Truth about Nationalizecd Health Care

Carson · #71 (**permalink**) 03-08-2008, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GAYDAR

Down to 5 words now huh ? its more than your worth

Getting worse instead of better. By next week, you will be full blown retarded ! yeah it takes an amazing intellect to name themselves gay, why not just name yourself fag

BTW shit fer brains...its MS..,.not mr. You are too stupid to even bother to find out who you are talking to. Pretty much wasted all thise 'suck dick" linesw huh ? Dontb you feel stupid ?
Bwhahahahahahaha !!! No I feel like your another cum gargling whore and you are

Click.

Hear that ? That bis my dismissing you and putting you on iggy. I am done making you dance on my strings...you bore me.

Now some still post even though they know they are on ignore...It will be fun to see mif you are one nof those dipshits.. Even on ignore, I can still mock you.....hahahahahahaa

Bu bye shit stain...bu bye

BTW you fucking tard go ahead and ignore me why would I want to talk to some dumb bisexual slut like u

Carson · #72 (**permalink**) 03-08-2008, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoRightAndYouCan'tGoWrong

Sorry, Gaydar, it really doesn't ring a bell. I think you have me confused w/ someone else.

Don't worry Gay is confused in a lot of ways, it doesn't know its gender or sexual orientation either it just randomly flips back and forth what a tard

cliffrocks · #73 (**permalink**) 03-19-2008, 01:38 AM

Well like I keep saying I support less government health care if these goddamn
greedy assed MDs will take a huge paycut FUCKEM

Carson · #74 (**permalink**) 03-19-2008, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cliffrocks@arkansas.net

Well like I keep saying I support less government health care if these goddamn
greedy assed MDs will take a huge paycut FUCKEM

Less WTF are you talking about, we don't have government health care.

GoRightAndYouCan'tGoWrong · #75 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cliffrocks@arkansas.net

Well like I keep saying I support less government health care if these goddamn
greedy assed MDs will take a huge paycut FUCKEM

And why should they do this?

wow · #76 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

Truth About Nationalized Health Care

By Maggie Gallagher

Hillary Clinton opened fire on Barack Obama across an array of issues, but saved the really big guns for health care: "Of all our differences," said Hillary in Rhode Island (the forgotten primary state), "the one that is just inexplicable to me is his refusal to put forth a plan on universal health care and his continuing attacks on my plan to do so."
How hard can it be to offer a universal health care plan? "John Edwards had a plan, I had a plan, Chris Dodd had a plan, Dennis Kucinich had a plan, Bill Richardson had a plan. Because we're Democrats ..." Clinton said.
But Obama, in his Bob the Builder campaign designed to appeal to the toddler in every American, offers a plan that is all gain and no pain: subsidized health insurance for anyone who wants to buy it, whenever they want to buy it. More money, more choice, no cost. Gee, what's not to like?

Nothing, except that Hillary is correct. Obamacare can't possibly work, because it doesn't make sense to buy insurance when you are young and healthy if you are guaranteed access anyway when you are older and sicker.
And that's the problem.
The exchange between the two Democrats highlights the dirty little secret that not even Hillary will tell you about a universal government health insurance program. The problem with our current system that mandatory national health insurance will solve is not that people don't get health care -- it's that they don't pay for it.
Young healthy folks are more and more likely to go without health insurance. That means the pool of insured people is older and sicker and, therefore, more expensive to insure. Health insurance premiums rise, which makes health insurance an even worse deal for the relatively young and healthy, guaranteeing that more and more twentysomethings are uninsured, and health insurance costs for us middle-aged and older folks skyrocket.
What kind of people in the U.S. are uninsured? A whole lot of people like Brandy Coons, a 23-year-old Atlanta waitress highlighted on the front page of The New York Times as the new face of the "free rider" problem. Brandy admits she could probably afford a policy if she cut back on her gym membership and her photography hobby, but why should she do that?
"I'm young and in pretty good shape ... The insurance premium was more than what I would pay for my prescriptions, so I just decided not to deal with it," Coons said.
But even The New York Times cannot admit the real "free rider" problem here. It's not that the health care needs of uninsured twentysomethings like Brandy are bankrupting the system. It's that not enough twentysomethings like Brandy are paying for the health care of fortysomethings and older. That's the only way insurance makes sense: We pay into it when we are young and healthy, and we get something out of it when we are older and more likely to get sick.
But try running on that as your platform: Make the young people pay more!
Here's the other dirty little secret: National health insurance is going to cost Brandy and other taxpayers a whole lot more than either Hillary or Obama admits. Just ask Gov. Deval Patrick in Massachusetts, where just two years into operation, the state's mandatory health insurance plan is already costing $400 million more than budgeted.
Meanwhile we have a Medicare system that is going to go bankrupt.
Here's a question neither Hillary nor Barack will answer: How can we justify spending billions to insure the Brandys of the worlds, when we haven't yet secured the health care financing for our existing promises to senior citizens?

Don't need Hillarycare nor Obamacare.

GAYDAR · #77 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 08:52 PM

Maggie Gallagher...Bwhahahahahahahahahahahaha !!!!!!!!!!!!

SEE if you can find a MORE discredited, debunked, dismissed and reputeated bought and paid for nazi cunt...IF you can

Unless it's Ann (I used to be a man) Coulter or Laura ( my dick is bigger then yours) Ingrham, you would be hard pressed to find one

By the way, is it hard to type with your lips attached to Bush's anus ?

On January 26, 2005, the Washington Post reported that Maggie Gallagher, a prominent advocate for the amendment to ban gay marriage as well as funding for marriage based health and social programs, had accepted a $21,500 contract from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to promote President Bush's marriage promotion initiatives. The contract included ghostwriting articles for department officials, writing brochures and briefing department officials.

While she was receiving federal funds to promote the Bush marriage initiative, Gallagher wrote in praise of it on National Review Online and dismissed criticisms of the initiative in her syndicated column as "nonsense." She wrote, "Bush plans to use a tiny fraction of surplus welfare dollars to fund marriage education services for at-risk couples." She also wrote about the marriage initiative for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Weekly Standard, in addition to speaking about it during interviews, including one with the Washington Post. [3]

Gallagher also receieved a $20,000 Justice Department grant for a writing a report titled "Can Government Strengthen Marriage?" that was published by the private, non-profit National Fatherhood Intiative. Wade Horn, the Health and Human Services Department's assistant secretary for children and families who defended Gallagher's contracts as "not unusual," founded the National Fatherhood Initiative before entering government. [4]

In response to the controversy, Gallagher wrote a column saying she "had no special obligation to disclose this information" but would have done so anyway, "if I had remembered." She wrote, "Of course, the reason Howard Kurtz of the Post is interested is the now-notorious case of conservative columnist Armstrong Williams, who signed a very different sort of government contract: to promote Bush's No Child Left Behind Act on his television show." She maintained that her case was different, because "I get paid to write, edit, research and educate on marriage. If a scholar or expert gets paid to do some work for the government, should he or she disclose that if he writes a paper, essay or op-ed on the same or similar subject?" [5]

These comments seem to contrast with statements that Gallager herself made in 1997, when she spoke at a conference organized by the Committee of Concerned Journalists at Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. "The more a journalist views himself as a participant in the events and has a loyalty to sources, the less able he or she is to really consider himself a journalist," she told the conference. "... [And as an opinion journalist, which is to say you are emotionally invested in the outcome of the events] it becomes [even more] important ... to be open with the reader, to make it clear to the audience what your views are and what your biases are." [6]

Contacted by Editor and Publisher, Kurtz dismissed her response. "It's too bad that Maggie Gallagher, in the process of apologizing for her mistake, has seen fit to blame the messenger. My story made quite clear that her work at HHS included writing brochures for the President's marriage initiative, ghostwriting a magazine article for a top official, and briefing other department officials on the issue. That sure sounds like promotion to me, but none of this would be a media controversy had Ms. Gallagher disclosed the contract in her writing trumpeting the Bush marriage plan." [8]

On January 28, the Middletown Journal in Ohio announced that it was dropping Gallagher's column. "When she accepted money to produce government literature -- propaganda, some would say -- as disgraced syndicated columnist Armstrong Williams did on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education and the 'No Child Left Behind' program, she gave her detractors reason to question whether her beliefs are genuine or are for profit," the paper editorialized. "Our readers should never have to wonder whether the columnists we publish are expressing their honest opinions or are being paid to deliver someone else's." [9]

Asked at a press conference about whether the practice of paying commentators was appropriate, President George W. Bush said "no". " I expect my Cabinet Secretaries to make sure that that practice doesn't go forward. There needs to be independence. And Mr. Armstrong Williams admitted he made a mistake. And we didn't know about this in the White House, and there needs to be a nice, independent relationship between the White House and the press, the administration and the press. So, no, we shouldn't be going for it," he said.[12]

"... All our Cabinet Secretaries must realize that we will not be paying commentators to advance our agenda. Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet," Bush said.

SaintMalaclypse · #78 (**permalink**) 03-27-2008, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carson

Less WTF are you talking about, we don't have government health care.

Oh thank god! So, they'll quit forcing me to make Medicare payments out every paycheck now that it doesn't exist?

I take it you don't have, and never have had, a job? Or a grandmother on Medicare? Or a crippled gimpy cousin on disability?

If by "we don't have government healthcare" you mean that we have health care paid for by the government, but it's not called by those terms, then you're right.

But that's beside the point. The point is that the Government programs so far have all been smashing successes, so hell yeah they should take over my health care too. There's 0% possibility that once all healthcare is nationalized the dorctors will realize every patient is a guaranteed-paying-customer and will gouge the taxpayers; there's 0% chance that even though medical professionals will no longer have to compete for your business that they'll get sloppy; and there's 0% chance that anything could go wrong with a monstrous healthcare fund full of money just waiting for one of those rare politicians who would first borrow then later blatantly steal from it until it's depleted just like Social Security.

All of that sounds like pure heaven compared to the overwhelming task of working for a living and budgeting in enough money to pay my insurance premiums each month.

Thanks, Big Brother! I love when you lift my burdens for me!

Just one more example of how the Government wants you to know that you are simply too stupid, inept, and untrustworthy to handle your own finances.

Both parties constantly take credit for "creating jobs"...if health insurance is such a crucial problem, why do they keep "creating" jobs that don't come with good benefits if they're so goddamned powerful? Oh, wait...the only jobs they create are the ones where they actually hire people to do pointless bureaucratic things like sharpen staples, and they create new ones all the time. Like the tens of thousands of people they'll pretend they need to hire in order to manage this amazing, sparkly new Health Care system designed by Jesus himself.

-------------------------------

And another thing...what's with the phrase "Universal Health Care"? Are politicians really under the assumption that they govern a whole universe, or did the word "National" just not occur to them? Meh. Either way, they can suck hot razorblades out of my cats infected ear before I'll give them a dime for this tub of shit legislation.

Carson · #79 (**permalink**) 03-27-2008, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaintMalaclypse

Oh thank god! So, they'll quit forcing me to make Medicare payments out every paycheck now that it doesn't exist? thats not complete government health care and you know it, if it was up to me they would quit forcing us to contribute to medicare though

I take it you don't have, and never have had, a job? whatever don't be dumb Or a grandmother on Medicare? Or a crippled gimpy cousin on disability? actually I do have a grandmother on medicare but I still disapprove of it
If by "we don't have government healthcare" you mean that we have health care paid for by the government, but it's not called by those terms, then you're right.

But that's beside the point. The point is that the Government programs so far have all been smashing successes, so hell yeah they should take over my health care too. are you retarded, our government has been proven to be the most wasteful in the world There's 0% possibility that once all healthcare is nationalized the dorctors will realize every patient is a guaranteed-paying-customer and will gouge the taxpayers; there's 0% chance that even though medical professionals will no longer have to compete for your business that they'll get sloppy; and there's 0% chance that anything could go wrong with a monstrous healthcare fund full of money just waiting for one of those rare politicians who would first borrow then later blatantly steal from it until it's depleted just like Social Security. and theres 100% chance that people who leach off the system now will also find a way to leach off of that system which will demoralize those involved in healthcare. Theres no way that can be good
All of that sounds like pure heaven compared to the overwhelming task of working for a living and budgeting in enough money to pay my insurance premiums each month. You will still have to work and budget so who cares

Thanks, Big Brother! I love when you lift my burdens for me!

Just one more example of how the Government wants you to know that you are simply too stupid, inept, and untrustworthy to handle your own finances.

Both parties constantly take credit for "creating jobs"...if health insurance is such a crucial problem, why do they keep "creating" jobs that don't come with good benefits if they're so goddamned powerful? because their so goddamned greedy Oh, wait...the only jobs they create are the ones where they actually hire people to do pointless bureaucratic things like sharpen staples, and they create new ones all the time. Like the tens of thousands of people they'll pretend they need to hire in order to manage this amazing, sparkly new Health Care system designed by Jesus himself.

-------------------------------

And another thing...what's with the phrase "Universal Health Care"? Are politicians really under the assumption that they govern a whole universe, or did the word "National" just not occur to them? Meh. Either way, they can suck hot razorblades out of my cats infected ear before I'll give them a dime for this tub of shit legislation.

Exactly so stop with the sarcasm and be straight up

SaintMalaclypse · #80 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 01:11 PM

You said we had no government health care when in fact we do. It raised my hackles, because I pay too much into it right now for it not to exist. And I agree with you - Medicare/Medicaid ought to stop. Yesterday or sooner would suit me.

And I too had a grandmother on Medicare, and a grandfather too proud to apply for it. He only made her apply for it because he didn't want her dying before him...kinda pitiful. So, I did what every red-blooded American ought to do and moved them into my place, got them on a REAL insurance plan, and took care of them till they died. The cost was ungodly at their age, but the rest of the family helped out and they had SS checks, which I hated, but they'd paid into it all their lives, so they'd earned that much.

Damned shame more Americans don't realize how easy it is to do that when you get past the "What about me? How will I afford my trinkets and gizmos?" mentality when it comes to helping family. You accept that your family is your responsibility, not the Government's, and the rest will work out. Besides, they ate like birds, so feeding 'em was cheap.