Monopoly--Allopathic Archives

Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

[ Monopoly--Allopathic Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!
 
        

Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 16, 2008 at 21:35:37:

The big threat to growth in the next decade is not oil or food prices, but the rising cost of health care. The doubling of health insurance premiums since 2000 makes employers choose between cutting benefits and hiring fewer workers.

Rising health costs push total employment costs up and wages and benefits down. The result is lost profits and lost wages, in addition to pointless risk, insecurity and a flood of personal bankruptcies.


Sustained growth thus requires successful health-care reform. Barack Obama and John McCain propose to lead us in opposite directions -- and the Obama direction is far superior.

Sen. Obama's proposal will modernize our current system of employer- and government-provided health care, keeping what works well, and making the investments now that will lead to a more efficient medical system. He does this in five ways:

- Learning. One-third of medical costs go for services at best ineffective and at worst harmful. Fifty billion dollars will jump-start the long-overdue information revolution in health care to identify the best providers, treatments and patient management strategies.

- Rewarding. Doctors and hospitals today are paid for performing procedures, not for helping patients. Insurers make money by dumping sick patients, not by keeping people healthy. Mr. Obama proposes to base Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements to hospitals and doctors on patient outcomes (lower cholesterol readings, made and kept follow-up appointments) in a coordinated effort to focus the entire payment system around better health, not just more care.

- Pooling. The Obama plan would give individuals and small firms the option of joining large insurance pools. With large patient pools, a few people incurring high medical costs will not topple the entire system, so insurers would no longer need to waste time, money and resources weeding out the healthy from the sick, and businesses and individuals would no longer have to subject themselves to that costly and stressful process.

- Preventing. In today's health-care market, less than one dollar in 25 goes for prevention, even though preventive services -- regular screenings and healthy lifestyle information -- are among the most cost-effective medical services around. Guaranteeing access to preventive services will improve health and in many cases save money.

- Covering. Controlling long-run health-care costs requires removing the hidden expenses of the uninsured. The reforms described above will lower premiums by $2,500 for the typical family, allowing millions previously priced out of the market to afford insurance.

In addition, tax credits for those still unable to afford private coverage, and the option to buy in to the federal government's benefits system, will ensure that all individuals have access to an affordable, portable alternative at a price they can afford.

Given the current inefficiencies in our system, the impact of the Obama plan will be profound. Besides the $2,500 savings in medical costs for the typical family, according to our research annual business-sector costs will fall by about $140 billion. Our figures suggest that decreasing employer costs by this amount will result in the expansion of employer-provided health insurance to 10 million previously uninsured people.

We know these savings are attainable: other countries have them today. We spend 40% more than other countries such as Canada and Switzeraland on health care -- nearly $1 trillion -- but our health outcomes are no better.

The lower cost of benefits will allow employers to hire some 90,000 low-wage workers currently without jobs because they are currently priced out of the market. It also would pull one and a half million more workers out of low-wage low-benefit and into high-wage high-benefit jobs. Workers currently locked into jobs because they fear losing their health benefits would be able to move to entrepreneurial jobs, or simply work part time.

In contrast, Sen. McCain, who constantly repeats his no-new-taxes promise on the campaign trail, proposes a big tax hike as the solution to our health-care crisis. His plan would raise taxes on workers who receive health benefits, with the idea of encouraging their employers to drop coverage. A study conducted by University of Michigan economist Tom Buchmueller and colleagues published in the journal Health Affairs suggests that the McCain tax hike will lead employers to drop coverage for over 20 million Americans.

What would happen to these people? Mr. McCain will give them a small tax credit, $5,000 for a family and $2,500 for an individual, and tell them to navigate the individual insurance market on their own.

For middle- and lower-income people, the credits are way too small. They are less than half the cost of policies today ($12,000 on average for a family), and are far below the 75% that most employers offering coverage contribute. Further, their value would erode over time, as the credit increases less rapidly than average premiums.

Those already sick are completely out of luck, as individual insurers are free to deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions. Mr. McCain has proposed a high-risk pool for the very sick, but has not put forward the money to make it work.

Even for those healthy enough to gain coverage in the individual insurance market, the screening, marketing and individual underwriting that insurers do to separate healthy from sick boosts premiums by 17% relative to employer-provided insurance, well beyond the help offered by the McCain tax credit.

The immediate consequences of the McCain plan are even worse. The McCain plan is a big tax increase on employers and workers. With the economy in recession, that's the last thing America's businesses need.

Finally, Mr. McCain does nothing to bend the curve of rising health-care costs downward. He does not fund investments in learning, rewarding and preventing. Eliminating state coverage requirements will slash preventive service availability.

The high cost-sharing plans he envisions will similarly discourage preventive care. And as he does nothing about the hidden costs of the uncovered -- expensive ER visits, recurring conditions resulting from inadequate follow-up care.

Everyone agrees our health-care financing system must change. But only one candidate, Barack Obama, has real change we can believe in.

Mr. Cutler is professor of economics at Harvard and an adviser to Barack Obama's presidential campaign. Mr. DeLong is professor of economics at University of California, Berkeley. Ms. Marciarille is adjunct law professor at McGeorge School of Law.



Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by DELETE THIS GARBAGE.... PLEASE [4750.4757] on September 17, 2008 at 00:22:30:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 16, 2008 at 21:35:37:

The board has been so nice lately. Would the powers that be please delete this. And whoever posted it, please take it somewhere else!


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by Ron [5412.2287] on September 17, 2008 at 01:13:41:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 16, 2008 at 21:35:37:

Hi Chris,

"- Pooling. The Obama plan would give individuals and small firms the option of joining large insurance pools. With large patient pools, a few people incurring high medical costs will not topple the entire system, so insurers would no longer need to waste time, money and resources weeding out the healthy from the sick, and businesses and individuals would no longer have to subject themselves to that costly and stressful process."
---------------------------------
>>>
If you believe that Obama's promises are etched in stone and will be carried out... then you are also being fooled by the promises of following through on "Drill, Drill, Drill"... That nonesense will be stopped as soon as the Dems win... Haven't you heard the latest about their blocking drilling on 80% of the land leased by the oil Companies?

I thought that Obama was saying that all Americans would get healthcare as good as what Congress and other
politicians are getting ?
I wonder if that Includes Hair Plugs... (a la Biden) ?




Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by Jayne [10093.4789] on September 17, 2008 at 07:43:46:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by DELETE THIS GARBAGE.... PLEASE [4750.4757] on September 17, 2008 at 00:22:30:

as Michele says,,,,If you don't like a Subject,,,,Don't Read IT!


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by Walt Stoll [93.4968] on September 17, 2008 at 08:05:28:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 16, 2008 at 21:35:37:

Thanks, UK!

In MY opinion, Obama's plan comes closest to what eventually has to be the long term solution to this terrible problem. Only prevention through education will ultimately work.

35 years ago I began a "Wellness Program" at IBM (then the largest employer in Lexington, KY) which was my idea to reverse the medical costs problem that was even then obvious. It included SR (certified by biofeedback), whole foods diet and aerobic exercise. This was a two hour class once a week for 6 weeks.The first 6 week class had about 10 people--mostly supervisors. The second class had at least 25. The third had over a hundred and then they had to hold the class in the auditorium because there were too many people interested in wellness. Of course, now, many companies are starting their own wellness programs (30 years later).

Finally the program was cancelled because I was talking about biofeedback and the locals equated it to "witchcraft". Can you imagine: the most scientifically advanced company in the town equated biofeedback to witchcraft?

Perhaps that was not really the reason. Perhaps the local physician/Big Pharma combine began to realize that I was attacking their financial monopoly. Of course, I was doing the class as a public service at no charge.

Anyhow, in my opinion, McCain doesn't have a clue. Obama has to offer something like this to get us started in the right direction.

Whoever the person is who wants this "banned from the BB" does not understand that wellness has to be the policy of the government. Or, perhaps understands too well that wellness will undermine the PTB and continue their "feeding at the trough"of the status quo.

I apologise for the "rant" but it really pisses me off to see the public being reamed to feed the special interests. Especially when that policy promotes illnesses which I gave an oath to prevent and treat.

Comments?

Walt


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by PhillyLady [5444.4789] on September 17, 2008 at 09:01:52:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by Walt Stoll [93.4968] on September 17, 2008 at 08:05:28:

What a sensible and common-sense reply. Thank you, Dr. Stoll.

No need to apologize for enlightening us. What you said needed to be said.


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Snore

Posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 09:09:05:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 16, 2008 at 21:35:37:

Of course an advisor to O's campaign would not point out any "negatives" to his plan. Why not post an unbiased and objective analysis, if one even exists?


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Snore

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 09:29:57:

In Reply to: Snore posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 09:09:05:

Only one of the authors, of three, is an advisor to Obama, and all three hold respectable positions in economic and law estabishments around America. In any worthwhile analysis there is bound to be some subjective commentary, based on the writer's experience and qualification. It wouldn't be much of an analysis otherwise! The closest thing I can find to something totally neutral is below.



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by sonia [5538.1399] on September 17, 2008 at 10:03:17:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 16, 2008 at 21:35:37:

Nothing will ever change while it's all about money. The Governments are cowtowing to the drug companies who in turn make large donations to their party.

It's in their interests to keep the nation sick!

It's all so corrupt it makes me want to spit!


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 10:54:21:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by Walt Stoll [93.4968] on September 17, 2008 at 08:05:28:

Thanks Walt I agree. Of course Obama's healthcare platform is only one reason of many to vote against the Republicans in the coming election. Any day now I expect Ms Palin to qualify her expertise on healthcare on the basis of being able to see a hospital from her house in Alaska. Of course she's already a foreign relations expert and “knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America”. (McCain's words). Not bad for a "hockey Mom", whose scientific credentials at least seem somewhat lacking. I refer of course to her belief that creationism is a valid alternative theory to evolution and should be taught in classrooms to impressionable children. One of whom, in future, will be one of her grandchildren; the consequence of a teenage pregnancy; a perfect example of her irresponsibility as a mother, and illustrating her flawed ideas about abstinence, contraception and abortion. However, her own personal failures won't stop her from telling other people how to live their lives, nor potentially occupying the most responsible office in the world. If McCain's health were to fail during the next Presidential term, as seems likely, it is a scary prospect that a someone who regards Revelations as prophesy, will have access to nuclear weapons - "Tell me when Lord, tell me when!"

I'm really curious as to your opinion of these latest developments in the race for the White House, but also appreciate how "hot" this topic can be. I think you summed it up quite well in saying "it really pisses me off to see the public being reamed to feed the special interests". Ever more true in the past few days, with more banks and now an insurer being bailed out by the increasingly forlorn taxpayer. I estimate this single bailout of ING at an initial cost of $300 per American, on top of already astronomical debts and welfare entitlements. It leads one to wonder what the bigger picture is here - it surely can't be that the government is this incompetent. Who stands to gain, that is my question? That the government is taking ownership of century-old institutions; they now own 80% of the biggest insurer in America, and several of the largest banks after having engineered this mess in the first place with artificially low interest rates and by encouraging "boom and bust" consumption and credit malpractise. Not to mention the wars.... So much for the merits of unbridled capitalism and government conservatism. Their actions stunningly contradict there ideas and words. So the message from Wall Street is, "capitalise the gains; socialise the losses" - isn't this exactly how the military and medicine industrial complex operate too?

I'm not sure what amazes me more; the fact this has happened, or that people are ready to fall for it all over again in November. It's a shame we must all suffer the mistakes of short-sighted people.


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 12:11:12:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by Ron [5412.2287] on September 17, 2008 at 01:13:41:

"I thought that Obama was saying that all Americans would get healthcare as good as what Congress and other
politicians are getting"

I think that was John Edwards.

I don't follow the rest of your post, other than to say that nothing can top being as "fooled" as the Americans have been during the Bush regime. In his own words "fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again".



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 12:11:46:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by Jayne [10093.4789] on September 17, 2008 at 07:43:46:

Thanks Jayne.


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by Ron [3468.2287] on September 17, 2008 at 12:25:27:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 10:54:21:

Hi Chris,

"I refer of course to her belief that creationism is a valid alternative theory to evolution and should be taught in classrooms to impressionable children. "
==================================================

***What about teaching the scary subject of Global Warming to these same children without presenting the other side of the argument? isn't that worse?
Actually, just teaching another view OR demanding that views are changed to support Creationism are two different things.***

---------------------------

"One of whom, in future, will be one of her grandchildren; the consequence of a teenage pregnancy; a perfect example of her irresponsibility as a mother, and illustrating her flawed ideas about abstinence, contraception and abortion. However, her own personal failures won't stop her from telling other people how to live their lives, nor potentially occupying the most responsible office in the world."
===========================================

***Would you rather that Palin had thrown her daughter out to become a streetperson with a child?
Would you rahter that she had told her to have an abortion... or give the child up for adoption?
The daughter is owning-up to her mistake and getting married.. That is her "punishment" and she sets a
valuable example to others who might stray from the
rules...
Notice that Obama did not critcise... His mother was also 17 while he was in her teenage womb...
Look at how good he turned out! ***

------------------------

"That the government is taking ownership of century-old institutions; they now own 80% of the biggest insurer in America, and several of the largest banks after having engineered this mess in the first place with artificially low interest rates and by encouraging "boom and bust" consumption and credit malpractise."
=================================================

***What? You are against the Government taking over big business? How capitalist of you!
This is not happening without the approval of Congress and the Senate which are run by a Democrat Majority.

In case you are wondering who started the Bank deregulation start with "Affordable Housing" that was
a project of Jimmy Carter. ***



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by Ron [3468.2287] on September 17, 2008 at 12:31:26:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 12:11:12:

Hi Chris,

Who is fooling everyone about Freddy and Fannie Mae?
Who is one of Obama's advisors...?
(an ex CEO who profitted from Fannie Mae to the tune of $100 Million)


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



All mothers who have pregnant teenagers -

Posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:18:10:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by Ron [3468.2287] on September 17, 2008 at 12:25:27:

UKchris calls you irresponsible....

I say it's none of anyone's business.



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



There's No Arguing With Conservatives. No Seriously, Scientific Studies Prove It

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 13:27:45:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by Ron [3468.2287] on September 17, 2008 at 12:25:27:

The article linked below articulates what I am thinking, better than I can express it.

"A new study out of Yale University confirms what argumentative liberals have long-known: Offering reality-based rebuttals to conservative lies only makes conservatives cling to those lies even harder. In essence, schooling conservatives makes them more stupid.

If you've ever gotten in an argument with your conservative friends (assuming you haven't offered each other a mutual Carville-Matalin-style political ceasefire to preserve the friendship), you've probably seen this "backfire effect" in action. The more you try to tell people that Sarah Palin is lying when she says she was against the Bridge to Nowhere, the more they believe she was telling the truth. The more you try to explain how similar McCain's policies are to Bush's, the more they maintain he's "the original maverick."

The typical mantra of the left is that we don't need to sink to the Republicans' level because we have the truth on our side. But if the other side is utterly immune to the truth -- and indeed, the truth only makes them dig deeper into their fantasy world in which the economy is fundamentally strong and the War in Iraq is a staggering success -- what's a leftie to do?

I ain't got the answers, ace, except to say this: When arguing with conservatives in front of on-the-fence independents, remember that you're not trying to convince the conservative to actually buy into silly notions like facts and reason. You're highlighting the differences between left and right for the outside observer. If the other guy insists on political views that belong only in Disney World's Fantasyland, other folks will realize what's happening."

The results of the study were very telling, although (in my experience) not surprising in the least:

"In a paper approaching publication, Nyhan, a PhD student at Duke University, and Reifler, at Georgia State University, suggest that Republicans might be especially prone to the backfire effect because conservatives may have more rigid views than liberals: Upon hearing a refutation, conservatives might "argue back" against the refutation in their minds, thereby strengthening their belief in the misinformation. Nyhan and Reifler did not see the same "backfire effect" when liberals were given misinformation and a refutation about the Bush administration's stance on stem cell research."

I am outta this discussion with you now. I was really only interested in Walt's opinion since I already know most others' quite well. I'm not going to start defending Jimmy Carter, who was President before I was even born!



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



What about the parents of the boy who impregnated her...

Posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:30:07:

In Reply to: All mothers who have pregnant teenagers - posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:18:10:

Are they irresponsible as well???



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: There's No Arguing With Conservatives. No Seriously, Scientific Studies Prove It

Posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:34:01:

In Reply to: There's No Arguing With Conservatives. No Seriously, Scientific Studies Prove It posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 13:27:45:

Ever heard of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)?

As first described by conservative columnist and Psychiatrist Charles Krauthammer, Bush Derangement Syndrome (or BDS) is a loss of the capability for rational thought. This loss is often displayed over a period of hours, days or even months and years. The sufferer in all cases blames President George W. Bush for any and all types of disasters, human maladies, etc. despite abundant evidence of contrary causal effects. BDS is also manifested in many sufferers by a determination to label President Bush as the greatest single threat to democracy and freedom in the United States since the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts during the presidency of John Adams. Also, closely related, see Karl Rove Syndrome (KRS).
A person who refuses to remove the Kerry / Edwards bumper sticker from his / her car, believing that keeping such sticker will in some way alter the results of the 2004 election. This is the most common example of Bush Derangement Syndrome - especially in Blue states.

In close relation to the above example, a person who from time to time will comment that Al Gore was really elected in 2000 despite the fact that however anachronistic, the results of the Electoral College determines the result of presidential elections, not the results of the popular vote.

And in yet another related area, any person who insists that in 2000 that voter irregularity in Florida gave that state to Bush and /or in 2004 that voting machines in Ohio were tampered with by the RNC, again to throw the last, critical state over into the Red column.

A person who resolutely insists that hurricane damage is controlled from the White House and is routinely directed towards areas of lower income / high minority population.

Persons who routinely use terms such as "dictator", "fascist", "monarchary" or "Generalissimo" when discussing George W. Bush.

Persons who never had any problem with former President Bill Clinton attending Sunday worship services with Bible in hand, but who see in George W. Bush the man who would be Grand Mufti of the USA.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bush+Derangement+Syndrome&defid=1441489



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:39:38:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by Ron [3468.2287] on September 17, 2008 at 12:31:26:

One of O's biggest contributors is none other than Aunt Fannie.

Here's what my friend Boortz said today:

Nancy Pelosi says the Democrats share absolutely none of the blame for the current financial goings-on. She's wrong. In fact, she's lying because she knows here statement to be untrue.

1. Almost all of the financial problems we see today are based on bad mortgage lending. That would be lending money to people to buy homes who didn't qualify for a loan.

2. The Democrats, under Clinton, strengthened a government-created monster called the "Community Reinvestment Act." This law was then used by "activists" and "community organizers" (like Obama?) to coerce lending institutions to make these bad loans ... millions of them.

3. Now we see what happens when political "wisdom" supplants good loan underwriting. When private financial institutions are virtually forced to make loans to people with a bad credit and job history .. this is what you get. Enjoy it.

The Democrats have offered us a candidate who is very anti-private sector. Obama believes that America is great because of government and those who, like him, deride the profit motive. If Americans are stupid enough to believe his socialist drivel and put him in office .. .then we will get just what we so richly deserve.



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: What about the parents of the boy who impregnated her...

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 13:42:46:

In Reply to: What about the parents of the boy who impregnated her... posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:30:07:

Fork, could you please quote where I branded the daughter irresponsible? I believe I was referring to her mother, Sarah Palin, potential President of America, who taught her children to abstain and not use contraception, and now has a teenage pregnancy as a direct consequence of such unrealistic and dogmatic values. And she wants to dictate to us how to live our lives? Don't make me laugh.

Trying to pretend this is a responsible and "wanted" pregnancy is not going to float with me or anyone of an IQ above 100. Generally speaking I don't believe a 17 year old is equipped to be a mother, but that's just my opinion and not particularly relevant to this discussion. I am mainly interested in Sarah Palin, not her daughter.


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 13:48:34:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:39:38:

Get what you deserve? Are you even keeping up with the news? LOL

You mean the Dems can make it worse than this? That's a tall order I tell ya!


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: There's No Arguing With Conservatives. No Seriously, Scientific Studies Prove It

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 14:09:18:

In Reply to: Re: There's No Arguing With Conservatives. No Seriously, Scientific Studies Prove It posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 13:34:01:

I think this definition is more accurate:

"The irrational belief, despite all factual evidence to the contrary, that President George W. Bush has been truthful and successful in the execution of his policies, and that his actions are in the best interests of the United States.
That Iraq had developed weapons of mass destruction; that Iraq supported Al Qaeda; that the invastion of Iraq has made America and the world safer from terrorism; that his tax cuts help the middle class."


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: What about the parents of the boy who impregnated her...

Posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 15:00:25:

In Reply to: Re: What about the parents of the boy who impregnated her... posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 13:42:46:

You said Palin (the mother) is a perfect example of her irresponsibility as a mother, and illustrating her flawed ideas about abstinence, contraception and abortion.

"flawed ideas about abstinence, contraception and abortion." - Those are YOUR opinions, but coming from you, completely understandable as a self pronounced atheist and loather of anything Christian.

Palin has never said she will "Dictate to us how to live our lives", that's a Dem's job. Repubs, especially Alaskan repubs wear their free thinking/living independent persona like a badge of honor.

"Trying to pretend this is a responsible and "wanted" pregnancy is not going to float with me or anyone of an IQ above 100" - Who knows it is "want"....It is none of anyone's business outside the Palin family, one thing for sure, it will be loved. The Palin family has every right to make their OWN decision whether to carry to term their daughter's pregnancy or Ms. Palin's Down syndrome baby.

Question for you Chris, Why do find it fun to attack & insult Christians who participate on this board? It is a very unattractive quality, and smacks of narrow minded intolerance.



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: What about the parents of the boy who impregnated her...

Posted by ukchris [1490.2450] on September 17, 2008 at 17:21:04:

In Reply to: Re: What about the parents of the boy who impregnated her... posted by Fork in the Road [358.4515] on September 17, 2008 at 15:00:25:

A few points:

"Repubs, especially Alaskan repubs wear their free thinking/living independent persona like a badge of honor."

Would this be the independent Alaskans who enjoyed a $1200 energy rebate courtesy of your prospective VP? The same Sarah Palin who lied about the Bridge to Nowhere, actually having been in favour of the project at first until embarrassment led to the money being diverted elsewhere, whilst $73m of this taxpayer money still sits in Alaskan coffers. Don't you wonder why she didn't give it back yet? Doesn't sound like "no" to me at least!

Maybe a free-thinking, liberal Alaskan is typified by someone demanding books to be removed from a library then attempting to sack the librarian for refusing to do so... Not sure my definitions agree with your's as you can see.

"It is none of anyone's business outside the Palin family, one thing for sure, it will be loved."

I agree it is none of anyone's business. It is hypocrisy and the threat to liberty and equality that is worries me. In the interests of consistency you should agree that it is not Sarah Palin's business what other people do in their lives either. However, she is a member of "Feminists for Life", which advocates the imprisonment of doctors who perform abortions. I am not sure how more transparent I can make this. I can't say for sure what exact impact her extremist views would have on public policy, but I hope Americans don't vote to find out.

"Why do find it fun to attack & insult Christians who participate on this board?"

Going to have to ask you to find this quote for me also. I am countering certain principles that jar with mine, not people of a particular belief. It doesn't particularly matter what people believe, just as long as their beliefs know their place and have no consequence on my life and in public policy.



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Amen Amen and Amen....

Posted by Michele 2 [3899.3334] on September 17, 2008 at 17:47:23:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by Walt Stoll [93.4968] on September 17, 2008 at 08:05:28:

And why does it make me like you that much more to hear you say "pisses me off"?! ;-)


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Amen Amen and Amen....

Posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 17, 2008 at 17:57:51:

In Reply to: Amen Amen and Amen.... posted by Michele 2 [3899.3334] on September 17, 2008 at 17:47:23:

Passion.))


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 17, 2008 at 18:06:48:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 10:54:21:

has she admitted she hears voices yet? She'll say she heard one that said, "Push the Button, Sarah". I prefer, "Push the Button, Max", from the movie, "The Great Race". That was about a car race from NY to Paris in 190X. Wonder if they went through Alaska, to say hello to Sarah's granny.


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by ukchris [1490.2450] on September 17, 2008 at 18:14:41:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 17, 2008 at 18:06:48:

Careful there Vince. You'll get the reputation of being an atheist.

Shocking!! ;-)


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by ukchris [1490.2450] on September 17, 2008 at 18:17:01:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by sonia [5538.1399] on September 17, 2008 at 10:03:17:

True sonia. There is a very long way to go. People will have to educate themselves before we see the real change needed, or they'll continue to get exactly what they deserve.... Sad.


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by Lurch [140.4558] on September 17, 2008 at 18:32:58:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by Walt Stoll [93.4968] on September 17, 2008 at 08:05:28:

I'm glad to hear that you feel this way. I feel this way too.




Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by Sounder [10699.2765] on September 17, 2008 at 18:55:52:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 16, 2008 at 21:35:37:

this looks like a more balanced read to me.


http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2008/03/a-detailed-anal.html



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 17, 2008 at 21:29:46:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by ukchris [1490.2450] on September 17, 2008 at 18:14:41:

but an atheist who hears voices is acceptable.)) They figure you are salvagible.))


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly.

Posted by Walt Stoll [93.4968] on September 18, 2008 at 07:15:48:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 17, 2008 at 10:54:21:

Thanks, UK!

When it comes to Palin, "Just say no!".

I wish it were that easy,

Walt


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Public being reamed to feed the special interests???

Posted by Voice of Reason [9585.4] on September 18, 2008 at 16:50:15:

In Reply to: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? Archive in monopoly. posted by Walt Stoll [93.4968] on September 17, 2008 at 08:05:28:

Here is a prime example, and a taste of more to come!

(To avoid being called a liar, watch for yourself.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0




Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests???

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 11:10:25:

In Reply to: Public being reamed to feed the special interests??? posted by Voice of Reason [9585.4] on September 18, 2008 at 16:50:15:

I finally got around to researching this and exposing this for the nonsense it is. Don't thank me though, I'm happy to provide the truth just in case any casual readers out there are following this.

Basically you forgot to mention the Republican connections to Freddie Mac.

"Six members of the Republican lobbying firm Fierce Isakowitz & Blalock, all Fannie Mae lobbyists, have given McCain $13,250, records show.

The New York investor Geoffrey Boisi, a member of Freddie Mac's board, contributed more than $70,000 to McCain and Republican Party committees working for his election. Both he and Richard Hohlt, a Fannie Mae lobbyist, are among the McCain "bundlers" who have raised $100,000 to $250,000 from others, according to the campaign Web site."

"While the two firms have long been careful to hire from and contribute to both parties, generally Fannie Mae has favored Democrats and Freddie Mac the Republicans."

Next time, mention both sides of the story please? The facts eventually speak for themselves. This is actually getting pretty desperate and pathetic. At least Ron Paul is still making sense though, why didn't you nominate him? Don't you realise the government you elected oversaw this chaos? And you're resorting to biased, disingenuous, cherry-picked tidbits of propaganda that don't tell the whole story?

Anyone who cites Fox News as a credible source of information without doing further research is a fool. "Fair and Balanced", as if stating so makes it true! Sigh.

So the slogan of the Republican party is "Straight Talk Express"? I suggest "Disinformation Derailed" as far more appropriate.

Better luck next time, eh?



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests???

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 11:39:38:

In Reply to: Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests??? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 11:10:25:

By the way, I recognise there is an anomaly between the Total Obama figures given by the NYT, but the fundamental point I am addressing here is that both McCain and Obama have ties to Freddie and Fannie. That is quite clear.

"They’ve stacked their payrolls with top Washington power brokers of all political stripes, including Republican John McCain’s presidential campaign manager, Rick Davis; Democrat Barack Obama’s original vice presidential vetter, Jim Johnson; and scores of others now working for the two rivals for the White House.

Fannie and Freddie’s aggressive political maneuvering has helped stave off increased regulation and preserve special benefits such as exemption from state and local income taxes and the ability to borrow at low rates."

We should consider whether this party politics is an intentional distraction stirred by the media. We seem blinded to the truth; who is behind all of this since it seems non-party affiliated? We need to become nonpartisan and dispel corruption whether it's Republican or Democrat.



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



UK de Lafayette

Posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 19, 2008 at 12:22:50:

In Reply to: Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests??? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 11:10:25:

You are acting like the Marquis de Lafayette for us in the revolution, helping US out.))


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: UK de Lafayette

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 14:52:12:

In Reply to: UK de Lafayette posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 19, 2008 at 12:22:50:

Thanks Vince, that put a smile on my face :-)


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: UK de Lafayette

Posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 19, 2008 at 15:03:21:

In Reply to: Re: UK de Lafayette posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 14:52:12:

Although the US and UK are linked at the navel, or maybe the butt, it is hard to tell how we look from over there. I guess like Ronnie is up on things that happen here, more than many here are, we must create a BIG wave and wake.

I was trying to find the quote about Lafayette, maybe when he returned years later, and got a hero's welcome, and he visited all the states, and even songs being written for the visit, but couldn't find it.


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests???

Posted by Phillylady [3423.4757] on September 19, 2008 at 16:48:49:

In Reply to: Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests??? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 11:10:25:

Thank you, Chris. Things become clearer when the correct figures are shown. Maybe McCain can explain how that happened?


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests???

Posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 19, 2008 at 18:09:04:

In Reply to: Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests??? posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 11:10:25:

LOL. AH McC in his Straight Talk Pedal Car Said, Obama took Money from Fannie and Freddie. After the clip, PBS said, that He DIDN'T Say, HE took 10X as much, 169K$. Maybe he doesn't know where monies come from, like he didn't know how many houses he owned. Maybe his wife like his Own campaign keep him in the dark. Like mushrooms. They're grown in the dark, and fed BS.

When their Lips are Moving, They're LYING!!! If someone asks him about it, He'll probably say, He can SEE Russia, from his front steps, answering something Completely different than the question.

More and More, I Don't want These people or ones who swallow their BS Near Me... Probably LIE about the weather we were Both Out In. Maybe they have a Brain Virus, that makes them Think people won't catch their lies, but then, they believe, Say something often enough, and Some people (mo rons) will Believe it. She Says She Said, Thanks, but No Thanks, to the bridge to nowhere...)))))) Lieing Scum with lipstic. She fits McC Like A Glove... They Call themselves Mavericks...LOL. What a LOAD, They're Worse than what they'd be replacing. No WMD's Here, None There. Osama WHO??? NEVER Think about My Friend..

The Fleecing of the US, by crooks and cronies.



Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests???

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 20:26:56:

In Reply to: Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests??? posted by Phillylady [3423.4757] on September 19, 2008 at 16:48:49:

Maybe, or maybe Voice of Reason can explain why she posted this disinformation without researching it's accuracy first? It's called denial :-)


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests???

Posted by ukchris [10820.4773] on September 19, 2008 at 20:36:04:

In Reply to: Re: Public being reamed to feed the special interests??? posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 19, 2008 at 18:09:04:

Vince, I'm encouraged and grateful that you speak out. So few do. Where's everyone else to protest? You could hear a pin drop! Sad.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: UK de Lafayette

Posted by Charles [448.2996] on September 21, 2008 at 19:24:04:

In Reply to: Re: UK de Lafayette posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 19, 2008 at 15:03:21:

Uh Vince, was Lafayette French?


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: UK de Lafayette

Posted by VF [12036.1399] on September 21, 2008 at 19:39:04:

In Reply to: Re: UK de Lafayette posted by Charles [448.2996] on September 21, 2008 at 19:24:04:

sometimes..))


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts?

Posted by Serge C. [9322.4538] on September 21, 2008 at 20:56:01:

In Reply to: Re: Why Obama's Health Plan Is Better - Walt, thoughts? posted by DELETE THIS GARBAGE.... PLEASE [4750.4757] on September 17, 2008 at 00:22:30:

This is not really the place for pure politic, but let me tell you that any canadian in the east with a IQ > 80 would never vote for the republicans.

We still can't believe that you did again the last time.

Sorry to be rude.

Serge


Go to First Post in this Thread

Follow Ups:



[ Monopoly--Allopathic Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!