Palin, have a tort, Obama

[Lumpy 1]

What was the deal?

I'll guess, threats and a spanking!

 

[veritas]

good for the nation than she was able to do as the governor of Alaska. I just can't wait until they try to pass Cap and Trade in the senate, that's her area of expertise. It will be fun to watch.

riiiiight. she doesn't know squat about it.

 

[Lumpy 1]

good for the nation than she was able to do as the governor of Alaska. I just can't wait until they try to pass Cap and Trade in the senate, that's her area of expertise. It will be fun to watch.

riiiiight. she doesn't know squat about it.

Sinatra's a gal, hmmm.. I guess her boots are made for walking!

 

[Fatality]

Holy crap! HOLY CRAP!

SHE DID IT AGAIN!

Sarah M1A2 Abrams knocked out Obama Point Tank with a single "Death Panel" shot and now she's taking out the rest of the platoon!

ALL BY HERSELF!

BY POSTING ON FACEBOOK!

YOU STUPID FUCKING LIBRULS COULDN'T LEAVE HER ALONE!

they cant leave her alone, they are driven like rabid dogs to attack her.

 

[George Costanza]

Shill with a ghost writer.


You can tell, no lame sports analogies.

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

"Tort reform" is bull shit, whether it comes from the feds or the individual states. "Tort reform" is Republican code for crapping all over the rights of indiviuals in order to protect the pocketbooks of the medical machine (mainly, insurance companies).

Republican dogma: If it's good for the rich, it's good for America.

 

[rightwinger]

Lets see......
Republicans had 8 years to pass tort reform legislation

I guess it couldn't have been that good an idea if they ignored it for 8 years

 

[veritas]

Lets see......
Republicans had 8 years to pass tort reform legislation

I guess it couldn't have been that good an idea if they ignored it for 8 years

It's just a smokescreen, they know malpractice suits aren't the problem and they know the comparative effectiveness model scares the crap out of their buddies in pharma.

 

[jillian]

Lets see......
Republicans had 8 years to pass tort reform legislation

I guess it couldn't have been that good an idea if they ignored it for 8 years

It's just a smokescreen, they know malpractice suits aren't the problem and they know the comparative effectiveness model scares the crap out of their buddies in pharma.

they also know that most of them are lawyers... as are a lot of people who donate to their campaigns.

but they tell a lot of uninformed people a lot of lies to keep the partisan garbage going....

they had eight years to shut down rowe v wade, too... but then all their funding would dry up because they wouldn't have their big wedge issue.

 

[rightwinger]

So the VA budget for 2010 is $112.8B, and the drug companies spent $57B+ on advertising in 2004???

That's over half the budget for the whole VA for 2010, not just health care. And that was 5 years ago.

And the drug companies spend more than twice on advertising as they do on R&D.

And advertising does not improve the efficacy or timeliness of treatment if a doctor has to spend time explaining/arguing with a patient about how an advertised drug may not be the best treatment for them.

AND the drug companies engage in relabeling and renaming drugs to gouge people, as well as resizing and manufacturing to gouge people for identical substances. AND they try to push out tried and true non patented drugs in favor of their more expensive new drugs. Some of which lead to class action malpractice suits......the big ones.

And Obama made a very secretive little back room deal with those drug companies...

Prove it

 

[veritas]

So the VA budget for 2010 is $112.8B, and the drug companies spent $57B+ on advertising in 2004???

That's over half the budget for the whole VA for 2010, not just health care. And that was 5 years ago.

And the drug companies spend more than twice on advertising as they do on R&D.

And advertising does not improve the efficacy or timeliness of treatment if a doctor has to spend time explaining/arguing with a patient about how an advertised drug may not be the best treatment for them.

AND the drug companies engage in relabeling and renaming drugs to gouge people, as well as resizing and manufacturing to gouge people for identical substances. AND they try to push out tried and true non patented drugs in favor of their more expensive new drugs. Some of which lead to class action malpractice suits......the big ones.

And Obama made a very secretive little back room deal with those drug companies...

Prove it

This is true, rightwinger and not very encouraging.

Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma

The White House deal with Big Pharma undermines democracy | Salon

Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma | CommonDreams.org

 

[bodecea]

Shill with a ghost writer.


You can tell, no lame sports analogies.

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

Only in a nanny state power grab by the Federal government would it be a federal issue. Is this what the Republicans are asking for?

 

[Lumpy 1]

Palin & Dean, sounds like team

 

[rightwinger]

Palin/Prejean 2012

 

[DiveCon]

Palin/Prejean 2012

keep dreaming

 

[Polk]

Shill with a ghost writer.


You can tell, no lame sports analogies.

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

"Tort reform" is bull shit, whether it comes from the feds or the individual states. "Tort reform" is Republican code for crapping all over the rights of indiviuals in order to protect the pocketbooks of the medical machine (mainly, insurance companies).

Republican dogma: If it's good for the rich, it's good for America.

Basically. Even if you could eliminate all malpractice suits, you'd still only be talking about a two percent reduction in health care costs.

 

[Sinatra]

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

"Tort reform" is bull shit, whether it comes from the feds or the individual states. "Tort reform" is Republican code for crapping all over the rights of indiviuals in order to protect the pocketbooks of the medical machine (mainly, insurance companies).

Republican dogma: If it's good for the rich, it's good for America.

Basically. Even if you could eliminate all malpractice suits, you'd still only be talking about a two percent reduction in health care costs.

Incorrect - the CBO has never fully investigated waste in the health care industry, namely the ever growing and problamatic issue of defensive medicine.

Defensive medicine is notoriously hard to quantify, but some estimates place the annual cost at $100 billion to $200 billion or more. Quantification is difficult because defensiveness is now embedded in the culture of American health care; it's hard to separate the financial incentives from the distrust of justice. Yet every physician, and most patients, can give examples. In a recent letter to The Wall Street Journal , a Texas doctor described how, since being unsuccessfully sued in 1995, he has “doubled and tripled the number of tests and consultations that I order.”

Defensive medicine — the practice of ordering tests and procedures that aren't needed to protect a doctor from the remote possibility of a lawsuit — is ubiquitous. A 2005 survey in the Journal of the American Medical Association related that 93 percent of high-risk specialists in Pennsylvania admitted to the practice, and 83 percent of Massachusetts physicians did the same in a 2008 survey. The same Massachusetts survey showed that 25 percent of all imaging tests were ordered for defensive purposes, and 28 percent and 38 percent, respectively, of those surveyed admitted reducing the number of high-risk patients they saw and limiting the number of high-risk procedures or services they performed.

Medical tort reform could save billions | courier-journal.com | The Courier-Journal

 

[Sinatra]

The fact Howard Dean is now addressing Tort reform direclty is yet another example of Palin's influence on this current debate. She is on offense, while the Democrat talking heads are scrambling on defense...

Palin Defeats Obama - Part 2 | Newsflavor

 

[DiveCon]

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

"Tort reform" is bull shit, whether it comes from the feds or the individual states. "Tort reform" is Republican code for crapping all over the rights of indiviuals in order to protect the pocketbooks of the medical machine (mainly, insurance companies).

Republican dogma: If it's good for the rich, it's good for America.

Basically. Even if you could eliminate all malpractice suits, you'd still only be talking about a two percent reduction in health care costs.

its not just what it costs in the law suits
its what it costs in the malpractice insurance and what it costs to have the extra tests done to PROTECT them from lawsuits

 

[Polk]

"Tort reform" is bull shit, whether it comes from the feds or the individual states. "Tort reform" is Republican code for crapping all over the rights of indiviuals in order to protect the pocketbooks of the medical machine (mainly, insurance companies).

Republican dogma: If it's good for the rich, it's good for America.

Basically. Even if you could eliminate all malpractice suits, you'd still only be talking about a two percent reduction in health care costs.

its not just what it costs in the law suits
its what it costs in the malpractice insurance and what it costs to have the extra tests done to PROTECT them from lawsuits

The two percent figure includes the insurance.

 

[garyd]

But it doesn't begin to include the costs generated in trying to make sure that you've crossed every t and doted evey i. The cost to defend lawsuits even when the defense is successful, or a whole host of other things that the lawyers among us neglect to mention when they are defending their right to yank money out of the economy for their personal enrichment.