Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 7/20/2009

Uh oh, Jake, Gibbsy didn’t like that one bit. You were supposed to have forgotten about THAT.

Jake, you let him go with, “The — those are being reviewed now, and we’ll release something in the coming days.” after we have seen them delay the budget reports over a month? As you pointed out, it has been 91 days.

This is awesome. I hope the GOP can score a political victory on the health care issue. If Obama succeeds in getting a public plan through congress, we will surely see a permanent Democratic majority.

NICE! however, I am sure with all of the Hhuh-uh-hu-uhhu’s comming out of Gibb’s mouth, they will find some way to discredit what the Mayo Clinic is saying, or find someway to screw them out of some type of payments in retaliation for their comments. You know, the Chicago Machine Stayle Thug Politics Way!

I find this young man in Houston quite refreshing for the black community.He is the one responsible for the MLK was a Republican Billboard Sign that garnered national media coverage last week!
APOSTLE CLAVER T. KAMAU-IMANI
Listen to “The Christian Politician” Talk Show, Mon-Fri, 9am (CST), 1050AM. Live Stream: RagingElephants.org.
Please join the Facebook group

While I am glad that the Mayo Clinic is against Obama, they are notoriously pro-abortion.

“None of these things alone are going to make a difference. But cumulatively they make an extraordinary difference because they start setting a tone. And so what we are going to do is, line by line, page by page, $100 million there, $100 million here, pretty soon, even in Washington, it adds up to real money.”
_________________________________
A pound of ham here, a slab of cheese there. Pretty soon you’ve got yourself a dandy little entitlement!

This is becoming interesting.

If you thought insurance companies were tough to deal with you ain’t seen nothin’.
You just wait until Barney Frank and Chris Dodd decide what you’re getting and what you’re not getting.
The bottom line is rationing. You will get less and it will cost you more.
And Mom and Dad are going to die sooner. Under Obamacare Ted Kennedy would already be dead.

“And Mom and Dad are going to die sooner”
Is that why nationalized health care companies kick out butts on longevity?

“Is that why nationalized health care companies kick out butts on longevity?”
That should read countries not companies and our instead of out.

“Is that why nationalized health care companies kick out butts on longevity?”
That’s utter nonsense. Liberalmath is used to create that data. Infants who don’t live for two days are not counted.
Then you can deduct murders and car accidents. None of that has anything to do with the health care system.

“That’s utter nonsense. Liberalmath is used to create that data.”
ROFLMAO!
“Infants who don’t live for two days are not counted.”
Sure. Got any proof or are you just parroting the right wing line?

“So we have so many more murders and accidents than other countries that our longevity figures are badly skewed?”
Check it for yourself.

I will have Obama-Porkulus Health Care program, hold the Mayo.

Senator Kennedy admitted today that Obamacare will result in rationing. His honesty threatens to harm the president’s chances of passage. The presdient continues to lie, and more and more people are recognizing this.
How’s that Guantanamo closure promise working out?

“Senator Kennedy admitted today that Obamacare will result in rationing.”
It’s about time. I’ve been saying this for a long time here and Ryan’s been insulting me about it every time.

Here are some more of those awful facts, Ryan:
again, from IBD:
“In countries with nationalized care, medical outcomes are often catastrophically worse. Take breast cancer. According to the Heritage Foundation, breast cancer mortality in Germany is 52% higher than in the U.S.; the U.K.’s rate is 88% higher. For prostate cancer, mortality is 604% higher in the U.K. and 457% higher in Norway. Colorectal cancer? Forty percent higher in the U.K.
But what about the health care paradise to our north? Americans have almost uniformly better outcomes and lower mortality rates than Canada, where breast cancer mortality is 9% higher, prostate cancer 184% higher and colon cancer 10% higher.”

Too many people on here have been listening to fox news. The USA can’t continue down the road that bush/cheney led us. So people, you must realize that fox news is simply entertainment, listen to other sources (Such as NPR) to get a “real” balanced approach.

“Check it for yourself.”
You made the claim, back it up.

“Senator Kennedy admitted today that Obamacare will result in rationing.”
It’s about time. I’ve been saying this for a long time here and Ryan’s been insulting me about it every time.”
Psssst quoting right wing healdlines does not equal the truth…usually quite the opposite.

“Gee, Ryan that dort of makes liars of those who fail to account for this, doesn’t it?”
Actually since that is offered by a right wing doctor with ZERO citation, I would say its very likely she’s lying and you gullible as ever swallowed it.

Ryan
Spitting on sources doesn’t do anything but make you full of spit.
You only resort to this infantile behavior because you cannot refute the facts.

“In the analysis of global infant mortality, Japan had the lowest newborn death rate, 1.8 per 1,000 and four countries tied for second place with 2 per 1,000 — the Czech Republic, Finland, Iceland and Norway …
About half a million U.S. babies are born prematurely each year, data show. African-American babies are twice as likely as white infants to be premature, to have a low birth weight, and to die at birth, according to Save the Children …
“The researchers also said lack of national health insurance and short maternity leaves likely contribute to the poor U.S. rankings. Those factors can lead to poor health care before and during pregnancy, increasing risks for premature births and low birth weight, which are the leading causes of newborn death in industrialized countries.”

“Let’s talk about what the guidelines will be for rationing”
I don’t think the word ‘rationing’ is appropriate in this case and it’s descriptive qualities are being exploited. It implies that there wouldn’t be enough basic services to go around which not the issue.

“Letting Mom and Dad die sooner is another.”
People’s Moms and Dads who don’t have insurance are dying sooner right now. All you’ve been able to do so far is support a different way to choose who will die sooner.

“Of course it’s rationing, Skip. For many procedures you’ll go on a major wait list. Dying is one method of const containment.”
Because insurance companies never ever refuse treatment…right?

“It must kill you to know Ted Kennedy admits I was right.”
Not at all.
I knew you were lying about Kennedy.
Now I have verified it.

I remember when I was a debater, you knew you had the other side on the ropes when they were reduced to attacking the credentials of your sources. Not that solid sources were not important, but if you were wasting time in the round on credentials, in most cases, that meant you didn’t have enough solid material to refute the arguments themselves.
The information on life expectancy statistics, infant mortality statistics, and cancer survivability that puts the US in a very favorable light, far more favorable than the public plan proponents want it to appear, is accurate. Posters here are quoting secondary sources, like the Heritage Foundation and the California doctor. BUT what matters is that the raw material backs up those claims. I have been researching those topics myself in recent days and passed along much of the information I found on this web site.
You can argue about the slant of the Heritage Foundation if you like, but my understanding of the skewing of infant mortality and life expectancy statistics did not come from that source. I found the same numbers the Heritage folks did. Others can do the research for themselves, too, if they have the time and inclination. You can’t change the fact that they are facts– that the quality of health care in America is the gold standard, that those of us commenting here who are Americans can fight over the cost of our health care, and even about access to health care, but should not waste time arguing about whether or not we have extremely high quality health care in this country. We do.

“The information on life expectancy statistics, infant mortality statistics, and cancer survivability that puts the US in a very favorable light, far more favorable than the public plan proponents want it to appear, is accurate. Posters here are quoting secondary sources, like the Heritage Foundation and the California doctor. BUT what matters is that the raw material backs up those claims. I have been researching those topics myself in recent days and passed along much of the information I found on this web site.”
So where is the raw data backing up these claims?
None of these secondary sources seem to cite it.
They cite each other instead.
“You can argue about the slant of the Heritage Foundation if you like, but my understanding of the skewing of infant mortality and life expectancy statistics did not come from that source. I found the same numbers the Heritage folks did. ”
I also found the same numbers on numerous right wing blogs, none with original citation.
“You can’t change the fact that they are facts– that the quality of health care in America is the gold standard”
Because that’s not a fact, no matter how many times you say it.
“that those of us commenting here who are Americans can fight over the cost of our health care, and even about access to health care, but should not waste time arguing about whether or not we have extremely high quality health care in this country. We do.”
Of we do have high quality care here for those willing pay for it.
As opposed to the rest of the 1st world which has high quality care for all.

The CBO estimates the cost of the public option in healthcare will cost $1 trillion over 10 years. Other groups estimate the cost to be $1.25 trillion to $1.5 trillion over 10 years.
I would like to know how many people the CBO and other groups estimate will take advantage of the public option? Has anyone seen either the CBO’s or the Obama Administration’s estimates? Certainly that will make a huge difference on the total cost. IF they are estimating that the 40 million uninsured will take the public option how many more do they estimate will switch from a current private insurance to the public option?
Now IF as many of us believe will be the result of implementing the public option–that it will eliminate the private sector as an option and leave only the public option as the sole provider of health care–then that would mean 300 million people being covered by the public option. THAT could mean the actual 10 year cost might end up being 5-6 times the current estimates. Everyone’s taxes would have to be raised should that happen!

Deduct the savings from business not having to provide insurance and the cost we pay now and the projection of that cost over the next 10 years.
===========
So you think businesses won’t have to pay a tax to support the public option?
The government is going to pay, instead of people?
How are you imagining this getting paid for?

I wish it wasn’t but lets be real: PR has alot to do with all this and opponents of these plans are using the word ‘rationing’ to try and scare people.
==========
What do you think Obama is doing to move the discussion along?
What do you think about the rest of my comment- that Obama must be ready to discuss limitations on care if he is really going to have good legislation written and passed?

“What would Senator Kennedy’s medical situation be if he was under his own plan?”
He’d have died before he was diagnosed.

State champs my senior year, Ryan, and a college scholarship to boot. Yeah, we won far more than we lost.
Maybe I should have spelled out every little detail- a real time suck- for you. Bogus info from a bogus source does not enter into what I was describing– you debunk the source and the info in one fell swoop. That is not what is going on here and what I was referring to.
Say you want to put a fact about Pakistani military spending into the round and the card that says what you need to say in the shortest amount of words is by Meade. You use it. The information Meade is discussing about the military spending derives from Jane’s Defence which is a much better source. Cutting a card from Jane’s would mean having to put in lots of ellipses to get just the words you need into the round without a lot of extra material you do not need or just cutting a wordy card. So you go with the Meade card so you can have time to pack in another card or two in the time allowed. If any idiot decides to start ranting about Meade’s credentials to speak of Pakistani military hardware, you can use Jane’s as a backup in cross-x. The other team should have cut the same cards. They should know what you know. So they should not waste time disputing Meade’s knowledge of the subject because they know as well as you do that the fact is solid and where Meade got it. A team hat went after the card on credentials would be wasting their time and if they knew their stuff, they should know that.
See, I figured that explanation would be too inside baseball for the forum. But since you were so tickled by my more succinct version I guess I needed to spell it out for you.

Uh, what the Mayo clinic is proposing–paying for results, not procedures–is exactly what Obama–along with many other progressive policy wonks–has proposed himself. The problem isn’t with Obama, it’s with a Congress that lacks either the courage, the motivation or the intellect to pass a plan that does the right thing.