Today’s Q’s for O’s WH — 12/22/09

I think Gibberish’s non answer says it all.

Never has a WH spokesman said so little with so many words.

What is the matter with ABC and Jake Tapper for not exposing the “SWEETHEART DEALS” that Reid had to buy votes for the sickening health care bill? You people must be still sitting in the back pockets of those crooks in Washington otherwise you would REPORT REAL JOURNALISM instead of the nonsense junk coming in your headlines and on ABC news! You people should be ashamed of even calling yourselves a NEWS agency!! And here I thought Jake was a journalist…maybe he got a sweetheat deal too!!

Good for him, ignoring . . . a growing majority of the American public
_________________________________
Gallup poll today has the President at 51% approval rating. 43% disapprove.
It’s a majority approving.

If what we are seeing today is the implementation of a plan (yes, a conspiracy) begun long ago, and I do mean *long* ago, as in the early years of the 20th century, what chance do we have of arresting the movement forward of their plan for world government?
We’ve accepted most of it already, haven’t we? Aren’t we pretending that the destruction of our country actually has not occurred already? That is, hasn’t the struggle between collectivism and the inalienable rights of individual human beings already been lost by us?
I have little hope that the military will do what *we* consider right; there are many in the military who love the collectivist vision of humanity and would think nothing of killing us all.
Look, the education system for the last 100 or so years has molded the minds of generations of Americans into something that we all just witnessed in the last election. It wasn’t just the kids who went gaga over Obama; it was every age group — that’s how long they’ve been indoctrinating us.
I suppose you could accuse me of buying into a crackpot’s view of the universe, but it certainly seems rational to me to look at the world in terms of the struggle now going on before our very eyes.
The problem for us is that thinking about it in terms of individual particular instances is a symptom of not understanding the nature of the problem. They have succeeded in creating the robots they set out to create. What we are up against are robots who are programmed into the anti-life view of the world. They cannot respond to reason.
So what are we to do?

Gallup poll today has the President at 51% approval rating. 43% disapprove.
It’s a majority approving.

A clear mafority of American OPPOSE Obamacare
____________________________________
Not really. Depends on the poll for one thing. Gallup has 46% of Americans supporting health care legislation.
As all the nonsense and bickering settles down, I believe this number will become more positive. Right now many Americans do not like Congress, incumbents of any party, nor the legislative process – this greatly influences the health care polls.

Correction: I obviously OVERestimated the competence (but not the radicalness) of Obama and his lackeys.

Obama and the majority party in Congress are one step closer to ramming a healthcare bill the American people do not want down our throats. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!
Obama has reneged on his campaign promise of transparency. It is time to VOTE HIM OUT!
Obama has reneged on his campaign promise of non-partisanship. It is time to VOTE HIM OUT!
The majority party in Congress has given huge handouts to a few senators at the expense of those of us who live in all the other states. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!
The majority party in Congress has used back room deals and late night votes to confuse and mislead the American people. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!
Obama and The majority party in Congress have engaged in reckless spending that will severely impact the standard of living of future generations. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!
Obama and the majority party in Congress are responsible for the biggest intrusion into our private lives in the history of the country and the biggest perversion of our economic system as well. Obama is pointing us to a future of stagnation. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!

Posted by: tierra | Dec 22, 2009 3:24:35 PM
You are reaching very, very deep to defend your fallen Messiah…
And, it’s just year 1 of his presidency. Wait until years 2 – 4 when it’s not just conservatives who are carping on his general incompetence, lack of results on improving the economy, and his inability to protect American interests abroad.
Obama will end December with the lowest job approval at end of first year than any other president tracked by Gallup.

46%

“Moreover, working toward universal coverage is the decent, moral, humane and compassionate thing to do.”
You state (to paraphrase) that while the Obamacare does not poll well, elements of the bill are popular. Perhaps that is true – until the question is re-phrased to include if respondents would be willing to pay more for these elements to be incorporated, at which point polling turns negative.
Do you support $500 billion in cuts to Medicare? Do you support a 20%+ pay cut to physicians who see Medicare patients? Do you believe that Congress will follow through on making these cuts? If so, do you have evidence that Congress has followed through on similar commitments in the past?
And will there be enough doctors to support increased demand? There is already a shortage of primary care physicians, physicians are refusing to accept Medicare patients as they can no longer afford to do so (underpayments, late payments from govt.), and just as “taxing something will lead to less of it”, giving away healthcare will mean increased demand for healthcare services.
I don’t think there is anyone who would disagree that having healthcare for all would be a beautiful thing. But there is the reality of cost and availability of physicians. This legislation does not address either.
BTW – How does spending $900 billion “reduce the deficit/save” $130+ billion? Can you explain this math?
I realize you are a big fan of universal/government-run healthcare, but how can you support this legislation without objectively thinking through the questions raised? (unless you are a blind partisan which I do not believe you are)

I don’t think there is anyone who would disagree that having healthcare for all would be a beautiful thing.
…
Yes. A beautiful thing.
…
I realize you are a big fan of universal/government-run healthcare, but how can you support this legislation without objectively thinking through the questions raised?
…
I AM a fan of singler payer, particularly the French health care system. It looks like we’re going more Swiss. I can live with that– but I can’t live with yet another coming crisis (growing number of uninsureds, medical inflation)that we refuse to deal with (like the economy crash; the levies in New Orleans; whispers about bin Laden planning something BIG in the United States, possibly something to do with airplanes– but before I get accused of blaming Bush for that or being a truther, I don’t blame Bush at all for that; I’m just saying it was a coming crisis that wasn’t taken seriously enough.)
I think universal health care and a sustainable system is worth some growing pains, and some compromises– and compromises were made despite the spin that claims they weren’t.
Also, I have objectively thought through a wide, wide range of questions, many you didn’t ask, many of which have been hashed on at town halls, throughout the blogosphere, in Congress, and via pundits on opinion shows. I first became a Democrat rather than an independent in part because I believe in universal health care– so I’ve been thinking about it for a long, long time. (And I think you’re repeating yourself on some of the Q’s– asked and answered.)

“Yes. He’s very well-liked by those who have actually met him”
—
Just as all con-men are.

Both the NYT editorial board AND a group of economists from Stanford, MIT, Princeton, Brookings Institution) have come out in favor of the Senate Health bill. The economists sent Harry Reid a letter congratulating him on a job well done, and pointing out two elements they particularly liked about the bill. One of those elements is the Medicare commission. They write:
“Among the features that we believe to be critical to a fiscally responsible approach to health reform is a more effective independent Medicare advisory body. The Manager’s Amendment has strengthened the role of the body, now called the Independent Payment Advisory Board. The Amendment gives the Board the authority to produce annual reports beginning in 2014 and to report on privately financed medical care as well as care financed by Medicare. In addition, its recommendations will receive fast-track consideration under a broader set of circumstances than under the Senate Leadership Bill. These are important steps toward assuring that health care reform will significantly reduce health care inflation in both the public and private sectors.”
So, tjp, this gets at your questions about Medicare, which I’ll come back to in a separate comment.
They also like the pilot programs and note:
“Another feature that has been strengthened is the commitment to delivery system change. The Manager’s Amendment contains several provisions that should stimulate the development of innovative approaches to payment for care. These approaches hold the promise of improving quality and lowering the costs of care.”

Do you believe other massive entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are “sustainable”?
I think the most effective way to ensure Medicare and Medicaid are indeed sustainable is via universal single payer health care. The key problem with the US health care system is its fragmentation. So, are they sustainable as they are now? No, not without reforms, although in 2007, a study from the Foundation’s Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, published in Health Affairs, concluded that “expected growth in government revenues was likely to be large enough to sustain Medicaid spending increases over the next 40 years, while also allowing substantial real growth in spending for other public services. The study projects that Medicaid’s share of national health spending would remain virtually unchanged until 2025 and then increase slowly by 2045.” Also, “there is little that is special about Medicaid spending: It is likely to increase with health spending more generally, neither much more quickly nor much more slowly.”
So, getting universal health care coverage in place and moving on to bending the cost curve and integrate the approach to both delivery and payment (which is the usual evolution of these things—see Massachusetts and other countries) will be helpful in making both sustainable. Universal coverage systems find that they can’t just let the health care system increase costs because there is no safety valve of the uninsured to dump out of the system. All in, none out.
Do you support $500 billion in cuts to Medicare?
Yes. As I previously mentioned these are directed at waste and Medicare Advantage subsidies. (more on this later, maybe, I’m rushing here)
Do you support a 20%+ pay cut to physicians who see Medicare patients?
I believe there are good ways to integrate the approach and save costs and there will be growing pains to getting there. Simple pay cuts on fee for service isn’t the best way.
Do you believe that Congress will follow through on making these cuts?
Only if they are held accountable—by leadership, by the people, by a commission, by watchdogs.

So how would you explain our $13 trillion national debt?
________________________________________
By the end of the Clinton administration, the deficit had been cut to almost nothing.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration chose to cut back taxes and increase spending thus plunging the country further and further into debt every years of his presidency.
And we all know what happened to the economy while the Bush administration was in office – a severe economic recession that further eroded inadequate taxes.
Every western industrialized country has instituted stimulus plans, deficit spending and tax cuts in an attempt to get out of the economic mess all world economies have been going through.

Posted by: tjp612 | Dec 22, 2009 11:42:09 PM
You asked “So how would you explain our $13 trillion national debt?”
And it was clearly detailed for you . . .
________________________________________
By the end of the Clinton administration, the deficit had been cut to almost nothing.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration chose to cut back taxes and increase spending – thus plunging the country further and further into debt every years of his presidency. By the end of his administration, the national debt was doubled to over $10 TRILLION dollars.
And we all know what happened to the economy while the Bush administration was in office – a severe economic recession that further eroded inadequate taxes.
When Bush left office hundreds of thousands of jobs were being lost every month, the stock market had collapsed, foreclosures and bankruptcies were going through the roof, major banks and financial institutions were in complete collapse.
Bush had bankrupted the country and presided over the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression.

It is obvious that you are believer in universal care … No sense in tying up space on screen with these long posts. While your intentions are noble, this is NOT the best approach and passage of this bill is a big step towards nationalized healthcare
—
Agreed. It is obvious.
There are some issues, I’m more conservative about or more non- or bipartisan or independent but health care isn’t one of them (though I think tort reform is worth pursuing more aggressively as long as patient safety and a mechanism for addressing true wrongs is kept in place, and I would like the insurance exchanges to be nationalized, with federal regulation– think Swiss :>))
Anyway…as you say, we could probably go back and forth, and not really change either’s mind– and this isn’t really the forum for all that. Its worthwhile to hear your perspective, and I am respectful of all opinions, but ultimately its moral for me. Deeply moral. And yet, I do understand where you’re coming from. The truth is neither side can know for sure what the outcome will be of either the status quo or various reforms. As humans, we do our best to learn from others’ experiences and the trends, and we crunch the numbers and read studies an wonks. I’ve found some good things out of the state experiments, you see some bad things. I suppose both sides can sift through all the wonkery and find what they need to justify a position. I’ve seen no clear evidence for not moving forward toward universal coverage as other nations have done with success– and to me it really is the bone-deep “right” thing to do. I don’t judge those who don’t think so if they have legitimate arguments, but they’re not really going to change my mind unless they have definitive evidence– and they don’t.