Some lies about health care Obama clearly DID tell

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by Christopher, Sep 11, 2009.

  1. Christopher
    Offline

    Christopher Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    569
    Thanks Received:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +75
    Too many of us are focusing on arguing about a supposed lie Obama told about illegal immigrants and the health care plan. I think it is important to point out the clear lies he has told recently about health care and I challenge anyone who thinks they are not lies to provide evidence to the contrary.

    These are just a few of the recent lies classified as “false” by PolitiFact.com related to the topic of health care. There are others which he has told which PolitiFact classified as half or partially true, which I think still classify as lies.

    PolitiFact | Obama says preventive care saves money. It doesn't.

    PolitiFact | Obama says lower obesity rates would save Medicare $1 trillion

    PolitiFact | Obama has praised single-payer plans in the past

    PolitiFact | One health insurance company turned a profit, but not a record
     
  2. Maple
    Offline

    Maple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,674
    Thanks Received:
    568
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +568
    It became very obvious to me that he does not know much about the health care industry when he demonized doctors as ripping the toncils out of people and amputating people's limbs to make a profit. His whole agenda is not about health care reform, it's about a take over of 6% of our economy.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. American Horse
    Offline

    American Horse AKA "Mustang"

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,741
    Thanks Received:
    892
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    The Hoosier Heartland
    Ratings:
    +938
    Maple just for the sake of accuracy: The medical care sector represents 16% plus of the economy not 6%.
     
  4. Christopher
    Offline

    Christopher Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    569
    Thanks Received:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +75
    This is true, however, government spending through programs such as Medicare and Medicaid account for somewhere around one-half of all health care spending already. The government is just trying to take over the other half now.
     
  5. SmarterThanHick
    Offline

    SmarterThanHick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,084
    Thanks Received:
    240
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +240
    oh good. you found a website that tells you what to think! well, since an underqualified intern there was able to misunderstand a highly technical medical journal, the value gets passed onto the rest of ignorant America.

    OK. Let's really look at these issues

    Preventive Medicine. In the speech, Obama stated "insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies". If you look at the New England Journal of Medicine paper which your politi"fact" link cites as its only source, you will see a nice lil graph that lists a whole slew of measures. Top of the list is Colonoscopy: Cost Saving.

    The article doesn't mention mammography at all. The article tries to make an unbiased report that shows that some things will be cost saving, and others won't. Your politi"fact" picked out the part that it agreed with (no savings) and conveniently overlooked everything it disagreed with. Furthermore, it is foolish to claim that money is the only resource being saved in these setups. Primary care has been proven to keep people healthier for longer. Now, it might cost $5 more per year of your life, but hey if you die at 50 cuz you decided to opt out, that's like $250 saved! sweet!

    Let's look at the obesity and "record" profits. He got the numbers a bit off. Silly president - estimates say it would only save >10 million dollars. And those insurance companies? They only made a few million dollars over the billion dollar mark but it wasn't a record! So what does this tell us, in the end? Well, that tackling obesity would STILL save a large sum of money (not to mention keep a lot more people healthier - you know, the GOAL of all this), and that insurance companies are STILL making a ton of profit. Now it's not nice if anyone purposely exaggerates a trend, but he got the basic trend right.

    Are you that fragile that any overestimate cripples your respect and loyalty to your president? He's not telling you tackling obesity would save tons when it would really cost more. He's not telling you insurance companies broke records when they were in the red. And yet, somehow, after nitpicking over minutia, you are foolish enough to believe that your useless insignificant correction somehow dismisses or otherwise damages a solid plan?

    Try again.


    and what, do you believe, is their evil goal in taking over? what's the ulterior motive here?
     
  6. Christopher
    Offline

    Christopher Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    569
    Thanks Received:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +75
    No, it is not telling me what to think. It has given me enough evidence to say Obama lies, though.

    You are not looking at the whole picture. Overall, there are not cost savings, period. Obama is selling his plan as providing cost savings, yet the CBO and other studies (as mentioned in the article) state otherwise.
    Note that he said there is no cost savings and that it leads to higher spending “for most preventative services”.

    By the way, do you have any credible sources for the information you’re providing here, or is this just your speculation?

    The numbers are “a bit off”? 10 million versus 1 trillion? Wow, perhaps he needs to learn how to round, then. He is smarter than that, which is why I say exaggerating the truth is what he did, which is another way of saying he lied. He was off on his numbers twice, which is the reason PolitiFact mentioned it. Stating “record profits” is still a lie, no matter how much you want to spin it. He is only doing it to promote the people’s hatred towards the health insurance companies. That makes it wrong.
    It is noted that you did not respond to the other lie I provided. I assume you agree that it was a lie.

    Fragile? Yet you are saying my pointing out his blatant lies is “nitpicking”? Perhaps it is you who is too fragile to admit Obama lies, like many other politicians. I did not even point out the many other lies he has told.
    He does not address the many issues driving health care costs up, yet you claim he has a “solid plan”. Go figure.

    I think many within the government have good intentions for what they are trying to do, yet there are also many who are just seeking more power and they are pandering to a growing entitlement mentality in America.
     
  7. SmarterThanHick
    Offline

    SmarterThanHick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,084
    Thanks Received:
    240
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +240
    Note that of the two preventive procedures Obama stated in that speech, one is proven cost saving by YOUR source, the other has not been studied. Hey maybe if you use the word "period" again, it will make that lil fact go away.

    I actually just followed your own source. Go read the politi"fact" page. Laypeople have this bad habit of blindly believing every out-of-context quote they see instead of looking at the actual proof. Your link based its entire premise off an article in the New England Journal of Medicine. The article itself examines about 600 research studies on the topic to find that some preventive medicine is cost saving, while other aspects are not. Again, your politi"fact" just pulled out the pieces it wanted to read in that conclusion. Heck you don't even need to read the article - just look at one of their graphs.
    Flu vaccines and colonoscopies: cost saving. The latter is the very thing that Obama specifically mentioned.

    But hey, if the evil democrat says preventive medicine is good as it saves lives and a bit of money, you can either 1) blindly follow anyone who says otherwise, or 2) do the "research" yourself and focus in on medium chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiency screenings and shout how much money it wastes! Let's ignore the fact that Obama has never once, not ONCE, suggested we push for that test - let's just jump straight to flipping out hardcore.

    So what's the moral of the story here? Everything in moderation. There are a million and one obscure tests you can do under the name of diagnostic "preventive care", from crazy protein screenings to daily full body MRI. Do you really believe that's what he's pushing for? That it's what any doctor is pushing for? Start with the basics, such as flu shots and colonoscopies (both cost saving, by your own source's source).

    Maybe I just have a higher tolerance than you do. See when a president tells me an entire nation needs to go to war because of weapons of mass destruction which were knowingly and completely fabricated, I take offense. When a president says there's a large obesity problem but has the numbers wrong, even tho there really is a large obesity problem, I don't mind (especially because I just assumed he used different researchers, and a bit of sway factor as you alluded to). When he says insurance companies made a lot of profit when they really did make a lot of profit, I don't take umbrage, regardless of whether it was a "record" or not.

    Again: lying in a manner that is completely opposite of the truth that winds up costing a tremendous amount of money and lives = bad. overestimating true trends and acting in a manner that will still save America millions of dollars = I don't much mind.

    Yet again I ask: do either of the exaggerations change the problem or the solution? No. No, not at all. But hey, you can flipout hardcore about it anyway.

    I'm not familiar with it either way, thus I didn't comment. See there's this thing that hicks don't seem to understand called the political neutral. It is pretty close to the scientific neutral, but generally works like this: when I don't know something, I don't comment. I know, crazy thought to not just blatantly or blindly pick a side based on what my fellow ignorant American believes, but it's what I practice. So no, I don't blindly believe it to be a lie, nor do I believe it to be truth. Your "source" has already proven unreliable (that's completely incorrect unreliable, not just exaggeration unreliable, for the record).

    And what part of a public option is degraded because of his overestimates? No, you're not allowed to just allude to something being bad, you need to say *why* it's bad. So, why is a public option bad, and how do the exaggerations make it worse?

    more power? praytel who is gaining this "power" by trying to extend our lives and improve our standard of care? power over who? the people who can continue using their private insurance?

    really tho? you think the only reason the government is making any changes to our healthcare is cuz of a conquest for power? my lil friend the bar graph suggests otherwise:

    [​IMG]
     
  8. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    12,566
    Thanks Received:
    2,255
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,218
    And without any major changes, it will be 33% of the economy within twenty years.
     
  9. toomuchtime_
    Offline

    toomuchtime_ Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,588
    Thanks Received:
    712
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,002
    And no major changes that might slow this increase are proposed in any of the bills before Congress.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2009
  10. HUGGY
    Offline

    HUGGY I Post Because I Care Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    33,727
    Thanks Received:
    3,805
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Seattle, in a run down motel
    Ratings:
    +6,285
    Maple does not care about your socialist marxist communist accuracy.:lol::lol::lol:
     

Share This Page