Secret Service Visits Kennedy Compound; White House Says ‘No Plans’ for Obama Visit

Nothing says “I feel your pain” like a president schmoozing with fellow millionaires at Martha’s Vineyard.
Sure he deserves a vacation.
But this is the worst recession since the Great Depression, repeated ad nauseum by Obama.
He easily can afford over %50K a week while millions can barely feed their families.
Sure Obama deserves a vacation.
But Martha’ Vineyard?
He’s supposed to be different.
And he’s sending the wrong message.

I couldn’t believe my eyes and ears this evening. One of the major networks on the evening news questioned whether Obama was sending the right message by vacationing at Martha’s Vineyard.
Is it possible that the MSM is starting to do their job?
Maybe there’s still hope for some in the MSM.

He’s taking his first vacation after over 7 months on the job. Since Congress is not in session and he’s boarderline over exposed promoting legislation now, it seems like some time out of the office is the right move for him. He’s set the course firmly on Iraq and Afghanistan, made his arguments on legislation, and the financial bailouts and other measures are done. Plus it’s not like he’s disappeared off to Argentina in secrecy or anything – he’s closer to ‘the office’ than if he went home to Chicago.
Not exactly sure what people want him to do – personally go out and help the unemployed fill out job apps?
And actually, the wealthy going out and starting spending again is, in fact, EXACTLY the message that needs to get out. The wealthy and businesses need to get out of crisis mode and start spending – I’d think the trickle down party would know this.

patton | Aug 23, 2009 9:19:43 PM —- Like it or not the Kennedy’s have devoted their lives to public service. You? Oh, it’s just easier to tear down people who are fighting for their lives. Very Christian of you!

===He’s taking his first vacation after over 7 months on the job. ===
Not many people get a week off after 7 months on the job. That said, I don’t care where he is as long as he isn’t on television all week long. Over-exposure is putting it mildly.

Huh | Aug 23, 2009 10:16:19 PM – If private insurance actually was competitive we wouldn’t have this issue! They have had years to clean up their act and haven’t. What would you have President Obama do, force them to, so you can scream about that? By the way, whatever happened years ago, Sen. Kennedy has worked hard for the people of this country. If you don’t believe in forgiveness then you have enough Republicans to rant about, leave a dieing man alone!

No, no Barack is just like one of us. He just vacations like an elitist for appearance’s sake.

Axey:”Not many people get a week off after 7 months on the job. ”
“Not many”? Do you want to define that before I point out the real world statistics? Americans get among the least vacation in the world, but a week off after 6 months is standard (greater than 50% of the full time work force) in America.

BH:”No, no Barack is just like one of us.”
He’s the President of the most powerful, most prosperous free nation mankind has ever seen, and he achieved that position without the benefits of any family ties or wealth.
He’s not just like us, and I’m willing to bet you have more than a touch of an inflated ego if you think he’s just like you. Being President of our country is basically the definition of being one of the elite, and it should be. I want the best running the nation.

“Americans get among the least vacation in the world, but a week off after 6 months is standard (greater than 50% of the full time work force) in America.”
Oh, yeah. Complete with all expenses paid to one of the most elite locations in the country. Yup, that’s the typical American experience.
And you guys were yelling and screaming about AIG running off to a spa for a measly $400K…

Try the truth – I believe in forgiveness. He can go get a real job and sweat like the rest of us. Most people would serve a little time for doing what Kennedy did. As far as the health care debate goes. Look at a flowchart of the entangled government/politician/hospital mess with every entity taking its cut. Why doesn’t home owners insurance cover a burned out lightbulb, chips of paint falling off, oil spots in the driveway. Free market for all things small, insurance for all things big. Remember government can’t do anything under cost. It can’t deliver the mail for a profit. It can’t run Amtrak for a profit. It will not make cars for a profit, and it certainly will not deliver health care for a profit. History supports what I am saying. By the way we are broke, and most people eat junk.

BH:”Oh, yeah. Complete with all expenses paid to one of the most elite locations in the country. Yup, that’s the typical American experience. ”
I was responding to Axey’s comment: “Not many people get a week off after 7 months on the job.” Which was a blatant lie. Speaking of blatant lies, Obama is NOT getting an all-expenses-paid vacation. He pays for it out of his own pocket or his limited expenses compensation.
Our president is the leader of the greatest nation on Earth. He should live in a mansion, he should have his own plane, and he should take nice vacations where he wishes – regardless of what party he is. As long as he is doing the job, he should get the compensation (which is still a pittance to what Obama could have earned annually if he never went into politics).

Axey:”Afraid to try it before you turn our health care industry over to the government? ”
Perhaps we should try a goat sacrifice too, and wait a couple years to see if health care dances on the solstices do the trick.
California is a single MASSIVE health care market, equivalent to letting the insurance companies serving the 20 smallest states have your ‘open border’ competition. Open borders alone are not enough to create the free market necessary due to massive barriers to entry.

===At the same point in his presidency, Bush had already been on vacation for a month.===
Actually, the president is never on vacation, they just aren’t in Washington. Like I said earlier, I don’t care where Obama is as long as it isn’t on my television for a week. I’m sure a trip to Teddy’s house will ruin that wish, since the cameras will be rolling.

“Our president is the leader of the greatest nation on Earth. He should live in a mansion, he should have his own plane, and he should take nice vacations where he wishes – regardless of what party he is.”
No argument here, but let’s dispel any notions that the President’s background is all that different from any other President. The President has had a pretty easy life with lots of extraordinary help from some very shady folks.

moderate:” He never mentions those of us calling for a different sort of reform than he is, one that includes tort reform to reduce defensive doctoring, expanded use of HSAs with the government perhaps contributing to the HSAs”
It’s a pity that those of you with those views are such a vanishing minority that you do not have anyone in Congress representing you. The Republicans could offer their own bill(s), or steer this one with amendments and agreements to compromise (like the Democrats did to blunt the scariest – to them- parts of welfare reform in the 90′s, or Bush’s tax cuts in the 00′s). They have chose to just obstruct and spew out soundbites for their next election.
As a sidenote, you do realize states have the authority to do tort reform, many did it in the 80′s – including strict caps, and it is NOT a major savings. The CBO analyzed the savings potential and it is negligible compared to the full cost of healthcare (large, but healthcare is a trillion dollar problem). It’s largest impact is making some kinds of OBGYN practices cheaper. Is – not ‘world be;’ tort reform HAS BEEN DONE in many states. It’s impacts and savings are documented real-world fact if you just look. Pushing tort reform as a major savings makes your ideas appear woefully uninformed and bias rather than fact based.

BH:”No argument here, but let’s dispel any notions that the President’s background is all that different from any other President. ”
So he’s just like JFK or Bush who came from poor, no-name families and worked their way up the ladder through their own hard work. Another little snapshot into whatever fantasy world the right lives in.

“It’s a pity that those of you with those views are such a vanishing minority that you do not have anyone in Congress representing you.”
And yet, your stunning, impervious majority can barely get a health bill out of committee before being torched during the August recess. No question about it..the Repubs. are irrelevant and bankrupt of ideas….but just what exactly does that say about Democrats running for cover…blaming Republicans for their ineptness no less!…because the majority of Americans don’t trust them?

BH:”And yet, your stunning, impervious majority can barely get a health bill out of committee before being torched during the August recess. ”
? I’ve never said they’re an impervious majority. Anyone saying such a thing is woefully ignorant of reality – they only have 58 votes in the Senate without literally wheeling people in on hospital beds. You need 60 to break the Republicans unprecedented filibustering. And based on solid history, they’ll lose some seats come 2010. (Based on the blue dogs true, pharma-paid colors, I suspect they’ll lose a good number of seats this year.)
I don’t think it’s bad that the Democrats do NOT march in lockstep with Obama. They never have (which makes the ‘cult of personality’ nonsense just another lie that makes the Republicans look like they’re off in fantasy land).

BH you’re partially right. The problem isn’t really the Republicans.
The problem is a small group of Democrats who believe that their constituency is the insurance and drug industries that give them half or more of their funding.
For example, Sen Baucus of Montana, where the majority of Democrats disagree with his handling of health care.
On the other hand there is also Sen Snowe, who despite being told by all of the organizations representing small businesses in Maine that they need the public option, refuses to put it in the bill.

…, but let’s dispel any notions that the President’s background is all that different from any other President.
Posted by: BH
this is a true sample of how foolish some people are…. to suggest that Obama’s upbringing is in any way similar to ‘W’s, who was raised by a sort of political family dynasty of wealth and power.. is almost as lame as the ‘birther’s’ ranting

Flash Override:”The problem is a small group of Democrats who believe that their constituency is the insurance and drug industries that give them half or more of their funding.”
Minor correction: “The problem is a small group of Democrats” AND EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN “who believe that their constituency is the insurance and drug industries.” It is laughable to ‘blame Democrats’ because 5% of their caucus is obstructionist while 100% of Republicans are.
If the Republicans wanted to get something done, they would have done it years ago. Or they would come out with a ‘cream skimming’ bill with all the non-controversial, most popular reforms in one package.

Flash, Selling insurance across state lines is NOT just about insurance companies looking for friendly environs. Speaking out my wazoo, I would suggest that one big advantage of dropping the state lines for selling health insurance is the creation of bigger pools of the insured, which will lower costs. Car insurance is sold across state lines, right? Also, I don’t want those expensive state mandates to limit my choices of options– insurance companies will doubtless continue to offer gold-plated packages, but could also offer more basic coverage that does not include, say, maternity or alcohol/drug abuse services to those who do not feel they need them.
BTW, a Republican bill to allow sales across state lines was proposed by Shadegg and Demint in 2007 (they proposed a similar bill in 2005 and it died from inaction but did make it out of committee). And McCain championed the idea on the campaign trail, while candidate Obama opposed it. Rather like the change in taxing premiums, it is a McCain supported idea whose time has come.
And yes, I thought we were talking about federal regulation of health insurance– would the democratic bills be considered NOT heavily regulate the industry as you understand it? News to me.

moderate:”Let’s try again– we are not just talking about the direct costs of malpractice awards, which have been capped in those states, but about defensive doctoring. The studies that say the costs haven’t changed in those states are focusing on malpractice premiums and awards, not on defensive medicine. (and how do you explain the success of tort reform in Texas, btw?) We need nation-wide tort reform. ”
So with malpractice awards capped, why is defensive medicine still occurring? Think! Either tort reform doesn’t prevent defensive medicine, or the savings are not as big as you think. And the CBO studies did NOT just look at malpractice awards and insurance premiums, they also compared total health care spending to statistically similar population in states without tort reform. It looked at the data to identify defensive medicine spending – you know, reality not thought exercises.
Tort reform DOES save real amounts of money, it is very important to OBGYNs wanting to set up one or two person practices (too small for lawyers or to bargain with malpractice insurers). But those amounts are a few percent off the total health care spending beast.
As for tort reform’s success in Texas, how are you defining success? Based on pesky reality again, the premium for a family health insurance policy in Texas was $11,690 in 2006 – versus an average of $11,381 for the US as a whole. So what was tort reforms success in Texas? It’s not reducing premiums.
(Numbers collected under the Republican administration by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Center for Financing, Access and Cost Trends. 2006 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) -Insurance Component. Tables II.D.1, II.D.2, II.D.3 available at: Medical Expenditure Panel survey (MEPS))

Tort reform DOES save real amounts of money, … But those amounts are a few percent off the total health care spending beast.
Posted by: jhw539 |
It is a complete and total no-brainer that we should have meaningful and effective tort reform. If the obstructionists are right we only save a little. If the Massachusetts Medical Institutes November 2008 definitive study of defensive medicine is right then we save much more. We have nothing to lose.
Why would anyone oppose tort reform unless they were totally in the tank for the trial lawyers?
How can anyone be completely opposed to any meaningful tort reform and then accuse folks of not being willing to “discuss” health care reforms?

Tort reform is merely a euphemism for taking away victims’ rights.
We’d all be alot better off if people stopped hiding their class and race prejudices with euphemistic language.

When the President figures out how his 10 year budget projections were off 2 trillion from six months ago, and how Cash for Clunkers managed to go over the original budget while practically grinding to a halt, then, maybe, the left can come back to the table of ideas when they start talking about overhauling 1/6th of the nation’s GDP.

BH:”and how Cash for Clunkers managed to go over the original budget while practically grinding to a halt”
Why would we debate made up lies? Cash for clunkers did not go over budget. It was created to end when it ran out of money, and so they shut it down when it was projected to run out of money until, recognizing a successful program, additional resources were allocated. It was more successful than anticipated and went more quickly than anyone expected, but like the quick dispatch of Saddam’s army in Iraq excess speed was hardly a failure. Cash for Clunkers was designed to remove x vehicles from the road. It was never designed to run for x weeks.

The creators of cash for clunkers appropiated what they thought were sufficient funds for three months. They ran out of money in a week.
That occurrence seems to have presented to them for the very first time the notion that people are willing to accept other people’s money for almost any purpose, even if it means that the magnanimous giver will destroy a perfectly useful and valuable asset in the process, thus making that asset unavailable to the poor who might otherwise have bought it at its market value.
But let them eat cake, and let them buy a nice Prius. That will be a big hit where Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank and Henry Waxman hang out.

JEH539, you want me to “read up on it?” For God’s sake, mam, I lived it professionally for thirty years–what, exactly, would you like me to read?

Facist Hyena:”I lived it professionally for thirty years–what, exactly, would you like me to read?”
“We must inquire just what form such reforms took, and what has been their effect?”
You “lived it” yet you don’t know what form the 80′s reforms took? Nor are you aware of their impact on costs and procedure performed? And how exactly did you live it in a manner that gave you access to the large multi-state bodies of data required to reach any macro understanding of the impact?
Read the CBO reports, or just remain ignorant because you don’t know the forest from a tree.

Foghorn Leghorn:”For anyone who thinks there is something fishy about the claim that tort reform is not worth doing”
What a surprise – a strawman from the right. I certainly don’t think it isn’t worth doing, but all the factual studies, including those done under the Republican Congress and Administration, have concluded that a billion here and a billion there does add up to real money – but only a percent of two of our health care spending.

When they start writing in all caps, I know I’ve won.

“I certainly don’t think it isn’t worth doing”
As I said, it’s a no-brainer.
“all the factual studies, have concluded that a billion here and a billion there does add up to real money – but only a percent of two of our health care spending.”
Apparently there is only one tree in your forest.

For anyone who thinks there is something fishy about the claim that tort reform is not worth doing please Google “massachusetts medical society tort reform”.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Aug 24, 2009 1:03:14 AM
***********
Also Google Tort Reform in Texas where it has worked and good Doctors are relocating there in droves. And isn’t the TX economy doing much much better than the MA economy?

Tort reform?
John Edwards makes millions of dollars channeling dead babies. Anyone suggesting that that should continue unabated is nuts.
The wealthiest doctors do not even come close to the money that plaintiff’s attorneys make.

Did any of you ever notice that the only people who can afford to run for office are LAWYERS???
The rarities like Tom Coburn come from very small population states where the cost to run a campaign is not so onerous.

“Why would we debate made up lies? Cash for clunkers did not go over budget.”
Uh, sorry, but a couple of facts. First of all, the $3 billion cap is already known to have been spent while the final tally isn’t in. But then there’s press headlines like this one emerging:
Cash for Clunkers Will Surpass $3 Billion Budget
But hey, why do basic math and read when you can just call someone a liar…

Does Obama think Martha’s Vineyard, the exclusive haven of the Eastern liberal elite, is the appropriate place to vacation during these trying times?
Imagine if the Obamas has instead vacationed in the Midwest, say at The Dells in Wisconsin?

Here’s tort reform for you: payments for health care costs make up the bulk of most malpractice awards. If you have single payer health care, those costs are already paid.

Wisconsin Dells? Surely you jest.The Obama clan would not be satisfied by such a proletarian location.The children will have much more fun watching the surf and listening to the adults making small talk.Besides,the President needs to take a break from the heavy burdens of his office to be with his own crowd.Remember, he doesn’t want to cling to guns or religion like those silly midwestern people.Besides, they were dumb enough to elect him without knowing anything about him.

he doesn’t want to cling to guns or religion like those silly midwestern people
Posted by: Nephron
very original…maybe you should have been concerned when Bush took off for 31 days of vacation……………you mean you didn’t know that? shocking….

Maybe I’m misinformed,but I thought Barack Obama was president,not George Bush.

racet=race
“yeah, yer right, lets not allow citizens to do anything about being poisoned or maimed by bad products…”
You missed the point entirely. How does enriching leaches like Edwards improve health care?
When Obama rants on about excessive salaries, why does he never mention the astronomical fees and awards given to Trial Lawyers?

Big news on PO =
“I want a public option” –Sen. Baucus

-Maybe I’m misinformed,but I thought Barack Obama was president,not George Bush.-
Geroge Bush will always be POTUS when it is convenient.

-No, it wasn’t designed to remove vehicles from the road but to replace them with more fuel efficient ones. You get CASH for another VEHICLE for trading in your CLUNKER. See?-
Thank You! American car shopper. We at Toyota are grateful for your business! Cash for Clunker Cars was complete and total success. Please to have another stimulus plan. Banzai!

-Bible study is for church.-
Tell Obama. I don’t want to hear any more mention of God when it comes to the healthcare debate.

The profit motive is only a small part of the problem with corporate control over health care.
The problem is that these corporations are parasites.
You’re defending a vampire by saying that he’s only barely surviving by sucking blood.

Palin + Bachmann 2012
Bachmann + Santorum 2012
Please……….

moderate, the last time I checked, insurance companies do not make food, nor truck it to my neighborhood, nor a place in which I can buy it.
What they are SUPPOSED to do is allow us to *share* risk.
They have FAILED at 1) allowing people to share the unknown risk of getting a serious, and expensive, illness.
They have FAILED at keeping premiums affordable. The fact that premiums have doubling every 10 years means that most Americans are going to find themselves naked, without insurance, in a few short years.
They have WASTED an amazing amount of money, forcing doctors to hire people to their staff who never provide health care, just to fight with the insurance companies.
They have proven they cannot be TRUSTED, as in the case of Robin Beaton, who had her insurance cancelled after she was diagnosed with breast cancer, just a few days before she was scheduled to have a mastectomy.
They said she had a ‘pre-existing condition’, because of a skin blemish and her dermatologist pleaded with them on the phone, explaining it was acne not cancer!
But her insurance company closed their ears, and had no heart and the hospital told her they would not release the O.R. unless she could come up with $30,000 down.
This lady’s cancer doubled in size before she finally was able to get life saving surgery.
GUESS WHAT REPUBLICANS: This would never happen in the Britain.