The Trench discussion

Coulter on Health Care...

Comments Showing 1-22 of 22 (22 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 2: by Not Bill (last edited Aug 22, 2009 01:00PM) (new)

Not Bill | 467 comments Not sure on yer question there, RA. This is a small part of the Obamacare debate. Ann was unusually reserved though perhaps less than well spoken. She did get her points across though and that is the goal.

I'll go out on a limb here since you've given me the rope. Given the behavior of the Democrats, and Obama in particular, it appears to me this is all about the acquistion of power. The only plan the Dems have is precisely that - how to concentrate power in their hands. If we are to absolutley honest with ourselves, we need to understand THERE IS NO HEALTHCARE PLAN. The Dems are cobbling together ideas almost on a daily basis. Look at the chaos that is now the Obama Administration. On any given day, you have any number of Dems saying completely opposite things. It's insane...and illuminating. They don't care about the legislation. They only care that it passes. Once it does, they own us. Literally. That is the goal, and they see this as their best option. That's why the rush. They had to get it through before people caught on . They failed and now all they have is trying to trash any dissent as "unAmerican", "extremist", "Republican conspiracy", ... and my favorite from Harry Reid: "evil mongering". Hey Harry - Fuck You!

And now, I'm off to the 8/22 Summer Recess protest outside of Lynn Woolsey's office. You spread the EVIL!

message 3: by RandomAnthony (new)

RandomAnthony Here's the ad ABC and NBC supposedly won't run...I'm not sure of the details...anyone?

message 4: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill | 467 comments Details? The fact they've spiked it is THE issue, especially considering they were more than willing to give Obama free airtime while refusing any chance for on-air rebuttal. This speaks well to how we no longer have an independant press in this country. Sure, they've chosen to become Obama's sock puppets, but that's a distinction without a difference.

Thank God for teh interwebs!

Servius  Heiner  | 360 comments Mod
First off it is nice to see you here, RA.

As to the Health care issue... Well It is hard to debate an issue when there is no plan. As I understand it, the BO administration just wants to add everyone to a medicare model(if they are not happy with their own insurance). Well sorry that is crap and doesn't work. Medicare itself is broken and a failed model.

To me I would love to see health care reform. But I think the two of us would have two very different ideas as to what health care reform should be. And why is the Government stuck on insuring everyone? Bring the cost down so you can afford day to day medical cost on your own and only use the insurance for what it was originally intended for... BIG ILLNESSES.

personally I would like to see the government attack the way health care is administered and the suffocating bureaucracy that surrounds it. Healthcare would be affordable if we were not spending %70 of the moneys on supporting the administrative side of health care. Streamline. That is the key word, streamline; we have more clerks and fucking clerks for the clerks that nothing is ever expedited and were paying 15 people to do what one could do.
A few computer programs to collate all the data and dissimate it out to all required personnel. STREAMLINE EVERYTHING for Fuck sake. this is what the information age is all about. That is why Computers caught on, to speed things up and yet every company I have ever worked for still misuses computers or doesn't use them to the full capacity.

Damn where did that soap box come from... carry on.

message 6: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill | 467 comments SSH - good commentary. The problem is inddeed existing govt regulation in the guise of unfunded mandates. Thererfore, the solution is not to sxpand that model into a national system.

Again, what we are dealing with here is not something that is designed to solve the problem with rising healthcare costs. This is a means by with the radical left seeks to impose its will on the American People and radically reshape the political landscape in their favor. Tha is what at's stake here. The volkes are waking up to to the charade.

message 7: by RandomAnthony (new)

RandomAnthony Hey, I forgot to mention, Nick, you mentioned that Levin book...I bought it...kicks ass...

Carry on. Thanks, guys.

message 8: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill | 467 comments Woot!

message 9: by RandomAnthony (new)

RandomAnthony Thanks! I also got Reagan's diaries...those are remarkably readable...

So...somebody's giving a speech tonight, eh?

Servius  Heiner  | 360 comments Mod
I thought it was suppose to be a speech of details...

I like some aspects of the bill. But the idea of the reforms is not where my resistance comes from. How to pay for it, and how to keep the government out of it; and how to do it? That is the debate.

I don't buy President Obama's explanation about where the moneys will come from to support the reform. Couple that with the "fear mongering" two ton republican lie sitting in the corner about the 'public option' being used by illegal aliens. Nobody knows how many illegals are here, and Democrats (generally speaking of course) don't want to know; and do all they can to mask and give them American rights and services. So how can he claim they will not have access?
With an additional 12-16 million added to the already 30 million they want to add were looking at upwards of 50 million users to a system that is already collapsing under it's own weight.

President Obama claimed that he didn't want the government taking a part in the industry but then 5 minutes later he stated he wants to mandate insurance companies pay for certain preventive procedures. Where I come from that is a heavy hand. There is a different between saying you will not refuse insurance based on existing conditions, and forcing the insurance company to take on added tests, and telling them they are not allowed to adjust cost to cover the added expenses.

I could go on all day... so instead I will throw out an ideas and I am interested in your opinions on my ideas and your own as well:

Make insurance companies non-profit. I know WTF Nick! That isn't very capitalist of you...

True it is not but hear me out. As most of you know I work on the Alaska pipeline. It is a private company but we operate on public lands and are transporting public/private resources (as per Alaska's state constitution). So Alyeska pipeline and service company makes a killing every year. But they are not allowed to procure a profit. So what do we do with the profit moneys?
After the Native Corporations skim off their cut we fund environmental projects and fund in part the states energy audit program that gives up to 10k to home owners to work on their homes making them more energy efficient, and lastly public works projects.

How does this relate to the Health care industry? It doesn't, but it can be tailored to act in the same capacity improving care and reducing cost at the same time. Once the drive to increase profit is removed moneys can be targeted at; research and development, reducing the overall cost to users, and tuition assistance so more QUALIFIED individuals can afford to train up and become care providers. With double digit millions jumping on the strained system we are really going to need more people and more facilities.

Just an idea off the top of my head. I'm sure with a little debate and discussion we could tailor it into something reasonable and beneficial for both sides and we sad sacks in the middle.

message 11: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill | 467 comments Forget it...Obama has just doubled down with the far left and declared war on the American People. This plan, and any other coming out of this Marxist Congress needs to be defeated with extreme prejudice. Make it the albatross around Obama's neck that will sink him in 2012, and the Donk critters in in 2010.

message 12: by RandomAnthony (new)

RandomAnthony Not sure if you guys saw Palin's response to the health care speech...

After all the rhetoric is put aside, one principle ran through President Obama’s speech tonight: that increased government involvement in health care can solve its problems.

Many Americans fundamentally disagree with this idea. We know from long experience that the creation of a massive new bureaucracy will not provide us with “more stability and security,” but just the opposite. It's hard to believe the President when he says that this time he and his team of bureaucrats have finally figured out how to do things right if only we’ll take them at their word.

Our objections to the Democrats’ health care proposals are not mere “bickering” or “games.” They are not an attempt to “score short term political points.” And it’s hard to listen to the President lecture us not to use “scare tactics” when in the next breath he says that “more will die” if his proposals do not pass.

In his speech the President directly responded to concerns I’ve raised about unelected bureaucrats being given power to make decisions affecting life or death health care matters. He called these concerns “bogus,” “irresponsible,” and “a lie” -- so much for civility. After all the name-calling, though, what he did not do is respond to the arguments we’ve made, arguments even some of his own supporters have agreed have merit.

In fact, after promising to “make sure that no government bureaucrat .... gets between you and the health care you need,” the President repeated his call for an Independent Medicare Advisory Council -- an unelected, largely unaccountable group of bureaucrats charged with containing Medicare costs. He did not disavow his own statement that such a group, working outside of “normal political channels,” should guide decisions regarding that “huge driver of cost ... the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives....” He did not disavow the statements of his health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, and continuing to pay his salary with taxpayer dollars proves a commitment to his beliefs. The President can keep making unsupported assertions, but until he directly responds to the arguments I’ve made, I’m going to call him out too.

It was heartening to hear the President finally recognize that tort reform is an important part of any solution. But this concession shouldn’t lead us to take our eye off the ball: the Democrats’ proposals will not reduce costs, and they will not deliver better health care. It’s this kind of “healthy skepticism of government” that truly reflects a “concern and regard for the plight of others.” We can’t wait to hear the details on that; we look forward to working with you on tort reform.

Finally, President Obama delivered an offhand applause line tonight about the cost of the War on Terror. As we approach the anniversary of the September 11th attacks and honor those who died that day and those who have died since in the War on Terror, in order to secure our freedoms, we need to remember their sacrifices and not demonize them as having had too high a price tag.

Remember, Mr. President, elected officials work for the people. Forcing a conclusion in order to claim a “victory” is not healthy for our country. We hear you say government isn’t always the answer; now hear us -- that’s what we’ve been saying all along.

- Sarah Palin

Servius  Heiner  | 360 comments Mod
RA, I find myself agreeing with Ms. Palin more often then not. I think she is well grounded here as well. At times I find it hard to keep supporting her in her political ventures since her resignation, but I am withholding final judgment until I talk with her again. As I have said I believe it is a strategy to go to Washington as a senator in next yeas election.

You ask a lot of questions, RA, and now I have one of you: How do you feel the president is performing; not speeches, but actual performance?

Second part of same question, how do you feel congress is performing?

message 14: by RandomAnthony (last edited Sep 11, 2009 12:10PM) (new)

RandomAnthony Ok, in order to answer that, Nick, I have to talk a little bit about what brought me to describe myself as "conservative" which, in retrospect, I always kind of was, anyway, but as a conservative friend recently pointed out, I didn't really know it at the time. I hope that's ok.

I'm very frustrated with the President. I feel like government intrusion into daily life both through the health care bill and the bank bailouts has gone well beyond what I expected. It's not that I don't think people/industries may need some government intervention, I guess, but I had no idea the government would intrude on the citizens' lives so intensely and with a sense of arrogance and self-righteousness. Obama made a lot of noise on the night he was elected about how he was going to "earn the trust" of those who didn't vote for him. And then he dismisses genuine concerns as "scare tactics" and his people describe positions opposed to him as "silly". He's not who he said he was going to be. That's the short answer. On a personal level I recognize what I think is a smug, arrogant "we'll listen, and look sensitive, but ultimately, really, we're smarter than everyone and the public should just get out of the way and let us run their lives" attitude from his administration. But, anyway, I believe in free speech (and that includes Beck and Fox News), small government (and how small, of course, is hard to say, but right now I think government encroachment on daily life is out of control), reasonable spending (I'd like my kids to, you know, not be in massive debt to other countries), a strong defense (along with building relationships with other countries, but c'mon, we're not all going to sing around the campfire), and social programs that allow people the dignity to stand on their own rather than enslaving them a governmental crutch. So, yeah. I guess that makes me a conservative. And I'm stunned, stunned, at how many of my liberal friends recoil at that idea. I still have a lot to learn about all angles on the republican party, the nuances of conservative thinking, etc. I don't want to sound like a know-it-all. That's a big part of why I'm here:)

It's harder for me to speak on Congress. I just know Nancy Pelosi is lame.


Servius  Heiner  | 360 comments Mod
Well I'm glad to hear you are not a republican, but yes I can see the conservative thinking in what you say. I often find myself at odds with conservative republicans on issues, it is the tenants of conservatism that are important not so much the issues. IMO anyway.

Servius  Heiner  | 360 comments Mod
I am not surprised to hear some of your other friends ignoring Obama's short comings and ignoring a simple truth: He is a politician and does what politicians do.

I also believe he is the first person that redeems President Bush. To history anyway.

Gitmo: He promised to close it, some would say he is doing that... but so was Bush. The media glazes over the details of these things, one can not just wave their wand like a scene from Harry Potter. (Acco solution) The simple truth is the detainees are in legal limbo and it wouldn't make any difference where they were held or what court they were tried in. it is a matter of legal jurisdiction. They are not citizens of the US, or civil courts have no authority to try them for anything. A military tribunal doesn't have any authority because they are not solders of a nation. They are free agent killers. What President Bush was doing was an attempt to set up a legal frame work to prosecute terrorists because none exists. But to The media and the hard line left this was a great affront to the detainees civil liberties. Personally I don't care about their civil liberties. Do I think they are all guilty, no, but I also believe that once they are cleared they are released. This IS a war damn it were going to have to offend somebody.

Iraq: He didn't start anything new, he is allowing his predecessors plan to proceed to completion. if anything he is allowing it to stagnate and turn sourer again. A war id like driving, small intermediate adjustments. Something I hope Sec. Gates (and everyone else) learns soon is this is a war and it is a war of attrition. We are currently winning. Extremist ranks are thinning and they are finding it harder to recruit new members. For all the talk of Bush administration policies bolstering the ranks of terrorist people miss the meaning of it. If one joined up with that lot because of us, then they were capable of doing it on their own.

Back in 03' President Bush spoke clearly about his intent: To draw the enemy out and destroy them in their own back yard. And that is what happen. Yes there were a few attacks in Europe but as soon as the extremist resources were over whelmed in Iraq and Afghanistan they pulled back. Since only small attempts have been made, and almost all have been foiled. Bush's failures was simple: he allowed himself to become a defiant slave to the media. He tried to play it soft to gain breathing room wail still conducting combat operations he knew needed to happen. I believe President Obama came to the same conclusion once he became privy to the Knowledge that only a president can.

The Economy: The collapse is a sham, and I believe it to be an engineered collapse. I won't go into further detail or else I would sound like a conspiracy nut.

message 17: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill | 467 comments RA - you've done a very good job at putting words to your awakenining. Always better late than never. Your voice will resonate well as one who pierced the veil of soaring rhetoric.

Nick - I agree on your conclusion that this collapse is engineered. I don't mind sounding like a conspiracy nut so here goes. Today we learn that Obama has just slapped China with significant tarrifs on auto part imports as political payoff to the unions. We are looking at the very real possibility of a trade war with one of our most significant trade partners at just the same time we are out to experience massive tax increases - precisely the same recipe that brought us The Great Depression.

The only question: Is Obama really criminally stupid, or is he really seeking to transform our nation in ways that would have caused our founding fathers to take up arms?

message 18: by Jerrod (new)

Jerrod (liquidazrael) The only question: Is Obama really criminally stupid, or is he really seeking to transform our nation in ways that would have caused our founding fathers to take up arms?

I dislike Obama, and for all his short comings, he's not stupid. He knows what he's doing and where he wants to go. The people are stupid for thinking otherwise in the face of overwhelming evidence. And yes, he is transforming our nation into one that should cause us to take up arms. It's obvious that the current strain of government is incompetent to listen and do the will of the legal American public.

On the economy, I'll say I agree and believe some engineering involvement, I mean come on, 3 bubbles to maintain a lie of growth? But we could discuss the engineering part extensively and we would still end with the same conclusion, we are screwed. No going back to the days of yonder for a while, the recovery is a joke mean to lull people into dumping more of the fiat currency into the market. They can manipulate numbers of housing stats, and growth indicators, but in the end, only accepting and moving through the contraction will make this end any quicker.

message 19: by RandomAnthony (new)

RandomAnthony I'm getting more and more frustrated every day...from Obama's spokespeople dismissing any protester yesterday as "wrong" and characterizing the people there as "fringe" (wish I could find where I read that...when I do I'll post it), to CNN's slanted and/or Maureen Dowd's absolutely stunningly dumb column on Joe Wilson.

I've been talking with more people about exactly what you're saying, Rusty...this isn't a "Republican" thing as much as it a "conservative" thing. I'm still very new to this, but I hope you're right, too.

message 20: by RandomAnthony (last edited Sep 13, 2009 10:59AM) (new)

RandomAnthony Oh, ha, Rusty had already posted the link in another thread...thanks, Rusty...

but I still can't find that other link...shit...

message 22: by Not Bill (last edited Sep 19, 2009 01:34PM) (new)

Not Bill | 467 comments So much for civility and Queen Nancy's crocodile tears. The Dems launch healthcare counter offensive, promising a "rain of hellfire". I'm not joking. Right out of the the North Korean KCNA news service playbook. No wonder Hillary loves it there.

The Donks are so friggin' desperate they're completely clueless as to how rediculous they appear. Sure..bring it on. Rain of Hellfire, LOL.

back to top