Liberal lies about national health care: First in a series

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Jul 5, 2004
13,399
1,706
245
(1) National health care will punish the insurance companies.

(2) National health care will "increase competition and keep insurance companies honest" -- as President Barack Obama has said.

(3) Insurance companies are denying legitimate claims because they are "villains."

(4) National health care will give Americans "basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable" -- as Barack Obama claimed in his op/ed in the Times.

(5) Government intervention is the only way to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions.

To read why these are lies go to Welcome to AnnCoulter.com
 
Nataline Sarkisyan, victim of a Bush "death panel"
Link
Excerpt:
Ms. Sarkysian had leukemia, and was admitted to a hospital for a bone marrow transplant. There were complications and her kidneys and liver failed. Her brother donated a kidney. She was ready for a liver transplant (a relatively routine procedure), but her insurance company would not approve the procedure by claiming it was "experimental". In other words, a bean counter at Cigna made the decision that since they had already shelled out a lot of cash for the bone marrow and kidney transplant, that the cost of a liver transplant and followup care was just too high. The bean counter at Cigna effectively sentenced Nataline Sarkisyan to death. Cigna eventually reversed course following a public outcry, but it was too late. She passed away the evening that Cigna finally agreed to cover her procedure.

hc-audacity.jpg
 
The title of this thread shows on its face that the OP doesn't really care to discuss this issue. He's a flamebaiter.

If you'd like to ACTUALLY discuss, come back when you're not insulting someone or acting irrationally.

Posts like this make Baby Jesus cry.
 
Nataline Sarkisyan, victim of a Bush "death panel"
Link
Excerpt:
Ms. Sarkysian had leukemia, and was admitted to a hospital for a bone marrow transplant. There were complications and her kidneys and liver failed. Her brother donated a kidney. She was ready for a liver transplant (a relatively routine procedure), but her insurance company would not approve the procedure by claiming it was "experimental". In other words, a bean counter at Cigna made the decision that since they had already shelled out a lot of cash for the bone marrow and kidney transplant, that the cost of a liver transplant and followup care was just too high. The bean counter at Cigna effectively sentenced Nataline Sarkisyan to death. Cigna eventually reversed course following a public outcry, but it was too late. She passed away the evening that Cigna finally agreed to cover her procedure.
All that may be true, but it's happening is a whole lot more rare than it will be once the government bureaucracy is in charge of decisions with a bent towards cost reductions.
 
Last edited:
Nataline Sarkisyan, victim of a Bush "death panel"
Link
Excerpt:
Ms. Sarkysian had leukemia, and was admitted to a hospital for a bone marrow transplant. There were complications and her kidneys and liver failed. Her brother donated a kidney. She was ready for a liver transplant (a relatively routine procedure), but her insurance company would not approve the procedure by claiming it was "experimental". In other words, a bean counter at Cigna made the decision that since they had already shelled out a lot of cash for the bone marrow and kidney transplant, that the cost of a liver transplant and followup care was just too high. The bean counter at Cigna effectively sentenced Nataline Sarkisyan to death. Cigna eventually reversed course following a public outcry, but it was too late. She passed away the evening that Cigna finally agreed to cover her procedure.
All that may be true, but it's happening is a whole lot more rare that it will be once the government bureaucracy is in charge of decisions with a bent towards cost reductions.

so YOU say........you can't demonstrate it though.
 
Nataline Sarkisyan, victim of a Bush "death panel"
Link
Excerpt:
Ms. Sarkysian had leukemia, and was admitted to a hospital for a bone marrow transplant. There were complications and her kidneys and liver failed. Her brother donated a kidney. She was ready for a liver transplant (a relatively routine procedure), but her insurance company would not approve the procedure by claiming it was "experimental". In other words, a bean counter at Cigna made the decision that since they had already shelled out a lot of cash for the bone marrow and kidney transplant, that the cost of a liver transplant and followup care was just too high. The bean counter at Cigna effectively sentenced Nataline Sarkisyan to death. Cigna eventually reversed course following a public outcry, but it was too late. She passed away the evening that Cigna finally agreed to cover her procedure.
All that may be true, but it's happening is a whole lot more rare that it will be once the government bureaucracy is in charge of decisions with a bent towards cost reductions.

so YOU say........you can't demonstrate it though.
Anyone's experience with bureaus and government agencies will suffice to demonstrate that. If you have had limited experience in that realm, your skepticism is understandable.
 
Last edited:
Nataline Sarkisyan, victim of a Bush "death panel"
Link
Excerpt:
Ms. Sarkysian had leukemia, and was admitted to a hospital for a bone marrow transplant. There were complications and her kidneys and liver failed. Her brother donated a kidney. She was ready for a liver transplant (a relatively routine procedure), but her insurance company would not approve the procedure by claiming it was "experimental". In other words, a bean counter at Cigna made the decision that since they had already shelled out a lot of cash for the bone marrow and kidney transplant, that the cost of a liver transplant and followup care was just too high. The bean counter at Cigna effectively sentenced Nataline Sarkisyan to death. Cigna eventually reversed course following a public outcry, but it was too late. She passed away the evening that Cigna finally agreed to cover her procedure.
All that may be true, but it's happening is a whole lot more rare that it will be once the government bureaucracy is in charge of decisions with a bent towards cost reductions.

so YOU say........you can't demonstrate it though.

How about tens of thousands of people probably wishing to die due to being left to suffer in excruciating pain because of a government decision to save money? That is what is happening today in the UK under their socialized government health system...

Patients forced to live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for painkilling injections

Tens of thousands with chronic back pain will be forced to live in agony after a decision to slash the number of painkilling injections issued on the NHS, doctors have warned.

02 August 2009

The Government's drug rationing watchdog says "therapeutic" injections of steroids, such as cortisone, which are used to reduce inflammation, should no longer be offered to patients suffering from persistent lower back pain when the cause is not known.

Instead the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is ordering doctors to offer patients remedies like acupuncture and osteopathy.

Specialists fear tens of thousands of people, mainly the elderly and frail, will be left to suffer excruciating levels of pain or pay as much as £500 each for private treatment.

The NHS currently issues more than 60,000 treatments of steroid injections every year. NICE said in its guidance it wants to cut this to just 3,000 treatments a year, a move which would save the NHS £33 million.

But the British Pain Society, which represents specialists in the field, has written to NICE calling for the guidelines to be withdrawn after its members warned that they would lead to many patients having to undergo unnecessary and high-risk spinal surgery.

Dr Christopher Wells, a leading specialist in pain relief medicine and the founder of the NHS' first specialist pain clinic, said it was "entirely unacceptable" that conventional treatments used by thousands of patients would be stopped.

"I don't mind whether some people want to try acupuncture, or osteopathy. What concerns me is that to pay for these treatments, specialist clinics which offer vital services are going to be forced to close, leaving patients in significant pain, with nowhere to go,"

The NICE guidelines admit that evidence was limited for many back pain treatments, including those it recommended. Where scientific proof was lacking, advice was instead taken from its expert group. But specialists are furious that while the group included practitioners of alternative therapies, there was no one with expertise in conventional pain relief medicine to argue against a decision to significantly restrict its use.

Dr Jonathan Richardson, a consultant pain specialist from Bradford Hospitals Trust, is among more than 50 medics who have written to NICE urging the body to reconsider its decision, which was taken in May.

He said: "The consequences of the NICE decision will be devastating for thousands of patients. It will mean more people on opiates, which are addictive, and kill 2,000 a year. It will mean more people having spinal surgery, which is incredibly risky, and has a 50 per cent failure rate."

Telegraph.co.uk: news, business, sport, the Daily Telegraph newspaper, Sunday Telegraph - Telegraph
 
This "woman" is a proven liar and a shill, and people still listen to her? These are like comic book arguments. I read the first two and just thought... man, if people can't see how bad this reasoning is, we are in for some serious trouble.
 
The title of this thread shows on its face that the OP doesn't really care to discuss this issue. He's a flamebaiter.

If you'd like to ACTUALLY discuss, come back when you're not insulting someone or acting irrationally.

Posts like this make Baby Jesus cry.
 
Posts like this make Baby Jesus cry.

If you'd like to ACTUALLY discuss, come back when you're not insulting someone or acting irrationally.

The title of this thread shows on its face that the OP doesn't really care to discuss this issue. He's a flamebaiter.
 
This "woman" is a proven liar and a shill, and people still listen to her? These are like comic book arguments. I read the first two and just thought... man, if people can't see how bad this reasoning is, we are in for some serious trouble.
You liberals just can't seem to get over Ann Coulter can you? She really galls you doesn't she? It must be for some good reason......oh.....I think I know.....you can't debate her....much too hard for you....therefore the insults come forth instead.....:eusa_whistle:
 
Posts like this make Baby Jesus cry.

If you'd like to ACTUALLY discuss, come back when you're not insulting someone or acting irrationally.

The title of this thread shows on its face that the OP doesn't really care to discuss this issue. He's a flamebaiter.

Can you pls go practice your leftie cut and paste on some other message board?
 
Nataline Sarkisyan, victim of a Bush "death panel"
Link
Excerpt:
Ms. Sarkysian had leukemia, and was admitted to a hospital for a bone marrow transplant. There were complications and her kidneys and liver failed. Her brother donated a kidney. She was ready for a liver transplant (a relatively routine procedure), but her insurance company would not approve the procedure by claiming it was "experimental". In other words, a bean counter at Cigna made the decision that since they had already shelled out a lot of cash for the bone marrow and kidney transplant, that the cost of a liver transplant and followup care was just too high. The bean counter at Cigna effectively sentenced Nataline Sarkisyan to death. Cigna eventually reversed course following a public outcry, but it was too late. She passed away the evening that Cigna finally agreed to cover her procedure.
All that may be true, but it's happening is a whole lot more rare that it will be once the government bureaucracy is in charge of decisions with a bent towards cost reductions.

so YOU say........you can't demonstrate it though.
Never stood in line at the DMV or to sign up for unemployment, have you??
 
Never stood in line at the DMV or to sign up for unemployment, have you??

I have (dmv), and one of the most efficient services I've ever encountered. In California you can get in and out in 5-10 minutes (depending on your needs), and it's all automated.
 
(1) National health care will punish the insurance companies.

(2) National health care will "increase competition and keep insurance companies honest" -- as President Barack Obama has said.

(3) Insurance companies are denying legitimate claims because they are "villains."

(4) National health care will give Americans "basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable" -- as Barack Obama claimed in his op/ed in the Times.

(5) Government intervention is the only way to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions.

To read why these are lies go to Welcome to AnnCoulter.com



I dont know why any thinking being would be interested in what Mann Cultwhore has to say.
 
(1) National health care will punish the insurance companies.

(2) National health care will "increase competition and keep insurance companies honest" -- as President Barack Obama has said.

(3) Insurance companies are denying legitimate claims because they are "villains."

(4) National health care will give Americans "basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable" -- as Barack Obama claimed in his op/ed in the Times.

(5) Government intervention is the only way to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions.

To read why these are lies go to Welcome to AnnCoulter.com



I dont know why any thinking being would be interested in what Mann Cultwhore has to say.

Ah yes....another esoteric comment by another one of those "truth" liberals.....:lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top