I
Illegal Smile
Guest
Are you out of your mind? The only thing that can pass is a much smaller bill that republicans can agree on. That was the case yesterday and today cinched it.well, it's almost a mute point now. healthcare is going to pass. i love posting this.
now, does this mean that the RIU righties are going to melt or something? or get pissy?
yep, get pissy.
this place is going to be filled with the condemnation of the dems by the
jeffchr
Well-Known Member
patience. have some patience.
I
Illegal Smile
Guest
close your eyes tightly and repeat: "I believe I believe"
CrackerJax
New Member
Thomas Jefferson put eloquently... 'Great innovations should not be imposed on slender majorities".
This isn't even a case of a slender majority.
This isn't even a case of a slender majority.
jeffchr
Well-Known Member
it will be a majority if it passes. but interesting you would bring that quote into the discussion.
you deny a majority in favor of hc reform. Then why this particular quote of Jefferson's? If there is no majority, the quote is pointless.
Jefferson also, eloquently, said "... to consider the will of the society enounced by the majority of a single vote as sacred as if unanimous is the first of all lessons in importance, yet the last which is thoroughly learnt. This law once disregarded, no other remains but that of force, which ends necessarily in military despotism."
CrackerJax
New Member
There is no majority. Post the data if you know otherwise. This very thread pegs approval at 25%.... 
And you obviously miss the context of Jefferson. He means that a great undertaking should be practically unanimous.... it is most certainly NOT in this case.
Stay in skool kidz....
And you obviously miss the context of Jefferson. He means that a great undertaking should be practically unanimous.... it is most certainly NOT in this case.
Stay in skool kidz....
jeffchr
Well-Known Member
oh yea right like you're an expert on Jefferson. He said "this", but he really meant "that".There is no majority. Post the data if you know otherwise. This very thread pegs approval at 25%....
And you obviously miss the context of Jefferson. He means that a great undertaking should be practically unanimous.... it is most certainly NOT in this case.
Stay in skool kidz....
jeffchr
Well-Known Member
there is a majority who want reform. there is not a majority who support the current bills.There is no majority. Post the data if you know otherwise. This very thread pegs approval at 25%....
And you obviously miss the context of Jefferson. He means that a great undertaking should be practically unanimous.... it is most certainly NOT in this case.
Stay in skool kidz....
and besides, i wasn't talking about a majority of the people. the elections are over already.
i was talking about a majority in both houses. which there is. a bill will pass. and it won't become weaker from this point forward, it will only strengthen. it's a done deal, imo.
CrackerJax
New Member
Coming To A Hospital Near You?
Posted 06:47 PM ET
Reform: American health care is not British health care, at least not yet. But if Democrats get their way, this country will rush to adopt a system much like the one that is killing people in Great Britain.
Democrats will say that what they have planned for U.S. health care is not a copy of the British system, though it's been held up by the left as the model for years. But a nationalized health care system, no matter how it's tailored, will collapse like other socialist programs. Government-run health care may at times look like it works, but it is unsustainable — and deadly.
Consider the British hospital that was the focus of a recently completed independent inquiry. According to U.K. media reports, the review found that at least 400 and as many as 1,200 patients died from 2005 to 2008 because of poor care at Mid-Stratfordshire National Health Service Trust.
The final report did not include those figures (they apparently were used in a draft of the document). But a consultant involved in the inquiry admits that even if no specific figure can be assigned the number of needless deaths, the fact that such deaths did occur indicates a serious problem at the hospital.
At the root of these grave troubles are hospital managers — bureaucrats — who, according to a Times of London report, "stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs."
The 455-page report is packed with examples that should be the shame of the British health care system. It documents patient deaths due to what appear to be cases of neglect and misdiagnoses. There are records of patients falling, developing infections, left sitting on toilets and not properly fed.
Author Robert Francis says he heard "many accounts of bad care, denials of dignity and unnecessary suffering" from witnesses during his review.
The inquiry also noted "serious departures from the standard of basic care which every patient is entitled to expect" — abuses of elderly patients, a culture of bullying, low staff morale and concerns about the "attitude of staff to patients" as well as to visitors.
Even staff members "lived in an atmosphere of fear," in part due to "the managerial styles of some senior managers."
Judging by the report, the hospital resembled a landfill or sewage treatment plant as much as it did a house of healing. Patients went unwashed, as did their bedding, which was "soiled with urine and feces for considerable periods of time." There were "cases of patients who had soiled themselves who were dependent on their relatives to clean them."
For those who weren't fortunate enough to be cleaned by their relatives, "the distress and suffering caused by this" was "almost unimaginable when imposed on often frail and elderly patients fully aware of how they were being robbed of their dignity."
When patients were washed, sometimes the bowls were shared. Other sanitation problems included the presence of blood, discarded needles and used dressings.
Though not included in the report, a media account told of four members of one family who died at the hospital within 18 months. One of them, an 80-year-old woman, died "hungry and dehydrated" and in "her own excrement" because of staff failures, according to the Daily Mail.
The problems at Mid-Stratfordshire hospital are not isolated cases. Britain's system is plagued with similar problems. Last year, the Guardian reported that up to 10,000 cancer patients were dying needlessly in the U.K. each year because their condition was diagnosed too late, according to research by the government's director of cancer services.
Also in 2009, the Times said the health secretary ordered a probe into "claims that patients are dying due to poor care in at least 27 hospitals around the country."
From filthy facilities to long waiting lists to the lack of modern treatment and diagnostic equipment, the British health care system is in grave need of reform. America's system needs changes too, but not the kind that plague the U.K. and which Democrats are pushing. Ignoring lessons from over there almost guarantees the same disorder here.
Posted 06:47 PM ET
Reform: American health care is not British health care, at least not yet. But if Democrats get their way, this country will rush to adopt a system much like the one that is killing people in Great Britain.
Democrats will say that what they have planned for U.S. health care is not a copy of the British system, though it's been held up by the left as the model for years. But a nationalized health care system, no matter how it's tailored, will collapse like other socialist programs. Government-run health care may at times look like it works, but it is unsustainable — and deadly.
Consider the British hospital that was the focus of a recently completed independent inquiry. According to U.K. media reports, the review found that at least 400 and as many as 1,200 patients died from 2005 to 2008 because of poor care at Mid-Stratfordshire National Health Service Trust.
The final report did not include those figures (they apparently were used in a draft of the document). But a consultant involved in the inquiry admits that even if no specific figure can be assigned the number of needless deaths, the fact that such deaths did occur indicates a serious problem at the hospital.
At the root of these grave troubles are hospital managers — bureaucrats — who, according to a Times of London report, "stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs."
The 455-page report is packed with examples that should be the shame of the British health care system. It documents patient deaths due to what appear to be cases of neglect and misdiagnoses. There are records of patients falling, developing infections, left sitting on toilets and not properly fed.
Author Robert Francis says he heard "many accounts of bad care, denials of dignity and unnecessary suffering" from witnesses during his review.
The inquiry also noted "serious departures from the standard of basic care which every patient is entitled to expect" — abuses of elderly patients, a culture of bullying, low staff morale and concerns about the "attitude of staff to patients" as well as to visitors.
Even staff members "lived in an atmosphere of fear," in part due to "the managerial styles of some senior managers."
Judging by the report, the hospital resembled a landfill or sewage treatment plant as much as it did a house of healing. Patients went unwashed, as did their bedding, which was "soiled with urine and feces for considerable periods of time." There were "cases of patients who had soiled themselves who were dependent on their relatives to clean them."
For those who weren't fortunate enough to be cleaned by their relatives, "the distress and suffering caused by this" was "almost unimaginable when imposed on often frail and elderly patients fully aware of how they were being robbed of their dignity."
When patients were washed, sometimes the bowls were shared. Other sanitation problems included the presence of blood, discarded needles and used dressings.
Though not included in the report, a media account told of four members of one family who died at the hospital within 18 months. One of them, an 80-year-old woman, died "hungry and dehydrated" and in "her own excrement" because of staff failures, according to the Daily Mail.
The problems at Mid-Stratfordshire hospital are not isolated cases. Britain's system is plagued with similar problems. Last year, the Guardian reported that up to 10,000 cancer patients were dying needlessly in the U.K. each year because their condition was diagnosed too late, according to research by the government's director of cancer services.
Also in 2009, the Times said the health secretary ordered a probe into "claims that patients are dying due to poor care in at least 27 hospitals around the country."
From filthy facilities to long waiting lists to the lack of modern treatment and diagnostic equipment, the British health care system is in grave need of reform. America's system needs changes too, but not the kind that plague the U.K. and which Democrats are pushing. Ignoring lessons from over there almost guarantees the same disorder here.
FlyLikeAnEagle
Well-Known Member
Unanimous? You are living in a fantasy land. You do know that when Social Security was passed just about every republican was against that too, and to think what things would be like the past 75 years without it.There is no majority. Post the data if you know otherwise. This very thread pegs approval at 25%....
And you obviously miss the context of Jefferson. He means that a great undertaking should be practically unanimous.... it is most certainly NOT in this case.
Stay in skool kidz....
dukeofbaja
New Member
Not to mention the filibuster they tried to put on civil rights....the party of 'let's live in the past, despite current realities'.
Current reality is that the majority does not support whatever bills have been floated so far. Well, that doesn't surprise me, since a majority of Americans favor a public option, and it has been dropped by the idiot asshole democrats because they couldn't get 60 votes. Go take a look at polls tracking support for the proposals. Support drops as the public option gets dropped. Americans want a competitor that won't try to raise premiums by 20% or more after making record breaking profits and spending 1 out of every 3 dollars on shit like mega-compensation for executives and the like.
Basically, the idea is that you go to the same doctor and get the same care but do not pay executives million dollar bonuses for dropping sick patients and denying those with pre-existing conditions. Get the same care without all the bullshit money grubbing from private insurers who drop you once you get sick. Pay less, get the same. All the other wealthy nations do this and get BETTER care than we do.
And before you mention rationing, consider that my average wait to see a doctor with my employer-provided private plan was 3 fucking weeks. And if you really want to talk about rationing, let's talk about my fiance who searched for 3 fucking months for ANY provider that would insure her. SHe ended up paying $205 a month, but only thanks to a family connection. That is more than 10% of her income.
Best health care in the world? My ass
Current reality is that the majority does not support whatever bills have been floated so far. Well, that doesn't surprise me, since a majority of Americans favor a public option, and it has been dropped by the idiot asshole democrats because they couldn't get 60 votes. Go take a look at polls tracking support for the proposals. Support drops as the public option gets dropped. Americans want a competitor that won't try to raise premiums by 20% or more after making record breaking profits and spending 1 out of every 3 dollars on shit like mega-compensation for executives and the like.
Basically, the idea is that you go to the same doctor and get the same care but do not pay executives million dollar bonuses for dropping sick patients and denying those with pre-existing conditions. Get the same care without all the bullshit money grubbing from private insurers who drop you once you get sick. Pay less, get the same. All the other wealthy nations do this and get BETTER care than we do.
And before you mention rationing, consider that my average wait to see a doctor with my employer-provided private plan was 3 fucking weeks. And if you really want to talk about rationing, let's talk about my fiance who searched for 3 fucking months for ANY provider that would insure her. SHe ended up paying $205 a month, but only thanks to a family connection. That is more than 10% of her income.
Best health care in the world? My ass
P
PadawanBater
Guest
[youtube]KBqtyvn7OVw[/youtube]
Oh man, give this guy some REP! Weiner FTW!
Oh man, give this guy some REP! Weiner FTW!
I
Illegal Smile
Guest
Y'all libs sound a little bitter. Time to "moveon."
P
PadawanBater
Guest
I
Illegal Smile
Guest
I'm surprised you weren't clever enough to say archetype.Does it even bother you you're a stereotype??
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
If I'm not mistaken you didn't READ or comprehend my post. I know you are not stupid, just a tad impolite at times perhaps? If you care to go back a few posts you'll see what I mean, but that might take more humility than you can muster.I'm referring to the thread....what are you referring to?
To get on a thread which is about a poll showing 25% approval, and then say that 95% approve makes the poster look fairly stupid.
MuyLocoNC
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I am thinking about it. I'm thinking about the 100+ trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities from Soc Sec, Medicare/Medicaid and all of the other Socialist programs the LIBERALS/PROGRESSIVES have passed over the last 75 years. They were told by those Republicans you spoke of, that these programs were going to be the financial doom of this nation and lo and behold, they were right. They were told by those Republicans that the costs would spiral out of control and whoops, right on all counts again.
When your trying to make a point in favor of your camp, you might want to pick some examples that don't show how foolish and out of touch with reality your party is. All socialist programs are Ponzi schemes waiting to fail, you and your Liberal puke friend's main problem is you don't learn from history, you revise it.