PDA

View Full Version : Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) Admits Obama Healthcare Plan Will Destroy Insurance Industry



red states rule
05-02-2009, 06:05 AM
Listen to the riar of the crowd. This is how freedom ends - to thunderous applause.

Obama has criticized banks for making money on loans, so why not attack private health insurance for making money?


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dJkXl4wG2eU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dJkXl4wG2eU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Joe Steel
05-02-2009, 06:14 AM
...so why not attack private health insurance for making money?

Yeah, why not?

Private health insurance is a barrier to good health when we have a better alternative.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 06:16 AM
Yeah, why not?

Private health insurance is a barrier to good health when we have a better alternative.

Yea, we see how well the government runs VA Hospitals, Medicare and Medicade :rolleyes:

Joe Steel
05-02-2009, 06:58 AM
Yea, we see how well the government runs VA Hospitals, Medicare and Medica[id]

All are well-run.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 07:02 AM
All are well-run.

If Curly, Larry, and Moe are running them

Joe, you are hopeless if you honestly believe they are well run. If you like government run health care move to Canada or London. You would be much happier

Joe Steel
05-02-2009, 07:05 AM
If Curly, Larry, and Moe are running them

Joe, you are hopeless if you honestly believe they are well run. If you like government run health care move to Canada or London. You would be much happier

Civic duty. I feel obligated to give my countrymen the benefit of my good judgment.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 07:08 AM
Civic duty. I feel obligated to give my countrymen the benefit of my good judgment.

I am sure Hugo Chavez thanks you for your support

Back to America and the Dems -

If you can control how much money people can make, how much they can then keep, make them responsible to you for their homes, and control their health care what's left?

Nothing

At that point you have total control of the people. Which is the objective of Obama and the Dems

Destroy the home mortgage industry as we've known it since the inception of the country and then destroy they existing health care system and what's left?

Nothing.

Dems already have had control of how much money we can keep no matter how much we make for nearly a hundred years through the federal income tax and estate taxes.

We've had the highest standard of living in the world for more than 75 years here in the US because of the liberty we have enjoyed. We are now being turned into yet another European Nanny State .

PostmodernProphet
05-02-2009, 07:54 AM
Yeah, why not?

Private health insurance is a barrier to good health when we have a better alternative.

how many jobs will be lost when BC/BS closes it's doors?......

red states rule
05-02-2009, 08:00 AM
how many jobs will be lost when BC/BS closes it's doors?......

or United Health Care - my ins co

My claimes have approached nearly $100,000 and I have had zero problems with the ins company

I doubt if the same could have be said if I had Obama care. I would have used up my my rationed portion of medical coverage about 2 years ago

mundame
05-02-2009, 08:32 AM
The whole POINT to nationalized health care is to ration it: health care costs have been growing out of control for years. As I understand it (poorly), the problem is that health care is taking more and more of the money of these United States.

Leaving less and less money for other things.

An article in the Wall Street Journal this week referred to other countries viewing us as a "subprime nation" because of high and growing health costs.

I don't understand quite why this is a problem, necessarily. If anyone thinks they do understand it, explain it?

red states rule
05-02-2009, 08:35 AM
The whole POINT to nationalized health care is to ration it: health care costs have been growing out of control for years. As I understand it (poorly), the problem is that health care is taking more and more of the money of these United States.

Leaving less and less money for other things.

An article in the Wall Street Journal this week referred to other countries viewing us as a "subprime nation" because of high and growing health costs.

I don't understand quite why this is a problem, necessarily. If anyone thinks they do understand it, explain it?

This idea has been tried before in the US - and it failed

Of course, the story got little attention from the liberal media since it went against their big government agenda



Hawaii Ending Universal Child Health Care After 7 Mos.
Friday, October 17, 2008 | FoxNews.com

HONOLULU — Hawaii is dropping the only state universal child health care program in the country just seven months after it launched.

Gov. Linda Lingle's administration cited budget shortfalls and other available health care options for eliminating funding for the program. A state official said families were dropping private coverage so their children would be eligible for the subsidized plan.

"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."

State officials said Thursday they will stop giving health coverage to the 2,000 children enrolled by Nov. 1, but private partner Hawaii Medical Service Association will pay to extend their coverage through the end of the year without government support.

"We're very disappointed in the state's decision, and it came as a complete surprise to us," said Jennifer Diesman, a spokeswoman for HMSA, the state's largest health care provider. "We believe the program is working, and given Hawaii's economic uncertainty, we don't think now is the time to cut all funding for this kind of program."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,439607,00.html

mundame
05-02-2009, 08:40 AM
"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."


Duh.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 08:46 AM
Duh.

That basic concept has been lost on Obama, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, and their supporters who are looking for another handout

mundame
05-02-2009, 08:49 AM
That basic concept has been lost on Obama, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, and their supporters who are looking for another handout


I doubt that. I think it's a way to get total control of the health industry.

First you get nationalized coverage passed by saying people can keep what they've got. Then, as in Hawaii, people figure out it's cheaper to just use the government coverage and more and more people, especially less-rich young people, drift into that.

And then the private coverage closes down.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 08:52 AM
I doubt that. I think it's a way to get total control of the health industry.

First you get nationalized coverage passed by saying people can keep what they've got. Then, as in Hawaii, people figure out it's cheaper to just use the government coverage and more and more people, especially less-rich young people, drift into that.

And then the private coverage closes down.

Obama, Biden, Reid, and Pelosi couldn't give a damn about your healthcare, or your job, or your home. They care about POWER.

Their supporters are expecting "free" healthcare - but when they find out they will have to help pay for part of the cost (it will be impossible to cover the entire cost) they glow of government run health care will fade

April15
05-02-2009, 10:05 AM
For what it is worth it took 15 years of agony to get rotator cuff surgery. The operation failed because it took so long to get approval the tissue has degenerated so much it was not possible to correct the problem. I spent 20 years trying to get a miniscus tear fixed and was so thrilled that I tore it again about 7 months after surgery by running. That was about 5 years or more ago and I am still trying to get it fixed.
National healthcare would have solved these insurance company delays. So destroy the insurance companies if it means I only have to wait 10 years instead of twenty!

red states rule
05-02-2009, 10:09 AM
For what it is worth it took 15 years of agony to get rotator cuff surgery. The operation failed because it took so long to get approval the tissue has degenerated so much it was not possible to correct the problem. I spent 20 years trying to get a miniscus tear fixed and was so thrilled that I tore it again about 7 months after surgery by running. That was about 5 years or more ago and I am still trying to get it fixed.
National healthcare would have solved these insurance company delays. So destroy the insurance companies if it means I only have to wait 10 years instead of twenty!

Your wait would be longer under government health care. The paperwork, the approval process, and red tape would add to the cost and time

Obama's home state tried Obama Care and they saw what a failure it is

Thank God (and no not thank Obama) I was not depending of the government for cancer treatment, the mulitipal surgeries, tests, and exams. I would have gooten a letter along time ago, that my rationed portion of Obama care has been used up, and I am now on my own

Like with most Obama supporters, the sad thing is a very high percentage of our population will gladly line up with their hands out because it's easier than doing something on their own to achieve something in life

Joe Steel
05-02-2009, 12:17 PM
how many jobs will be lost when BC/BS closes it's doors?......

Probably none. They'll all go to work for the local National Health Care Plan intermediary.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 12:19 PM
Probably none. They'll all go to work for the local National Health Care Plan intermediary.

More governemnt paper pushers, making more moeny then the private sector, and more pensions - all paid for by the overtaxed American citizens

Joe Steel
05-02-2009, 12:22 PM
The whole POINT to nationalized health care is to ration it: health care costs have been growing out of control for years. As I understand it (poorly), the problem is that health care is taking more and more of the money of these United States.

Nonsense. The point is to spread the risk to the greatest possible number.

First, and foremost, we're really talking about national health care INSURANCE not national health care. No one has proposed a system of government run health care providers. The proposals are for a method of paying for care at the providers we use now.

Secondly, insurance works best when the risk is spread to the greatest number. National plans would include the greatest possible number of beneficiaries, the whole country. That makes national health care the best possible health care plan imaginable.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 12:24 PM
Nonsense. The point is to spread the risk to the greatest possible number.

First, and foremost, we're really talking about national health care INSURANCE not national health care. No one has proposed a system of government run health care providers. The proposals are for a method of paying for care at the providers we use now.

Secondly, insurance works best when the risk is spread to the greatest number. National plans would include the greatest possible number of beneficiaries, the whole country. That makes national health care the best possible health care plan imaginable.

The US currently has the BEST health care system in the world. Dems see it as a new source to increease their control over the folks, and expsnd the size of government

Why would anyone think the government could run our healthcare efficiently? I don't think they plan to. I think the plan is to slowly and surely destroy capitalism until we have nothing left to stand against government with.

Dems want everyone eating out of their hands so they can push whatever agenda they wish. I wonder if this new government run healthcare will include lethal injections for anyone who isn't a mindless follower.

Joe Steel
05-02-2009, 12:25 PM
More governemnt paper pushers, making more moeny then the private sector, and more pensions - all paid for by the overtaxed American citizens

More nonsense.

CMS already pays local intermediaries to process Medicare claims. They know who to run the process at the best possible price.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 12:26 PM
More nonsense.

CMS already pays local intermediaries to process Medicare claims. They know who to run the process at the best possible price.

and Obama has said he plans to hire 60,000 NEW government workers. As Dems destroy the private sector, they gleefully expand the size and cost of government

Joe Steel
05-02-2009, 12:34 PM
The US currently has the BEST health care system in the world.

It does not.

Some of the best health care in the world is available in the US for those who can pay for it. As a system, though, the US has one of the poorest health care systems in the industrialized word because it leaves too many citizens without adequate care.



Why would anyone think the government could run our healthcare efficiently?

The government is not planning to run the US health care system. It is planning to find a way to pay for care for every citizen.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 12:36 PM
It does not.

Some of the best health care in the world is available in the US for those who can pay for it. As a system, though, the US has one of the poorest health care systems in the industrialized word because it leaves too many citizens without adequate care.




The government is not planning to run the US health care system. It is planning to find a way to pay for care for every citizen.

I wish that the people that so desperately want national healthcare would truly research what has happened in Canada and in the UK.

The Mike Moore dream of transforming the US healthcare system to the Cuban healthcare system is about to become a reality.

Once Obama eliminates the private health insurance sector, Eugenics is the only way they can cut costs.

If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand

Missileman
05-02-2009, 02:06 PM
The government is not planning to run the US health care system. It is planning to find a way to pay for care for every citizen.

You're either kidding yourself or you're one really ignorant fool.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 03:36 PM
You're either kidding yourself or you're one really ignorant fool.

Is there really any doubt what part of your answer applies to Joe?

April15
05-02-2009, 03:39 PM
Your wait would be longer under government health care. The paperwork, the approval process, and red tape would add to the cost and time

Obama's home state tried Obama Care and they saw what a failure it is

Thank God (and no not thank Obama) I was not depending of the government for cancer treatment, the mulitipal surgeries, tests, and exams. I would have gooten a letter along time ago, that my rationed portion of Obama care has been used up, and I am now on my own

Like with most Obama supporters, the sad thing is a very high percentage of our population will gladly line up with their hands out because it's easier than doing something on their own to achieve something in life

You missed my point; that being I pay 980 a month to be told no. As a friend said to me this morning I would be better off if i just saved the money and when I needed surgery just pay for it and not have to be approved by some idiot deciding if my pain is worth fixing.

red states rule
05-02-2009, 03:42 PM
You missed my point; that being I pay 980 a month to be told no. As a friend said to me this morning I would be better off if i just saved the money and when I needed surgery just pay for it and not have to be approved by some idiot deciding if my pain is worth fixing.

So you expect the US taxpayer to fund your health care and medical needs?

If so, using that logic I should post a thread demanding every member send me $500 to pay for my medical expenses

The one thing the Obama supporters will quickly find out is, "free" mediacl care is far form free. Their taxes will go up, and their love of the Chosen One wuill soon fade when they see they WILL HAVE TO PAY PART OF THE COST

red states rule
05-02-2009, 07:27 PM
If you want to learn what getting screwed really means, let the government take over health care.

It'll be run like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and your DMV all rolled into one.

Joe Steel
05-03-2009, 06:58 AM
You're either kidding yourself or you're one really ignorant fool.

Only for responding to your postings with the hope of breaching the wall of ignorance you've built around yourself

red states rule
05-03-2009, 06:59 AM
Only for responding to your postings with the hope of breaching the wall of ignorance you've built around yourself

and we all saw how well government run health care worked in Obama's home state in HI

Jeff
05-03-2009, 07:49 AM
I doubt that. I think it's a way to get total control of the health industry.

First you get nationalized coverage passed by saying people can keep what they've got. Then, as in Hawaii, people figure out it's cheaper to just use the government coverage and more and more people, especially less-rich young people, drift into that.

And then the private coverage closes down.

Less rich that is the key, most people that work have health ins. and no it isnt cheap, and it isn't perfect, but to me the people wanting this government run health care are also the ones that want to collect a check from the Gov. ever month.

As for how good it will be just look to Canada yes they have free medical, and they pay for it ever time they go grocery shopping , anytime they buy anything, Someone is going to pay for it, Obama will just tax the hell out of everything.

Then ya have the quality , if it is so good why do people with money in Canada come to America for health care?

mundame
05-03-2009, 10:46 AM
For what it is worth it took 15 years of agony to get rotator cuff surgery. The operation failed because it took so long to get approval the tissue has degenerated so much it was not possible to correct the problem.

That is so strange and unfortunate, April15! I tore a rotator cuff falling off a horse, and after a few weeks of physical therapy (failed, of course -- surgery really is usually needed from what I hear from everyone) they approved surgery and that was a total cure. I'm sorry to hear you had such a long delay! It is truly a terribly painful condition.

mundame
05-03-2009, 11:01 AM
First, and foremost, we're really talking about national health care INSURANCE not national health care. No one has proposed a system of government run health care providers. The proposals are for a method of paying for care at the providers we use now.



That's an interesting distinction and I'll keep it in mind as the debate starts on legislation, if it does.




Nonsense. The point is to spread the risk to the greatest possible number...insurance works best when the risk is spread to the greatest number. National plans would include the greatest possible number of beneficiaries, the whole country. That makes national health care the best possible health care plan imaginable.


No, I don't believe that has anything to do with it at all. The point is not to make insurance cost LESS ---- the point is to ration health care. THAT is the common denominator in Canada and Britain that people most complain about. They cannot get services, even for painful and dire conditions. That's why they come to the United States to buy health services they cannot get in Canada!

I'd maybe be okay with a government insurance option if there were a total free market that physicians and others who could pay could opt into. So there could be "concierge" doctors who work on retainer, the ability to buy services on the free market, and leaving the country to pay for expensive operations in "medical tourism" countries like India.

A thriving free market for medicine, with the gov. insurance and docs who work under gov. insurance as a backstop. But private hospitals and doctors for people who were forward thinking and saving. Or had extra private insurance plans.

Do you support that, Joe Steel, or would you require everybody to have the poorer, rationed government services where docs are told what they can and cannot do, everyone treated the same?



I recognize that a lot of people think we spend way too much on medicine in this country, but I don't understand why it's not legitimate to spend on medicine --- why NOT spend on medical treatment, if that's what people want? Why is that a problem to the economy? And yet it clearly is viewed as such --- the U.S. high expenditure on medical treatment and drugs is widely viewed as a problem. Anyone have thoughts on this?

red states rule
05-03-2009, 02:59 PM
Less rich that is the key, most people that work have health ins. and no it isnt cheap, and it isn't perfect, but to me the people wanting this government run health care are also the ones that want to collect a check from the Gov. ever month.

As for how good it will be just look to Canada yes they have free medical, and they pay for it ever time they go grocery shopping , anytime they buy anything, Someone is going to pay for it, Obama will just tax the hell out of everything.

Then ya have the quality , if it is so good why do people with money in Canada come to America for health care?

It is amazing to me how many people actually think they are entitled to others peoples money. What is next after Obama care? <Obama Dental plan?

You know damn well this will not be the end - only the beginning of more liberal programs and handouts

Jeff
05-03-2009, 04:44 PM
It is amazing to me how many people actually think they are entitled to others peoples money. What is next after Obama care? <Obama Dental plan?

You know damn well this will not be the end - only the beginning of more liberal programs and handouts

As the saying goes, They have only just begun.

Nukeman
05-03-2009, 06:50 PM
The whole POINT to nationalized health care is to ration it: health care costs have been growing out of control for years. As I understand it (poorly), the problem is that health care is taking more and more of the money of these United States.

Leaving less and less money for other things.

An article in the Wall Street Journal this week referred to other countries viewing us as a "subprime nation" because of high and growing health costs.

I don't understand quite why this is a problem, necessarily. If anyone thinks they do understand it, explain it?


The cost of health care is "FALSELY" inflated by the inability or flat out refusal of CMS and private insurance to pay a fair market price. What I mean by this is that Medicare pays for hospital services $0.22 cents on the dollar of billed services (Joe thinks this is great). Medicaid pays $0.04 cents on the dollar for services rendered (once again Joe steel thinks this is fair). Private insurance when "negotiating" and I use that term loosely, tell you that scince your only charging CMS a certain amount they will only pay $0.35 cents on the dollar for services. Now when this happens we have to "RAISE' the price to make a "FAIR MARKET VALUE" on our services. This means that if we NEED $100.00 dollars to perform a test and make a small profit and pay all expenses with the federal and private insurance combined we need to charge $500.00 dollars to break even. So this LOOKS like the price is too high when in fact the negotiated price is pennies on the dollar.

A person paying cash can ALWAYS negotiate a cheaper price with the health care provider, providing the government allows them to.



For what it is worth it took 15 years of agony to get rotator cuff surgery. The operation failed because it took so long to get approval the tissue has degenerated so much it was not possible to correct the problem. I spent 20 years trying to get a miniscus tear fixed and was so thrilled that I tore it again about 7 months after surgery by running. That was about 5 years or more ago and I am still trying to get it fixed.
National health care would have solved these insurance company delays. So destroy the insurance companies if it means I only have to wait 10 years instead of twenty!

I say BULLSHIT on you, NO insurance company could LEGALLY deny a claim that long.... YOUR either full of shit or you didn't have the problem you stated!!!

More nonsense.

CMS already pays local intermediaries to process Medicare claims. They know who to run the process at the best possible price.

YOU are soo wrong on this Joe. Yaa they get the best price through....... Oh whats the term I'm looking for here............ lets try extortion and strong arm techniques.

Tell you what Joe go work in billing in ANY health care facility in the US and tell me what a wonderful job CMS does.. Moron...

April15
05-03-2009, 07:16 PM
I hate to tell ya but it is the truth. Insurance Co's can do what they want with little chance of reprimand. I was told at the age of 17 that my knee was toast. The phsician who attended me said to wait a year or two and a new type of surgery would be available that was faster and had less problems. He was talking about orthoscopic surgery. My knee was operated on when I was 49. I got lots of pain killers and anti inflamitory drugs over the years but nothing to fix the torn miniscus. I finally ran into a new orthopedic sergun at redwood city kaiser. He didn't even want an MRI. He siad that i should have had it fixed years earlier.

Some Americans get screwed by insurance CO's. Others die!

PostmodernProphet
05-03-2009, 09:21 PM
I hate to tell ya but it is the truth. Insurance Co's can do what they want with little chance of reprimand. I was told at the age of 17 that my knee was toast. The phsician who attended me said to wait a year or two and a new type of surgery would be available that was faster and had less problems. He was talking about orthoscopic surgery. My knee was operated on when I was 49. I got lots of pain killers and anti inflamitory drugs over the years but nothing to fix the torn miniscus. I finally ran into a new orthopedic sergun at redwood city kaiser. He didn't even want an MRI. He siad that i should have had it fixed years earlier.

Some Americans get screwed by insurance CO's. Others die!

just think, if Hillary had only gotten public health care through in 92 your knee would have been healed years and years ago.....

red states rule
05-04-2009, 05:55 AM
Well, with the Democrats in total control of the Government now, it sure proves that the anti-McCain conservative's refusal to vote GOP was spot on correct.

We would still be worrying about single payer health care and a total makeover of our government if McCain was in charge - right?

Thanks to all those conservatives out there teaching America a lesson we'll never recover from.

mundame
05-04-2009, 12:13 PM
Well, with the Democrats in total control of the Government now, it sure proves that the anti-McCain conservative's refusal to vote GOP was spot on correct.




Hey, give me a candidate that doesn't run a total idiocy campaign like McCain did, especially choosing a woman VP candidate for her looks who's next door to retarded, and I'll vote conservative as I always used to.

Otherwise, the heck with it; I give up on elections. There's a degree of low I won't go.

mundame
05-04-2009, 12:23 PM
The cost of health care is "FALSELY" inflated by the inability or flat out refusal of CMS and private insurance to pay a fair market price. What I mean by this is that Medicare pays for hospital services $0.22 cents on the dollar of billed services (Joe thinks this is great). Medicaid pays $0.04 cents on the dollar for services rendered (once again Joe steel thinks this is fair). Private insurance when "negotiating" and I use that term loosely, tell you that scince your only charging CMS a certain amount they will only pay $0.35 cents on the dollar for services. Now when this happens we have to "RAISE' the price to make a "FAIR MARKET VALUE" on our services. This means that if we NEED $100.00 dollars to perform a test and make a small profit and pay all expenses with the federal and private insurance combined we need to charge $500.00 dollars to break even. So this LOOKS like the price is too high when in fact the negotiated price is pennies on the dollar.

A person paying cash can ALWAYS negotiate a cheaper price with the health care provider, providing the government allows them to.



Not quite. I know a lot about this because hubby works in high-level healthcare finance. And I used to work in a disability group with very high emergency and chronic health services.

1) No, a person paying cash is often seriously screwed by hospitals; they charge insurers the lower negotiated price and the individual the "full" price, which can be multiples of that. There was a big scandal a couple years ago in the Wall Street Journal --- a New Haven hospital was dunning this elderly black guy literally DECADES after his wife had died of cancer for some $25,000. They stopped as soon as it hit the newspapers, but the point of the article was that this is common practice. They don't get much, but they keep on billing for years, very sad.

2) It is true that insurers negotiate a lower price. However, it is not true hospitals could charge whatever they want if that didn't happen! There is a LOT of severe state regulation of hospital pricing, very detailed in Maryland and other states. This is an effort to keep the ever-growing costs of medical care down, as they would grow instantly out of sight like Jack's beanstalk if the state didn't suppress hospital/docs/pharmaceutical companies charging whatever they like, because people will pay ANYthing to fix that rotator cuff (like April15, I've been there). Again, the problem seems to be that if not controlled, hospital/doc/drug costs will take all the money --- leaving very little for other products and industries.

That's as things are now.

Some of us think that if insurance were allowed to be sold freely without all the state regs that they have to have A thru Z coverage, have to be sold within states, etc., etc. and high deductibles were offered, the problem would be solved.

Jeff
05-04-2009, 02:46 PM
Hey, give me a candidate that doesn't run a total idiocy campaign like McCain did, especially choosing a woman VP candidate for her looks who's next door to retarded, and I'll vote conservative as I always used to.

Otherwise, the heck with it; I give up on elections. There's a degree of low I won't go.

For a retarded woman she sure made Biden look like a ass , and she has more executive experience than Obama ever dreamed of.

Not referring to you mundame ( as I don't know you) but most woman I know that hated Palin were jealous.

red states rule
05-04-2009, 06:20 PM
Hey, give me a candidate that doesn't run a total idiocy campaign like McCain did, especially choosing a woman VP candidate for her looks who's next door to retarded, and I'll vote conservative as I always used to.

Otherwise, the heck with it; I give up on elections. There's a degree of low I won't go.

I did not know McCain picked Hillary as his running mate :laugh2:

For someone who claims she would vote "conservative" you have said many times you would have voted for Hillary for President

Is Hillary your version of what a conservative should be? If so, you should have loved McCain

glockmail
05-04-2009, 06:48 PM
All are well-run. Tell that to my uncle who was at the Chelsea Naval Hospital for two years with a broken leg that got infected. Those hacks made a career out of him. He ended up getting hooked on morphine.

Joe Steel
05-05-2009, 06:42 AM
Tell that to my uncle who was at the Chelsea Naval Hospital for two years with a broken leg that got infected. Those hacks made a career out of him. He ended up getting hooked on morphine.

Was that a Navy hospital or a VA hospital? When?

mundame
05-05-2009, 06:49 AM
Is Hillary your version of what a conservative should be? If so, you should have loved McCain


No, but Hillary's husband had a successful presidency --- Peace and Prosperity are the job description, and after Bush totally losing both, I had hopes of Hillary.

I was okay with McCain until he went nuts --- he chose Sarah Palin, who was a walking dysfunctional family disaster and no bright bulb, and he behaved VERY strangely when the financial crisis broke out, rushing to Washington and causing nothing but a food fight, and then having to totally back down to Obama about the debate!!

Not presidential.

The whole situation became untenable.

red states rule
05-05-2009, 06:51 AM
No, but Hillary's husband had a successful presidency --- Peace and Prosperity are the job description, and after Bush totally losing both, I had hopes of Hillary.

I was okay with McCain until he went nuts --- he chose Sarah Palin, who was a walking dysfunctional family disaster and no bright bulb, and he behaved VERY strangely when the financial crisis broke out, rushing to Washington and causing nothing but a food fight, and then having to totally back down to Obama about the debate!!

Not presidential.

The whole situation became untenable.

Hillary gave us Huilary Care, the vast right wing conspiracy, cattle futures, lost billing records, sniper fire, and many other memories

Again, I note alot of jealousy in you when it comes to Gov Plain

mundame
05-05-2009, 07:06 AM
Again, I note alot of jealousy in you when it comes to Gov Plain


No, happily, I didn't manage my life as badly as she did, or my family. And I believe I was luckier than she was in education and perhaps some other advantages.


However, I see that you've decided to make me the enemy, which is fine if that's what you like, so carry on. http://wade.hu/smiley/kategoriak/szemtelen/cheeky-smiley-023.gif

red states rule
05-05-2009, 07:08 AM
No, happily, I didn't manage my life as badly as she did, or my family. And I believe I was luckier than she was in education and perhaps some other advantages.


However, I see that you've decided to make me the enemy, which is fine if that's what you like, so carry on. http://wade.hu/smiley/kategoriak/szemtelen/cheeky-smiley-023.gif

Not the enemy, just pointing out your double standards and your willingness to overlook the facts about Hillary - and her many lies

glockmail
05-05-2009, 08:36 AM
Was that a Navy hospital or a VA hospital? When? Navy hospitals are part of the VA. This was back during 'nam days. I have friends in the medical profession- the VA is still shit compared to private hospitals.

red states rule
05-05-2009, 08:37 AM
Navy hospitals are part of the VA. This was back during 'nam days. I have friends in the medical profession- the VA is still shit compared to private hospitals.

So government run health care is not as good as what the private industry can provide? What a shocker

PostmodernProphet
05-05-2009, 08:44 AM
No, happily, I didn't manage my life as badly as she did, or my family. And I believe I was luckier than she was in education and perhaps some other advantages.

and yet, she became the governor of Alaska and you post anonymously on a political board......think what she might have been if she had been as "lucky" as you......

Jeff
05-05-2009, 09:28 AM
No, happily, I didn't manage my life as badly as she did, or my family. And I believe I was luckier than she was in education and perhaps some other advantages.


However, I see that you've decided to make me the enemy, which is fine if that's what you like, so carry on. http://wade.hu/smiley/kategoriak/szemtelen/cheeky-smiley-023.gif

mundame are you serious? Am I know speaking to the Governor somewhere , and to state education again I must ask what puts you above her? And family you have got to be kidding, I guess she is the only woman in the country that had a daughter get pregnant, no, none of us want that , but seems like they weren't trying to hide it and were trying to do the right thing.

As for your earlier post about Clinton , the first thing they said on the news when Gore finally admitted he lost , was Bush must get this Country's economy back on track we were heading down hill very quickly then.

mundame
05-05-2009, 09:43 AM
and yet, she became the governor of Alaska and you post anonymously on a political board......think what she might have been if she had been as "lucky" as you......


Lucky is right --- my guess is that ol' Sarah wishes she were posting anonymously rather than being governor of Alaska at this point. Apparently things are not going too well for her.

Jeff
05-05-2009, 09:51 AM
Lucky is right --- my guess is that ol' Sarah wishes she were posting anonymously rather than being governor of Alaska at this point. Apparently things are not going too well for her.

Jealousy wont get ya to far in life

mundame
05-05-2009, 09:52 AM
Jealousy wont get ya to far in life


Very true, Jeff.

mundame
05-05-2009, 09:55 AM
Jeff, did you like Palin?

Did she seem like an acceptable vice-presidential candidate to you?

Did you see anything at all as a problem there?

red states rule
05-05-2009, 09:58 AM
Jeff, did you like Palin?

Did she seem like an acceptable vice-presidential candidate to you?

Did you see anything at all as a problem there?

She was much better then either Obama or McCain

Funny how you support a feminist (and serial liar) like Hillary but bash Gov Plain on her looks and family

PostmodernProphet
05-05-2009, 10:04 AM
Jeff, did you like Palin?

Did she seem like an acceptable vice-presidential candidate to you?

Did you see anything at all as a problem there?

of course there was a problem....she was handicapped by her running mate....

Jeff
05-05-2009, 10:22 AM
Jeff, did you like Palin?

Did she seem like an acceptable vice-presidential candidate to you?

Did you see anything at all as a problem there?

Yes mundame I did like her , I think she made a fool of Biden in the debates as far as VP I felt she has more experience than Obama so if we could elect him for President I certainly think she would of done good as VP , As for problems with Sarah no one is perfect, but I do feel she is less of a problem than either Biden or Obama.

mundame
05-05-2009, 10:49 AM
Yes mundame I did like her , I think she made a fool of Biden in the debates as far as VP I felt she has more experience than Obama so if we could elect him for President I certainly think she would of done good as VP , As for problems with Sarah no one is perfect, but I do feel she is less of a problem than either Biden or Obama.


Okay. You watched the debates and preferred her; and you thought she was better qualified than Obama.


PMP saying



of course there was a problem....she was handicapped by her running mate....


http://forums.offtopic.com/images/smilies/happysad.gif

Joe Steel
05-05-2009, 11:36 AM
Navy hospitals are part of the VA. This was back during 'nam days. I have friends in the medical profession- the VA is still shit compared to private hospitals.

Oh.

Forty years ago.

glockmail
05-05-2009, 01:14 PM
Oh.

Forty years ago. And the rest of my previous post?


CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. – Thousands of veterans were at first shocked to learn they should get blood tests for HIV and hepatitis because three hospitals might have treated them with unsterile equipment. Now, just a couple of months after the Department of Veterans Affairs issued the dire warnings, veterans are growing frustrated by the lack of information from the tightlipped federal agency.

Nearly 11,000 former sailors, soldiers, airmen and Marines could have been exposed to infectious diseases because three VA hospitals in the Southeast did not properly clean endoscopic equipment between patients. On Friday, the VA revealed that another patient had tested positive for HIV, bringing the total to four such cases among patients who got endoscope procedures at hospitals in Miami, Murfreesboro, Tenn., and Augusta, Ga.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090425/ap_on_re_us/us_veterans_colonoscopies

A private hospital would have been sued into oblivion. Instead, your beloved federal government circles the wagons.

Jeff
05-05-2009, 02:04 PM
Okay. You watched the debates and preferred her; and you thought she was better qualified than Obama.


PMP saying



http://forums.offtopic.com/images/smilies/happysad.gif

Yes I did, she has twice the experience and is way smarter, she had how long to get ready before be thrown to the wolves and still looked good.

Obame was a jr. Senator his only experience was in voting, she had actually ran a state, plain and simple Obama was elected cause of his skin color , no white man or woman with his experience would of ever gotten in.

In all fairness do I think Sarah is perfect, no , But I don't think either party is perfect either.