Liberal Sympathizer Huffington Admits Obama's Mistakes

[ilovedomains]

You didn't state a fact but an opinion

Thats your opinion, and you dont live here, so how would you know?
Everyone I know is happy with it, thats the fact that matter to me.

I dont care what kind of health care Americans has.
I never said you should have government health care,
I just told Raider to stop telling lies about my health care.

Heres Canadas national newspaper for what its worth:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...rticle1229169/

"Canadians happy with primary health care, study says"

[Raider]

Believe anything you want, but base it on facts, not special interest propoganda like biggovhealth.org

Raider can blather on til the cows come home, but the facts are...
Canadians (including the doctors) are generaly happy, and even proud of the health care system.
The only people saying its terrible are American health insurance companies. What a bunch of assholes.

The facts are your own Supreme Court ruled that it sucks......

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/healthcare/

"Access to a waiting list is not access to health care," two of the justices wrote in their decision.

Very well said, and yet 80% say they have access to Health Care, access to a "waiting list" that is... And this case was brought by a Canadian who was forced to wait over a year for hip replacement surgery, And who said that only American health insurance companies say it's terrible?, Oh yeah, "ilovemyheadinmyass"

Thats your opinion, and you dont live here, so how would you know?

Right, how would you know?...... You stated Health Care in the US is "crappy" in your words; http://www.dnforum.com/f254/liberal-...ml#post1937621

But yet you don't live here so how the **** would you know? Oh yeah, Cherry picking Google.

[ilovedomains]

You stated Health Care in the US is "crappy"

No, I said Canadians would rebel if the government tried to give us your crappy health INSURANCE.
Just ask any Canadian. That is a fact. (Thought you hated the health insurance bill???)

80% say they have access to Health Care, access to a "waiting list" that is

No, 80% said they were happy with their access to health care. 100% have access to the waiting list.
(Thats supposed to be bad? Do you even read the stuff you post?)

Oh yeah, Cherry picking Google.

Naw, THIS... is cherry picking Google (Just as an example)

Americans get health care in animal pens
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...out-canda.aspx

McDonalds employees only get $2000 in coverage if the get cancer
http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/05/news...nalds.fortune/

Theres a wonderful movie about health care that got rave reviews in Canada.
It might clear up some of these delusions you have about us .
You can buy a copy and even tweet the producer at: http://www.michaelmoore.com/

Hope I have explained any misunderstandings you had. Can I help you with anything else?
More links perhaps?

[fab]

Oh boy, quoting from Michael Moore, that's a heavy one.

[Raider]

(This is what you do)

Let me school you on Google "Cherry picking" It's when somebody goes to Google to search out something that agrees with his or her position while IGNORING or OVERLOOKING the sites that don't.

I didn't do that here, I just typed in "Canadian Waiting Lists" and guess what? every site was negative, NOT one site was positive or in agreement with what your saying here, Which really doesn't surprise me because I knew from the very start of this conversation that were full of sh*t.

Dont take my word for it.

Don't worry, I WONT.

---------- Post added at 02:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:43 AM ----------

Oh boy, quoting from Michael Moore, that's a heavy one.

Isn't this the same conspiracy a-hole who thinks the US Government was behind the 911 attacks?

ilovedomains may as well be quoting people who give us Elvis sightings.

[ilovedomains]

I just typed in "Canadian Waiting Lists" and guess what? every site was negative

Thank you for schooling me on Cherry picking Google.
I just typed "Canadians like their health care" and guess what? every site was positive.

[ilovedomains]

The difference between high-quality and low-quality is not the majority of the time or majority of the people. It's in a small percentage of emergency cases when mediocre is not sufficient. How often are MRI's used and necessary, and other high quality expensive procedures?

The biggest problem is the same one you have. Its getting so expensive neither of us can give everyone great care. The crux of your health care debate is the country cant afford it any more as I understand it. You have taken the approach of giving those who can afford it better care, and the rest get somewhat less.

We decided to have a system that gives everyone care and even if it has a waiting list and fewer frills, people are generally very happy with it.

I dont care what system you like in America. Just dont listen to idiots like Raider

[Raider]

We decided to have a system that gives everyone care and even if it has a waiting list and fewer frills, people are generally very happy with it.

Yes, you decided to have a system that gave care to everyone, "when" they can get care..... When we see the pictures of hundreds of Canadians waiting in long lines and sitting in chairs, it's hard not think that most Canadians have grown accustomed to it, Give Americans long wait lines like Canada has and we'll have riots in the streets, Give them those same long wait lines gradually over a period of time and they will grow accustomed to it.

In your case, I don't think you've grown accustomed to it at all, your probably so young and in good health that you rarely visit a practitioner.... Wait until your older or your Wife needs special care and that great system of yours tells you that your 8-12 months away from seeing a doctor, then you'll be singing a different tune.

[fab]

I am familiar with both systems. Have lived in both. The answer is obvious for those interested!

[Gerry]

Originally Posted by fab
How often are MRI's used and necessary, and other high quality expensive procedures?

The real travesty here is ordering of expensive and un-necessary testing as a method of combating frivolous lawsuits - leave no stone unturned. No doctor desires to send a patient home only to have that patient's condition worsen or potentially die. Because of the potential for lawsuits (legitimate or otherwise) often times tests are done as a "precaution".

Then again, on the legitimacy side of testing is to "rule out" any suspicions based on signs and symptoms. Diagnostic testing is exactly what the name implies; procedures used in determining an accurate portrayal of the diagnosis of the patient based on the sign and symptoms of the patient when he/she presented to the Emergency Room.

[ilovedomains]

your probably so young and in good health that you rarely visit a practitioner

If you read my other posts you would see I am 67 years old and I damn near live at my doctors office.
I had to watch my wife, mother and father die, so I have a pretty good idea of the quality of care here.
Satisfaction for people over 65 is 95%. We benifit the most, but Im sure you can find a website that says Im dieing in the gutter.

If I were young again, I sure would be wasting my time here. Why on earth do you do it?

[Area52]

You can't fix something if you don't know what's causing the problem.
Why are costs so high? Why and where are they rising? Are equipment and supply companies gouging?
Are healthcare workers overpaid? Are hospitals overcharging? Are insurance companies bilking the public?
Where are the answers to these questions? How can anyone reasonably come to a logical conclusion as to how to form legislation without them?

Evidence that the Obama's healthcare plan is not an honest effort is that the democrats didn't bother to find out what those answers are.
In addition, what was such an obscure group of people doing drafting a bill as important as this?
This should have included a concise third party study in conjunction with extensive public input and debate.

Another scammy fact is that government workers still have their own coverage.
Anyone that voted for this bill made it clear that they can't be trusted to look after our best interest.

Sure, we need reform, but we don't have to accept a makeshift, unfair, and possibly unconstitutional law.
The democrats want us to accept beans while they eat steak.
I think I know the U.S. citizen's answer to that!

[Raider]

I had to watch my wife, mother and father die, so I have a pretty good idea of the quality of care here.

I'm real sorry to hear about your Wife... At 67, I think it's safe to say you've more than grown accustomed to the waiting lists then.

If I were young again, I sure would be wasting my time here. Why on earth do you do it?

I don't, I spend about an hour or two on the PC everyday, the rest of the day I work and pay taxes to support the illegal aliens and lazy ass Americans who failed to get an education and are now on welfare living Obama's dream.

[ilovedomains]

I'm real sorry to hear about your Wife... At 67, I think it's safe to say you've more than grown accustomed to the waiting lists then.

Thanks Raider. Neither of our countries has the quality of care we used to have. Too many people, too little money.

Its true that 80% of people here are satisfied, but that also means 20% arent satified.

[Gerry]

No, we don't need regulation of healthcare or insurance companies.

Health insurance claim denials rose by half in recent years
Pregnancy among preexisting conditions according to four top insurers

WASHINGTON — Coverage denials of individuals based on their medical histories by the nation's top for-profit health insurance companies rose by nearly half in recent years, U.S. lawmakers said Tuesday.

The findings raise questions about industry practices before a law to prevent such discrimination kicks in in 2014.

In a report released Tuesday, the House Energy and Commerce Committee's top Democrats said the number of people refused health insurance plans by big insurers Aetna Inc, Humana Inc , UnitedHealth Group Inc and WellPoint Inc due to pre-existing conditions rose 49 percent in the last three years.

The denials affected tens of thousands of individuals seeking to buy their own insurance. In 2009, 257,100 could not get a plan compared with 172,400 in 2007, the committee said.

Overall, the insurers refused to sell plans to more than 651,000 individuals -- or one out of every seven applicants -- because of their medical history, Committee Chairmen Henry Waxman and ranking Democrat Bart Stupak said.

Health care reforms passed earlier this year would make it illegal to deny insurance based on such so-called "preexisting conditions," but so far it only protects children. Insurers do not have to change their practices for adults until 2014.

Additionally, the committee said the four insurers all considered pregnancy a preexisting condition to trigger automatic denial for a plan. (Reporting by Susan Heavey; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39633238...h-health_care/

I wonder how many of those 651,000 individuals were against any healthcare reform until they got denied?
I wonder how many of those 651,000 individuals contacted their congressperson?

[Raider]

I keep forgetting that "Health Care Regulation" and "Nationalizing Heath Care" where it's Americans are forced to pay for it whether they want it or not, is one of the same, silly me...

Thank you for clarifying that Doc.

[Gerry]

Hmm, Americans have been "forced" to pay for healthcare (whether they want to or not) since the Medicare tax was implemented in 1966 when the Medicare tax deduction was applied to Federal Witholding Taxes (FICA) at a Tax Rate of 1.45%, 2.9% for self employed.

So here we have all these whiners and tea bagging gagging on their own words. We (american workers) have been paying for the indigent and elder care since 1966.

So all these idiots saying "don't touch my medicare", well...I have a question for you; where do you think funds come from to support your elder care?

These people that talk about government run healthcare...they've been doing it for decades. Who do you think insures 3 Million Active and Reserve Military, "civilian" employees (which about the same it was during the Regan era - slightly under 2,000,000, with largest growth TSA), and the Veteran Insurance (aka government insured workers) goes back to 1914 when Big Brother started issuing Life Insurance for active duty. Not to mention (but let's do) the tens of millions of veterans receiving VA care at over 1400 VA clinics and hospitals in the nation.

Bush Borrowed More Than All Previous Presidents Combined, Group Says
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
November 04, 2005

(CNSNews.com) - President Bush and the current administration have borrowed more money from foreign governments and banks than the previous 42 presidents combined, a group of conservative to moderate Democrats said Friday.

Blue Dog Coalition, which describes itself as a group "focused on fiscal responsibility," called the administration's borrowing practices "astounding."

According to the Treasury Department, from 1776-2000, the first 224 years of U.S. history, 42 U.S. presidents borrowed a combined $1.01 trillion from foreign governments and financial institutions, but in the past four years alone, the Bush administration borrowed $1.05 trillion.

"The seriousness of this rapid and increasing financial vulnerability of our country can hardly be overstated," said Rep. John Tanner (D-Tenn.), a leader of the Blue Dog Coalition and member of the House Ways and Means Committee.

"The financial mismanagement of our country by the Bush Administration should be of concern to all Americans, regardless of political persuasion," said Tanner in a press release.

Earlier this year, the Blue Dog Coalition unveiled a 12-step plan to "cure" the nation's "addiction to deficit spending." It included requiring all federal agencies to pass clean audits, a balanced budget, and the establishment of a rainy day fund for use in emergencies specifically a natural disaster.

"No American political leadership has ever willfully and deliberately mortgaged our country to foreign interests in the manner we have witnessed over the past four years," said Tanner. "If this recklessness is not stopped, I truly believe our economic freedom as American citizens is in great jeopardy."

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstor...20051104b.html

When do the BUSH-PAY BACK THE $1.7 TRILLION I.O.U.TO SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND rallies start?

On May 19, 2005, President Bush Visited Milwaukee, Wisconsin To Meet With Younger Workers Who Are Concerned About The Future of Social Security. The President has called for allowing younger Americans the option of safely investing a portion of their payroll taxes in voluntary personal accounts that they own and control within the Social Security system

The Government Has Borrowed $1.7 Trillion From The Social Security Trust Fund. The government has borrowed the total value of the Trust Fund to pay for other government spending. Beginning in 2017, the government will have to begin backing up these paper promises with real money.

Source of the above liberal bullshit lies? Hmm...http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archiv...ecurity/youth/

Sweet deal, eh? Borrow against Social Security Trust Fund until it is bankrupt and then try to sell americans on the idea of privatization.

No one wants to be forced to accept a government health care plan yet everyone expects someone else to pay their medical bills irregardless.

The words that you choke back when holding back the truth must taste like the most fowl pissy-poopy-maggot-infested-pond-scum imaginable.

[fab]

Hmm, Americans have been "forced" to pay for healthcare (whether they want to or not) since the Medicare tax was implemented in 1966 when the Medicare tax deduction was applied to Federal Witholding Taxes (FICA) at a Tax Rate of 1.45%, 2.9% for self employed.

Well, maybe it's time to get back to the basics. How about getting rid of it all, Social Security, Medicare Medicaid, etc.

[Raider]

Well, maybe it's time to get back to the basics. How about getting rid of it all, Social Security, Medicare Medicaid, etc.

Why do that? Government is the answer to all our problems, at least from a Democrat and Liberal perspective.