Page 3 of 263 FirstFirst 12345671353103 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 3939
  1. #31

  2. #32

    Default

    "Our trust remains in God, not government," said Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, who criticized an "ongoing effort of this administration and the liberal majority in Congress to take over our health care."
    Last I looked, God doesn't bother to cure cancer, the black death, or even the common cold.

    So I'll take my chances with public healthcare, thank you.

    Though if the Christian right wants to take the Mary Baker Eddy path, I'd be more than happy to wave them on their way.
    one of the highest principles of America is that we're a nation of people from different backgrounds living in equal dignity and mutual loyalty - Eboo Patel.

  3. #33
    Were You There? Michael P's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Location, Location!
    Posts
    31,750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul McEnery View Post
    Last I looked, God doesn't bother to cure cancer, the black death, or even the common cold.
    Well, not directly, anyway.
    "If you can't say anything good about someone, sit right here by me." - Alice Roosevelt Longworth, on manners

    "It's not whether you win or lose, it's whether I win or lose." - Peter David, on life

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael P View Post
    Well, not directly, anyway.
    Either God acts indirectly through disease to kill people because he's a big meanie; or God acts indirectly through human compassion to rescue people from disease.

    It seems pretty obvious to me that Tony Perkins has an apt name, since he's on the side of God the Psycho.
    one of the highest principles of America is that we're a nation of people from different backgrounds living in equal dignity and mutual loyalty - Eboo Patel.

  5. #35

    Default

    All I remember about Tony Perkins is him getting the crap kicked out of him by Dan Savage.

  6. #36

    Default

    "Our trust remains in God, not government," said Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, who criticized an "ongoing effort of this administration and the liberal majority in Congress to take over our health care."

    They seem to have less faith in God when it comes to public order, national defense and regulating homosexuality and abortion.

    I seem to recall one of the red states passed a State House resolution saying they put their faith in God to protect their state from terrorists. Funnily enough they didn't refuse Homeland Security funds from the Federal government.
    Last edited by Iangould; 09-21-2009 at 01:32 AM.
    Visit the Ace Comics & Games Digital shopfront:
    http://www.acecomics.comicretailer.com

  7. #37
    for the lulz 7thangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    8,657

    Default

    http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo...ervativism.php

    According to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), 95 percent of our health care problems would be fixed if we allowed people to buy their own insurance. Plus a little tort reform.

    In this utopian world, "You own your health care just like you own your auto insurance," Bachmann said. One might ask, how would that lower costs? "You can band together with whomever you want," she said, "so you have purchasing power."

    "It's called freedom!" she said to whoops and cheers. She was speaking, along with Reps. Tom Price (R-GA) and Chris Smith (R-NJ), at a health care Q&A, part of the Values Voter Summit in Washington.

    The hour-long panel was a lesson in how removed many conservatives are from the health care debate the rest of us are having. Insurance company regulations, preventive care, getting insurance for people who can't afford it -- these things are replaced with calls for tort reform, making sure abortion isn't federally funded and lauding Medicare out of one side of the mouth while attacking government run health care out of the other.

    After Bachmann claimed all of the nation's woes were caused by government intervention, Smith stepped in to praise Medicare and Medicaid. But a government health care reform bill, he said, is different.

    "Obamacare is reckless," he said.

    Smith, though, mostly stuck to the topic of abortion, claiming the bill will fund abortions and, therefore, abortions will increase by a third.

    "This is the biggest threat since Roe v. Wade itself," he said.

    Republicans are often accused of opposing the Democrats' plan without having one of their own. Their defense is usually to cry "Tort reform!" Today's panel was no different.

    To her credit, Bachmann acknowledged that President Obama has asked Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to look for governments and groups who have an alternative medical liability system, to find out what works and what doesn't. But, Bachmann said, that program is worthless unless there's language in the health care bill that changes the way malpractice law works.

    "We already have a pilot program," she said. "It's called the state of Texas."

    Texas instituted malpractice reforms in 2003, cutting the number of suits by half and lowering malpractice insurance premiums for doctors. But health care costs in Texas are still high, and among the fastest growing in the nation.

    In the end, it seems these conservative opponents of the various health care bills winding through Congress don't want an alternative. They simply want the bill to fail, so much show that they'll ask for divine interventions. Price, for one, asked the audience to pray for the Blue Dogs to have some "backbone" and vote

  8. #38
    Marquis de carabas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Belgium.
    Posts
    31,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7thangel View Post
    According to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), 95 percent of our health care problems would be fixed if we allowed people to buy their own insurance. Plus a little tort reform.
    How is that different from how things are? Or does she mean that health insurance should not be linked to your job (which seems indeed like a pretty evil scheme to me).
    'The marquis. Well, you know, to be honest, he seems a little bit dodgy to me.'
    'Mm,' she agreed. 'He's a little bit dodgy in the same way that rats are a little bit covered in fur."

  9. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carabas View Post
    How is that different from how things are? Or does she mean that health insurance should not be linked to your job (which seems indeed like a pretty evil scheme to me).
    I hope that's what she meant. Because if not... seriously, WTF?

  10. #40
    for the lulz 7thangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    8,657

    Default

    you guys do know who she is right? crazy eyes, crazy words, crazy theories.

  11. #41
    Senior Member Titan76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,412

    Default

    NCAA coaches back health care reform

    WASHINGTON — NCAA basketball coaches who are sometimes rivals on the court came united to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to push for quick approval of health care reform.

    "Now is the time to press full court," Notre Dame Coach Mike Brey told about 200 American Cancer Society activists and others, adding, "And foul a little bit."

    Georgetown University Coach John Thompson III countered that Brey's team knows more than a little bit about fouling.

    "They do it all the time," he said, laughing.

    Both men were joined by fellow coaches Ed DeChellis of Penn State, Oliver Purnell of Clemson and Tubby Smith of Minnesota.

    The event, co-sponsored by Minnesota Democratic Sens. Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar, was a push to guarantee health coverage for all, regardless of preexisting conditions, and require minimal or no deductibles for cancer-screening procedures.

  12. #42
    Senior Member Titan76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,412

    Default

    http://www.seattlepi.com/local/6420a..._medicare.html

    WASHINGTON -- A health care overhaul bill authored by Sen. Maria Cantwell would change the way doctors serving Medicare patients are paid.

    The Washington Democrat said the measure would reward doctors for providing high quality care. The current Medicare system penalizes Washington and other states by rewarding quantity of medical services performed rather than quality, Cantwell said.

    Officials in Washington, Minnesota and other states have long complained that Medicare's complex reimbursement formula has the unintended effect of punishing doctors for providing cost-effective care because it means they received lower payments.

    "For too long, Washington state has blazed a trail providing coordinated, high-quality care for thousands of patients," Cantwell said Tuesday.

    Including the Medicare proposal in the health care overhaul being considered by the Senate Finance Committee "is a huge win for Washington state, and it finally puts the patient first rather than putting the focus on how physicians get paid," Cantwell said.

    Montana Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Finance panel, agreed to include the Medicare measure Tuesday in the health care overhaul the committee considering. Cantwell is a member of the panel.

    Cantwell and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and 26 other senators sent a letter last week to President Barack Obama urging the Medicare change. The letter was signed by 21 Democrats, six Republicans and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. All six senators in Washington, Oregon and Idaho signed the letter.

  13. #43
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Eastern Europe. For the 5th time
    Posts
    526

    Default

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...IULUeGAisyo07I

    So do doctors hate this idea or not?

  14. #44
    Senior Member Titan76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,412

    Default

    http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thega...no-really.aspx

    Liberals were disappointed when Max Baucus's long awaited health-care bill was unveiled last week without a public option. Baucus had instead included not-for-profit co-ops as his preferred mechanism for providing affordable coverage to the uninsured. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) gave voice to the general feeling on the Congressional left when he pronounced the Baucus plan "dead on arrival," largely because of it's lack of a public plan. But now amendments to the Finance chair's bill are flooding in (there's over 560 of them), and Maine Republican Olympia Snowe is offering some relatively progressive revisions, including reviving the notion of a public plan. Snowe would have a public plan enacted via a "trigger," that is, if insurance companies in any particular state fail to provide uninsured residents with an affordable plan, then that would "trigger" the creation of a public plan in that state. This way, insurance companies are given the opportunity to lower premiums and attract currently uninsured consumers, but if they fail to do so, the government will act. In other words, the free market will be given a chance and if it fails, government will step in. Snowe calls this a "safety-net" plan.

    In her amendment, Snowe defines affordability according to the percentage of income one could reasonably expect to pay for health insurance. It ranges from 3 percent of income if you are living on 133 percent of the federal poverty line (around $29,000 for a family of four) up to 13 percent for those earning 300 percent of the poverty line (around $66,000 for a family of four). This amendment is one of several that Snowe has offered in an attempted to enhance the bill's affordability measures, like her proposal to cap annual deductibles for employer-based insurance at $2,000 for an individual and $4,000 for a family.

    Snowe's amendments are currently the best indicator of what shape the Senate bill might ultimately take. Of the few Republicans who might vote for health care reform, she's the most likely.

  15. #45
    Senior Member Titan76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,412

    Default

    http://www.beyondchron.org/articles/...ood__7366.html

    In a truly disturbing article yesterday, the New York Times called Olympia Snowe the President’s “Best Hope in the G.O.P.” for health care reform – and elevated the White House’s effort to woo the Maine Senator as more “critical” than rallying public support for the plan. As the Senate’s most moderate Republican, the media likes to boost Snowe in these political fights – with Democrats hoping to forge some kind of “compromise” to earn her vote. But if history is any guide, cutting a deal with Snowe has never been a good thing for progressives. From campaign finance reform in 1997 to court appointments in 2005 to the federal stimulus to health care reform now, the only thing a Snowe Compromise has accomplished is to set back progressive policy goals – often irreparably into the future. And with 58% of Snowe’s Maine constituents supporting a “public option” for health care, there is simply no excuse to water down reform just to get her vote.

    Only in the insular world of Washington DC can the public option – which has always for progressives been a compromise from single-payer – be called a “liberal” proposal that may or may not pass because Olympia Snowe (who some bloggers have started calling President Snowe) doesn’t like it. The fact is poll after national poll shows the public option to be the mainstream view. And despite a brutal August recess where right-wing Teabaggers disrupted Town Hall meetings, the American people generally trust Obama on health care and want to see meaningful reform.

    Even in the most undemocratic of institutions – the U.S. Senate – a public option would pass easily, if Senators followed the will of their constituents. 55% of Arkansans support it, but Democratic Senators Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor (the “Wal-Mart twins”) are balking. The public option gets much love in Nevada, but Harry Reid’s inept handling of the issue could doom his re-election. Even a plurality of Montanans want it, despite Max Baucus doing everything to kill it. And in Maine – where Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe oppose the public option – 58% of their constituents support it, including 67% of independent voters.

    But even though Olympia Snowe is out of step with the American people on the public option – and out of step with her own Maine constituents on the public option – we keep hearing about how her support is “crucial” at forging some bipartisan “compromise.” Any quick history lesson of Snowe compromises should make Democrats think twice.

    Remember the Snowe Compromise on campaign finance reform from 1997? It went nowhere. Republicans were dead-set against the McCain-Feingold bill, unless labor unions were also required to get the individual consent of every member before spending political resources (which Democrats opposed.) Snowe proposed placating the right-wing’s “poison pill” – if corporations were also required to get consent from all their shareholders. Senate Republicans were too ideologically opposed to even accept that compromise, so the entire bill failed. Looking back on it, we should be grateful.

    In 2005, Senate Republicans were threatening to use the “nuclear option” – i.e., kill the filibuster – if Democrats kept opposing George Bush’s right-wing judicial nominations (we don’t see the Democratic Senate majority today invoking such threats.) The Gang of 14 – which included Olympia Snowe – came up with a compromise that “saved” the filibuster. Republicans would not invoke the nuclear option, if Democrats agreed not to filibuster except under “extraordinary circumstances.” As a direct result, right-wing ideologues Priscilla Owen, William Pryor and Janice Rogers Brown got confirmed to the Court. We never saw any Bush appointees get blocked afterwards, so it’s unclear to me how it was a compromise.

    After Obama became President this year, Republicans opposed the federal stimulus en masse – and again, there were concerns about getting 60 votes in the Senate to stop a filibuster. Enter Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins to the rescue with a “compromise” – which included gutting affordable housing funds and tax cuts for mansions. Did Snowe provide a critical vote to help pass the President’s Stimulus Package? Yes, but only by ensuring that much of the needed federal funds did not materialize. The Snowe Compromise struck again.

    Now, Olympia Snowe has argued against the public option – saying we should instead pass a “trigger” amendment that gives time for insurance companies to make health care affordable before any public option becomes “necessary.” Again, she is being courted as a possible Republican vote – but the ultimate effect of a Snowe Compromise will be to dilute the effect of good public policy into nothing. Now that Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus has written a health care bill that is an “absolute gift” to the insurance industry, all eyes are on Olympia Snowe to see if it’s another “acceptable” compromise.
    Makes you wonder how Olympia Snowe became one(if not the)most powerful Senator in the Senate. I don't understand why getting her support is so critical, especially when the Democrats have 60 votes already, and just need to whip the party members in line.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •