Interesting Article

[Chrisadamley]

Just an interesting article from the Associated Press i came across.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/ap_ ... ealth_poll

......

Any thoughts on it?

Main things of interest i noticed that the article pointed out were:

1) No death panels, or anything of the sort
2) No coverage for illegal immigrants

and it even says that these two things are basically just made up by critics of the bill.

.......

What do you guys think of this article? Im not interested in starting a fight or anything, just curious on thoughts about the article and the AP in general.

Do you guys think the AP is a good source for news? Do they lean far a certain way as far as politics go?

[xlr8]

The "End of Life Counseling" that is mentioned in the bill leaves way, waaaay too much wiggle room for the govt to decide who they can cover and who they can't. It never comes out and blatanly says " We're going to counsel people toward the euthanasia option", But it leaves room for this to happen in the future. People are generally not stupid and probably understand that when hard pressed for cash, the govt will eventually have to decide who gets care, how much they get and when to end coverage because a person's life is no longer worth footing the bill for. I think this is what ultimately scares the crap out of some folks.

There is also a strong feeling out there that the govt will eventually squeeze out private insurance and even private practice which will give them ultimate control over not just our healthcare, but our entire lives. With govt spending completely out of control, I think people's fears are well founded. I don't care what they say, they already have an unsustainable amount of debt built up over the last year and now they want to strap us with another hugely expensive govt program? I want one fiscally responsible person out there to please tell me how this is a good idea. I know of no one who has ever borrowed their way out of debt.

[Phil Elmore]

By its very nature, a nationalized healthcare system MUST ration care and therefore will of course constitute de facto death panels, as care is deemed inappropriate for those at the "end of life."

Leftists have squawked loud and long that any criticism of the bill is "manufactured." It is these claims that are lies, not the criticisms that have been leveled. Obama himself has gone on national television and lied about the contents of the bills he has not read, as have his Democrat cronies.

The yellow journalism in Calvin Woodward's "interesting article," which is written like an editorial and lacks almost any substantive support for what Woodward asserts are "facts" in opposition to what he describes, erroneously, as "myths," is obvious to anyone (unlike Chris) who isn't blinded by left-wing talking points. The "myths" that are taking hold among the American people are the result of READING THE VARIOUS VERSIONS OF THE BILLS INTRODUCED. It's fundamentally intellectually dishonest to take a later version of the bill, in which the explicit language referring to Obama's 'death panels' has been removed, and then claim that the bill doesn't contain that element -- when of course it did before they hastily changed it in the face of public outrage.

[Vagrant]

Fact-fiction is playing "fast and loose" with WHICH facts they select to list/report
There are about a dozen bills currently, being debated
One [or two] of the ones, that are LEAST likely to pass, do not mention end of life counseling, most of the others DO. [some say volutary, others say mandatory]
NONE of the bills [working papers/drafts/etc] SPECIFICALLY say senior healthcare funds will go to illegals but, ALL of them reduce seniorcare and give new benifits to illegals [same FREAKING thing]
Basically the figures LIE and liars figure
So if you [VERY carefully] pick and choose, parts from different bills] you can claim [dishonestly] that o'sambocare will benfit EVERYONE at a huge savings
That is commie BULL$HIT
And we all KNOW IT

[TRYKER]

maybe we should give it a test. lets start with all senior democraps (over the age of 65 ) in the senente and the house, kennedy can go first.


tryker

[Phil Elmore]

Here's why the "interesting article" Chris breathlessly links us to, in his ongoing search for validation of his left-wing views, is itself built on misinformation and lies. As usually, the Left accuses its critics of all its own crimes, hoping to deflect public attention from leftists' deceit and hypocrisy:

Link to extensively sourced refutations

Some highlights:

Current healthcare legislation states that illegal immigrants will not be covered. We believe this is a moot point as Obama and top Dems are setting the stage to pave the way for the majority of illegal immigrants to be given a form of “quickie” amnesty, a fast-tracked citizenship which would give illegal immigrants the right to vote and healthcare coverage.

...The magical 47 million “Americans” uninsured figure originated from the Census Bureau, who counts “residents” of the U.S. and not citizens. Twenty percent of the 47 million “Americans” uninsured are illegal immigrants, which, in our opinion, is the single most gross representation, or misinformation, relating to Obama’s healthcare reform.

While healthcare legislation stipulates that illegal immigrants won’t be covered, Obama continues to uses the number of illegal immigrants without healthcare coverage in the United States as the number of “Americans” uninsured. Obama either knows the number includes illegal immigrants and made the decision to refer to them as “Americans”, or, he’s using a figure that misstates the true number of Americans who are uninsured. If it’s former, then someone should call into question why the President of the United States is referring to illegal immigrants as “Americans” when trying to persuade the public to accept his proposed healthcare reform legislation. If it’s the latter, it doesn’t bode well for other “facts” and “figures” Obama and the Dems are using to persuade the public to support their proposed healthcare reform.

As for the death panels that Chris doesn't believe would be created:

Link to Article

Here's a highlight or two:

He is right. According to a 2006 study by the Department of Health and Human Services, five percent of the U.S. population accounts for nearly 50 percent of health care spending in America. Who are those five percent? Most are people over 65 years of age with serious, chronic illnesses.

By contrast, the study notes, half of the U.S. population "spends little or nothing on health care… with annual medical spending below $664 per person." These, of course, are mostly healthy young people – people without serious, chronic illnesses.

Obviously, Obama will not meet his cost-cutting targets by reducing care to healthy young people. They are already spending next to nothing. It is the old, the dying and the chronically ill whose health care he will cut. The numbers make this clear...

...How will Obama cut costs? His June 13 radio speech gave some hints. Obama said his plan would provide "incentives" to doctors to "avoid unnecessary hospital stays, treatments and tests that drive up costs."

And what sort of treatment does Obama consider "unnecessary?" In an ABC News special June 24, he implied medical treatment might be wasted on elderly people with grave illnesses, citing his own grandmother as an example.

Dying of cancer, with less than a year to live, Obama's grandmother broke her hip. "[T]he question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?" asked the president.

It turns out that Obama's grandmother did get the hip replacement – though he did not say so on ABC that night. Obama left the story about his grandmother unfinished, but went on to suggest that other people faced with such choices might do well to forget about surgery and settle instead for palliative or comfort care – treatment that helps you feel better while you are dying, but does not prolong your life.

"Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller," Obama concluded...

People like Chris are eager to give the government -- an organization that cannot even run the Congressional cafeteria at the break-even point -- control over ever facet of their lives, their health, and their cradle-to-grave existence.

I'm not.

[Chrisadamley]

I'm not trying to validate anything. There are just so many ridiculous claims going both ways on this that i would like to try and find out what will really happen.

People saying that "death panels" will be set up is totally ludicrous.

On the other hand...saying this bill will help everyone is also a bunch of crap.

So really i just care to know what the bill really is about....and not a bunch of propaganda from both the left and right alike.

[Phil Elmore]

You parrot talking points that have already been substantively refuted and, Chris, please -- don't insult our intelligence by trying to say you're just posing questions. Your leftist agenda is painfully clear when looking at your post history.

The "ridiculous claims" are, in fact, facts. The only lies being told are those of the leftists and their willing accomplices in the media, who are trying to mischaracterize criticism of Obama's socialized medicine as "misinformation."

Here's your buddy Obama saying that, why, of course illegal immigrants would see treatment under his healthcare plan:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... eated.html

The only "propaganda" here is from the left. The criticism leveled at this leftist power-grab has been legitimate. Your protestations are feeble and ill-founded.

[natcherly]

I'm not trying to validate anything. There are just so many ridiculous claims going both ways on this that i would like to try and find out what will really happen.

People saying that "death panels" will be set up is totally ludicrous....

The fact is that to provide the broad level of coverage the sponsors of the various bills are promising, there is no way to provide it to everyone. No Way. Rationing is practiced by every other governmental health plan (just look at Mass and OR for at home examples, forgetting the European examples). That means that someone or something will be making decisions as to who gets and who goes without. Call that what you will, but Death Panels pretty much says it.

Those DP's may not be specified in the bill, but don't forget, the law itself only outlines the program. It is up to the Bureaucracy to draft the Regulation implementing the law. These are then published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for a period of comment, after which they have the force of the original legislation. They are the law as it will operate, be interpreted and be enforced. Given the storm over the DP designation, I’m sure they will come up with something straight out of 1984. How about the Council of Compassion?

[JerrBear]

Mos' excellent and lucid explanation, Mr. Natch!
Even Mr. Chrisadamley should be able to understand it...

[tequiza]

Mos' excellent and lucid explanation, Mr. Natch!
Even Mr. Chrisadamley should be able to understand it...

I doubt it Jerr, he's a liberal

[Vagrant]

Mos' excellent and lucid explanation, Mr. Natch!
Even Mr. Chrisadamley should be able to understand it...

I doubt it Jerr, he's a liberal

And even when you have a vid of his FALSE Messiah saying something he will STILL claim "that's not what he said"
The 2010 [mid-term] elections will reveal if we are doomed to a dictatorship of the proletariat or there is light and the end of the socialist tunnel
The "left" will hope for a continuation of tyrany - while NEVER admiting [or even recognizing] it
Real AMERICANS will hope for relief and a warning of an impending CHANGE [back to REAL Patroitism]

[Chrisadamley]

Chris, please -- don't insult our intelligence by trying to say you're just posing questions.

I truly don't have a leftist "agenda"...and if by agenda you mean convincing others that the left is right. I don't think that everything obama does is right, but that doesnt mean that EVERYTHING he does is WRONG...does it?

What i really don't like though, is that i'm sure i can guess all your guys favorite news channel. Fox News perhaps? ....(just let me note here, i have NO problem with fox news...the only problem i have is them claiming that they are fair and balanced. They should just advertise as a extremely right leaning news show and i would be happy) ....there are also shows that lean left i am aware....but fox just seems to make it so bloody obvious its crazy.

Here's your buddy Obama saying that, why, of course illegal immigrants would see treatment under his healthcare plan:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... eated.html

The only "propaganda" here is from the left. The criticism leveled at this leftist power-grab has been legitimate. Your protestations are feeble and ill-founded.

You really see a problem with that video he made?....So if some illegal immigrants come into a hospital in a life threatening situation...their lives shouldnt be saved?...they should just get turned away?

it would be similar to how it is now...if ANYONE goes into a hospital, the doctors will do what they can to save their life regardless of their insurance plan. Isn't there a law that says they have to?...you can't just turn someone away if they are going to die unless they get emergency help.

[Vagrant]

You really see a problem with that video he made?....So if some illegal immigrants come into a hospital in a life threatening situation...their lives shouldnt be saved?...they should just get turned away?

it would be similar to how it is now...if ANYONE goes into a hospital, the doctors will do what they can to save their life regardless of their insurance plan. Isn't there a law that says they have to?...you can't just turn someone away if they are going to die unless they get emergency help.

What you FAIL to understand is - seniors, have already, paid ALL THERE LIVES, for senior health care, and will now watch BILLIONS being STOLEN to pay to save for these poor illegals.
Seniors will be asked to DIE [and advised how] to SAVE some piece of scum, who arrived illegaly, and in all likelyhood "needs" medical attention as a result of some illegal activity [check the stats on "illegal imigrant" crime in California]
The unfortunate FACT is SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO DIE -NO WAY AROUND THAT
I contend that an AMERICAN who has already paid [for decades] for healthcare should be saved FIRST. And the illegal, who has broken the law just by BEING HERE, is a VERY LOW priority
This is NOT a "deep concapt" but, it appears beyond the intellect of most liberals
Allowing such healthcare for illegals will only, encourage MORE of them to "flock here" in dramtically greater numbers, further depriving those who have paid, [their whole lives] only to see those services given to those who paid NOTHING
Are you REALLY to "dim" to understand that
Or just to "brainwashed" to believe it

[Chrisadamley]

well i'm neither "dim" nor "brainwashed"....I just think that it's human decency that if someone is dieing right in front of you that whatever should be done to save them.

.......

Now, this is my view on illegal immagration...perhaps we should be doing a better job of stopping illegals from coming here in the first place. I am ALL for an enormous increase in border control and getting current illegals out of the country. I think the penalty for getting caught hiring illegals should be VERY SEVERE. Also...if they do go to a hospital and get their lives saved, they should be deported as soon as they are good to go. I think that our current efforts on keeping illegals out of the country is a joke.