Another GOP Flip-Flop on Health Care

[Meister]

You know, you'd be taken a lot more seriously if you didn't make claims that were just so obviously false. You claim that Americans have the longest life expectancy in the world, and yet, not only are we not first, we're not in the top 10, top 20, or top 40. We're 50th, sitting right below Portugal and right above Albania.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html






Health care is going to become better if we reduce the quality of health insurance to that which would be seen in a third world country (which is exactly what the GOP proposal for sale across state lines does) and if we place caps on damages that can be collected in event of malpractice, even though previous caps have not been effective at reducing cost and that eliminating malpractice all together would only represent two percent of total health care costs.

If only you were bright enough to ask how the 'life expectancy' stat was calculated, "you'd be taken a lot more seriously ..."

Once the deaths due to auto accidents and homicides are removed, the United States has the greatest life expectancy.

Oh that's brilliant. No other country has cars or murders. BRILLIANT!

In reality, when people are in a car accident they are taken to a hospital and given medical care, same thing if they are shot or stabbed or clubbed, etc., so accidents and murders are not independent of medical care after all!!!!!

No other country has more cars, and we have probably more weapons with the US citizens than any other country. That would have impact on numbers.

 

[Polk]

Dec 10, 2009 Dems still have a majority and are still blaming Boooooshhhh Fox News, Sarah Palin and Republicans.

Yeah, they're doing great in the majority, this is gonna last a real long time

Seems you're ignorant of the fact it takes sixty votes to move anything through the Senate.

And? The GOP is filibuster ObamaCare? Yeah? I must have missed it. Link it up for me, Bro

Yes, the GOP is filibustering the bill. Why the hell do you think there is all this talk of sixty votes?

 

[Polk]

If only you were bright enough to ask how the 'life expectancy' stat was calculated, "you'd be taken a lot more seriously ..."

Once the deaths due to auto accidents and homicides are removed, the United States has the greatest life expectancy.

Oh that's brilliant. No other country has cars or murders. BRILLIANT!

In reality, when people are in a car accident they are taken to a hospital and given medical care, same thing if they are shot or stabbed or clubbed, etc., so accidents and murders are not independent of medical care after all!!!!!

No other country has more cars, and we have probably more weapons with the US citizens than any other country. That would have impact on numbers.

We also have the third largest population on the planet.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Seems you're ignorant of the fact it takes sixty votes to move anything through the Senate.

And? The GOP is filibuster ObamaCare? Yeah? I must have missed it. Link it up for me, Bro

Yes, the GOP is filibustering the bill. Why the hell do you think there is all this talk of sixty votes?

Because the bill sucks and Americans reject Socialism?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

EdtheCynic, you can now see the groveling, grubbing, frantic nature of the loony fringe (exemplified by politicalchic and CF). Murders and cars? Ohy, my.

LOL

I'm laughing at how you fuckers operate. The Fascists, NeoMarxists and Old School Socialists are duking it out on the Left and you're blaming Republicans.

Public Option! Fund abortion! Cover Illegals!

LOL

From each according to their means, to each according to ObamaCare!

 

[Polk]

And? The GOP is filibuster ObamaCare? Yeah? I must have missed it. Link it up for me, Bro

Yes, the GOP is filibustering the bill. Why the hell do you think there is all this talk of sixty votes?

Because the bill sucks and Americans reject Socialism?

Another dodge by Frank.

 

[JakeStarkey]

CF has not a clue.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yeah, the Republicans are fighting over covering all illegals, funding abortions, cutting Medicare, eliminating private insurance companies.

Fucking lying morons.

Go suck a glacier

 

[Political Junky]

Someone who called Coburn's office, said they answered his phone as Dr. Coburn's office. What's with that shit?

 

[saveliberty]

Yes, the GOP is filibustering the bill. Why the hell do you think there is all this talk of sixty votes?

Because the bill sucks and Americans reject Socialism?

Another dodge by Frank.

Okay, how about, it will be more expensive than doing nothing according to Health and Human Services per today's AP story. That savings from Medicare required to help pay for it will not materialize. Again from same article.

 

[Polk]

Because the bill sucks and Americans reject Socialism?

Another dodge by Frank.

Okay, how about, it will be more expensive than doing nothing according to Health and Human Services per today's AP story. That savings from Medicare required to help pay for it will not materialize. Again from same article.

It's expected that expansion coverage to a larger percentage of the population will increase cost in the short-run. The cost savings come into play over the longer run. As for the second claim, that's not from the AP article. That's from conservative bloggers commenting on the AP article. The AP article cites that the report addresses if it feels the savings are political possible.

 

[saveliberty]

Another dodge by Frank.

Okay, how about, it will be more expensive than doing nothing according to Health and Human Services per today's AP story. That savings from Medicare required to help pay for it will not materialize. Again from same article.

It's expected that expansion coverage to a larger percentage of the population will increase cost in the short-run. The cost savings come into play over the longer run. As for the second claim, that's not from the AP article. That's from conservative bloggers commenting on the AP article. The AP article cites that the report addresses if it feels the savings are political possible.

Not what I see Polk:

More troubling was the report's assessment that the Democrats' plan to squeeze Medicare for $493 billion over 10 years in savings relies on specific policy changes that "may be unrealistic" and could lead to cuts in services. The Medicare savings are expected to cover about half the nearly $1 trillion, 10-year cost of expanding coverage to the uninsured.

US health care tab to keep growing under overhaul - Yahoo! News

 

[Polk]

Okay, how about, it will be more expensive than doing nothing according to Health and Human Services per today's AP story. That savings from Medicare required to help pay for it will not materialize. Again from same article.

It's expected that expansion coverage to a larger percentage of the population will increase cost in the short-run. The cost savings come into play over the longer run. As for the second claim, that's not from the AP article. That's from conservative bloggers commenting on the AP article. The AP article cites that the report addresses if it feels the savings are political possible.

Not what I see Polk:

More troubling was the report's assessment that the Democrats' plan to squeeze Medicare for $493 billion over 10 years in savings relies on specific policy changes that "may be unrealistic" and could lead to cuts in services. The Medicare savings are expected to cover about half the nearly $1 trillion, 10-year cost of expanding coverage to the uninsured.

US health care tab to keep growing under overhaul - Yahoo! News

"May be" does not equal "will be".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Another dodge by Frank.

Okay, how about, it will be more expensive than doing nothing according to Health and Human Services per today's AP story. That savings from Medicare required to help pay for it will not materialize. Again from same article.

It's expected that expansion coverage to a larger percentage of the population will increase cost in the short-run. The cost savings come into play over the longer run. As for the second claim, that's not from the AP article. That's from conservative bloggers commenting on the AP article. The AP article cites that the report addresses if it feels the savings are political possible.

And you believe that? God, are you fucking dumb.

 

[saveliberty]

It's expected that expansion coverage to a larger percentage of the population will increase cost in the short-run. The cost savings come into play over the longer run. As for the second claim, that's not from the AP article. That's from conservative bloggers commenting on the AP article. The AP article cites that the report addresses if it feels the savings are political possible.

Not what I see Polk:

More troubling was the report's assessment that the Democrats' plan to squeeze Medicare for $493 billion over 10 years in savings relies on specific policy changes that "may be unrealistic" and could lead to cuts in services. The Medicare savings are expected to cover about half the nearly $1 trillion, 10-year cost of expanding coverage to the uninsured.

US health care tab to keep growing under overhaul - Yahoo! News

"May be" does not equal "will be".

Hanging on by your fingertips I see. My, that looks an awfully long way down.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yeah, look at how great Medicare worked out! Al least $60billion ANNUALLY to fraud, $60 FUCKING BILLION IN REAL CASH MONEY EACH AND EVERY FUCKING YEAR!!!!

And the Program is TRILLIONS UNDERFUNDED!

Let's double down on a losing bet.

 

[code1211]

Seems you're ignorant of the fact it takes sixty votes to move anything through the Senate.

And? The GOP is filibuster ObamaCare? Yeah? I must have missed it. Link it up for me, Bro

Yes, the GOP is filibustering the bill. Why the hell do you think there is all this talk of sixty votes?

In the Senate, lacking a procedural end run, 60 votes are required to pass a bill.

 

[code1211]

Another dodge by Frank.

Okay, how about, it will be more expensive than doing nothing according to Health and Human Services per today's AP story. That savings from Medicare required to help pay for it will not materialize. Again from same article.

It's expected that expansion coverage to a larger percentage of the population will increase cost in the short-run. The cost savings come into play over the longer run. As for the second claim, that's not from the AP article. That's from conservative bloggers commenting on the AP article. The AP article cites that the report addresses if it feels the savings are political possible.

Au Contraire. In the short run, taxes go into effect and services are delayed for three years. That is how the cost is contained over ten years. Neat trick that.

Paying for 7 years of service with ten years of taxes. After the tenth year, cost will continue to escalate and the first three year cushion will be gone.

 

[Polk]

Not what I see Polk:

More troubling was the report's assessment that the Democrats' plan to squeeze Medicare for $493 billion over 10 years in savings relies on specific policy changes that "may be unrealistic" and could lead to cuts in services. The Medicare savings are expected to cover about half the nearly $1 trillion, 10-year cost of expanding coverage to the uninsured.

US health care tab to keep growing under overhaul - Yahoo! News

"May be" does not equal "will be".

Hanging on by your fingertips I see. My, that looks an awfully long way down.

Language: it has meaning. The only thing hanging by a thread is your credibility after being caught making a false claim then not being man enough to admit it.

 

[Polk]

And? The GOP is filibuster ObamaCare? Yeah? I must have missed it. Link it up for me, Bro

Yes, the GOP is filibustering the bill. Why the hell do you think there is all this talk of sixty votes?

In the Senate, lacking a procedural end run, 60 votes are required to pass a bill.

That's not true. The standard operating procedure for the Senate in a majority vote. Forcing a sixty vote requirement is a procedural end run.