it. If you want to change plans or aren't currently covered, you can choose from dozens of the same plans available to members of Congress, or you can opt into a public plan option like Medicare.

Insurance companies won't be able to deny you coverage or drop you because their computer model says you're not worth it.

I don't think it goes far enough but Rome wasn't built in a day.

And I appreciate your thoughtful responses. I think if we focus on the nuts and bolts of each proposal everyone will be better off.

And a real piss off for me it the idiot wing of the Republicans throwing out terms like socialized medicine.

It one of the main reasons I can't stand the GOP.

[templar knight]

Well, Mo, if you graduated from UT, that would hardly let me know anything about you, since there are about 55,000 students there. As for the company you work for, if it is small, like mine, I have no interest in knowing, but if it were Anderson and Anderson, for example, that might give an indication that you had some knowledge of tax law, other than what is commonly available.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

See, that didn't hurt at all, now did it.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

JHarp: Show me where Hilda says "single payer"

The centerpiece of Clinton's "American Health Choices Plan" is the so-called "individual mandate," requiring everyone to have health insurance _ just as most states require drivers to purchase auto insurance. Rival John Edwards has also offered a plan that includes an individual mandate, while the proposal outlined by Barack Obama does not.

Aides said Clinton believes that an individual mandate is the only way to achieve health care for all. A key component of her plan would be a federal tax subsidy to help individuals pay for coverage.

Clinton's plan builds on the existing employer-based system of coverage. People who receive insurance through the workplace could continue to do so; businesses, in turn, would be required to offer insurance to employees, or contribute to a government-run pool that would help pay for those not covered. Clinton would also offer a tax subsidy to small businesses to help them afford the cost of providing coverage to their workers.

For individuals and families who are not covered by employers or whose employer-based coverage is inadequate, Clinton would offer expanded versions of two existing government programs: Medicare, and the health insurance plan currently offered to federal employees. Consumers could choose between either government-run program, but aides stress that no new federal bureaucracy would be created under the Clinton plan.

[syblle]

ANYBODY is better than John "fedding tube" McCain!!

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Mo, tell us what makes you a tax expert. You've waxed on about how educated, or brainwashed, depends on your point of view, jharp and chris are, and yet how ignorant seek us. Put up or shut up. I think you're nothing more than a loud-mouthed college puke, myself. Prove me wrong. Tell us what your qualifications are, what college you graduated from, what degree you have, what company you work for, etc. The Riehl World wants to know. --"

Yikes dude. You show me yours and I'll show you mine. But I'm not stupid enough to give out that much info. That said, I went to the University of Texas and worked as an accountant at a tax office in Austin for two years. That, and simple things like tax brackets are found through a quick Google search. You don't have to be a professional to figure them out.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

See.

If that doesn't satisfy you, then you're shit out of luck cause that's all I'm giving to a bunch of wingnut psychos on the intertubes.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Mo, tell us what makes you a tax expert."

TK, Pookie the LLama isn't going to give up any such info. See, if we know that kind of thing, we may be able to challenge her. I suspect a coed with assistance but guess we'll never know.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Hillary's healthcare disaster was the prime reason the Republicans swept the '94 mid-term elections. The first time the Democrats didn't control the House of Representatives in over 40 years. Bill Clinton's approval ratings were never lower than when Hillary completely botched healthcare reform. All of sudden, healthcare reform just vanished from the political agenda. Unfortunately, the healthcare crisis didn't; it just got worse year after year after year. After the healthcare reform debacle, Hillary became persona non grata in the White House, and as her recently released records show, she faded away from the West Wing and public policy, choosing instead to reinvent herself in the mold of a more traditional First Lady. If you think Hillary Clinton is the person to fix healthcare, you're either too young, have an extremely poor memory or you know virtually nothing about Hillary."

Hmm, first time dems didnt control the house in 40 years.....Guess it was a GOP senate that f'd up education. Anyway, this is about health care.
http://www.padems.com/node/1121

[jharp]

Willie,

We are insured now. My wife bailed out of her consulting business where she made a nice living to take a nothing, no pay job with benefits. And they had to insure us. Sure makes a lot of sense, huh.

Just plain fucking sucks that we had to give up considerable income in order to get health insurance. And tell me our health care system isn't crippling our economy.

I'm in the international trading business, dealing mostly with the far east. I have no desire to move back to Ohio. Been here 10 years and like it. Though like I said before I have a strong yen to get near the water (no impoundments and no salt water) and get my fishing boat into serious use.