US Healthcare Reform

[Happy Face 29]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

[Park Life 71]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

[Happy Face 29]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Happy Face

[Park Life 71]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

[ChezGiven 0]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

[Park Life 71]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

 

What you sayin like?

[Happy Face 29]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

 

What you sayin like?

 

I was only young at the time, so someone correct me if i'm wrong but when Clinton the white man was pushing for reform, there wasn't any support from big business, more complete opposition with millions spent on negative ad campaigns. There was also hardly any opposition whatsoever amongst the people, certainly not the passionate resistance we see with organised protests calling the president a commie.

 

This time the health industry have spent millions in support of the bill, and it's the people Fox news have whipped into a frenzy with irrational fear of the black man that oppose.

 

Either way, the will of the people seems irrelevant. As long as Obama did what Clinton failed to do and made it palatable to the health industry peeps, they wouldn't stand in it's way.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Happy Face

[Park Life 71]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

 

What you sayin like?

 

I was only young at the time, so someone correct me if i'm wrong but when Clinton the white man was pushing for reform, there wasn't any support from big business, more complete opposition with millions spent on negative ad campaigns. There was also hardly any opposition whatsoever amongst the people, certainly not the passionate resistance we see with organised protests calling the president a commie.

 

This time the health industry have spent millions in support of the bill, and it's the people Fox news have whipped into a frenzy with irrational fear of the black man that oppose.

 

Either way, the will of the people seems irrelevant. As long as Obama did what Clinton failed to do and made it palatable to the health industry peeps, they wouldn't stand in it's way.

 

Don't think they wanted to stand in the way of OB's first sortie into the unknown, anyway the medicine is modified enough so as 'special interests' haven't had to go to defcon 5. Big Pharma sees America as a big dumb market and is self-aware enough not to rock the boat too much. I was personally shocked at the whole 'illegal immigrants' will suck our money if there is reform bollocks...Anyway the financial crisis is just about to take another turn for the worst...so this will pale into the background...

[ChezGiven 0]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

 

What you sayin like?

 

That race is holding him back and that the American people are more inclined not to trust him because of his colour, making bipartisan reform his only option.

[Happy Face 29]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

 

What you sayin like?

 

I was only young at the time, so someone correct me if i'm wrong but when Clinton the white man was pushing for reform, there wasn't any support from big business, more complete opposition with millions spent on negative ad campaigns. There was also hardly any opposition whatsoever amongst the people, certainly not the passionate resistance we see with organised protests calling the president a commie.

 

This time the health industry have spent millions in support of the bill, and it's the people Fox news have whipped into a frenzy with irrational fear of the black man that oppose.

 

Either way, the will of the people seems irrelevant. As long as Obama did what Clinton failed to do and made it palatable to the health industry peeps, they wouldn't stand in it's way.

 

Don't think they wanted to stand in the way of OB's first sortie into the unknown, anyway the medicine is modified enough so as 'special interests' haven't had to go to defcon 5. Big Pharma sees America as a big dumb market and is self-aware enough not to rock the boat too much. I was personally shocked at the whole 'illegal immigrants' will suck our money if there is reform bollocks...Anyway the financial crisis is just about to take another turn for the worst...so this will pale into the background...

 

 

Obama made agreements with big Pharma (no drug re-importation and bulk price negotiations) and Insurance (no public option) so as they wouldn't kick up a fuss against his plan. In '93 they rocked the boat like mutha fucka's without those kind of assurances.

 

It wasn't a case of sitting this one out, they aggressively pursued their interests so that if change was going to happen they'd be ok. Once they were secure of that that, they left the politicians they'd contributed just under £178m to to have a political slanging match over how best to deliver their profits.

 

Edit: Dollars I mean

Edited March 22, 2010 by Happy Face

[Park Life 71]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

 

What you sayin like?

 

I was only young at the time, so someone correct me if i'm wrong but when Clinton the white man was pushing for reform, there wasn't any support from big business, more complete opposition with millions spent on negative ad campaigns. There was also hardly any opposition whatsoever amongst the people, certainly not the passionate resistance we see with organised protests calling the president a commie.

 

This time the health industry have spent millions in support of the bill, and it's the people Fox news have whipped into a frenzy with irrational fear of the black man that oppose.

 

Either way, the will of the people seems irrelevant. As long as Obama did what Clinton failed to do and made it palatable to the health industry peeps, they wouldn't stand in it's way.

 

Don't think they wanted to stand in the way of OB's first sortie into the unknown, anyway the medicine is modified enough so as 'special interests' haven't had to go to defcon 5. Big Pharma sees America as a big dumb market and is self-aware enough not to rock the boat too much. I was personally shocked at the whole 'illegal immigrants' will suck our money if there is reform bollocks...Anyway the financial crisis is just about to take another turn for the worst...so this will pale into the background...

 

 

Obama made agreements with big Pharma (no drug re-importation and bulk price negotiations) and Insurance (no public option) so as they wouldn't kick up a fuss against his plan. In '93 they rocked the boat like mutha fucka's without those kind of assurances.

 

It wasn't a case of sitting this one out, they aggressively pursued their interests so that if change was going to happen they'd be ok. Once they were secure of that that, they left the politicians they'd contributed just under £178m to have a political slanging match over how best to deliver their profits.

 

 

Ooop!! Chez won't like that..

[ChezGiven 0]

If Obama had tried to push through a more socialist reform measure, it would have failed.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=721893

 

I prefer to read what you think, not some mouthpiece from the US with little understanding of economics or healthcare.

 

 

I think it's a fine thing what happened last night.

 

I think a whole lot more could have gone in at the same time had Obama not already dealt it away last year.

 

I think the entire bipartisan approach was a complete waste of time and energy, as the republican vote shows.

 

The Reps' know that Oh banana will be most vulernable in his first term and they are just trying to fhu. If they can limit him to one term they can get back to business as usual....IMO he has come over too far in their direction in an effort for damage limitation. Also Americans are too dumb, you can't really tell them the truth behind these issues....I mean they started calling OB a communist didn't they?/!

 

It's like the black dude that's shagging Leazes's daughter pretending to like Dire Straits.

 

He's still a black dude, he'll never win him over. Best just stick some Jay-Z on and touch her up right in front of the old goat.

 

I had dinner with 20 prostate cancer specialist a few weeks back when i was on the west coast of the US. This one Dr i sat next to was an amazing bloke. He was from North Carolina so i was treading carefully on the issue of reform and politics. Anyway, this geezer was about 65-70 yo, had prostate cancer himself and when i asked him about health reform what he said was remarkable. He told the story of 3 young men in his care with an aggressive form of the cancer and without insurance. He explained that he, along with his colleagues, had provided care free of charge for these 3 men, giving them surgery (radical prostatectomies) and had negotiated to get free courses of chemotherapy from a deal done with their health centre and our company. I asked him how prevalent that sort of behaviour was in his profession and if that sort of will existed, why was there not a will for stronger reform?

 

He said 'not everybody wants to get paid less but the real problem is one of race, the problem is that he is black'. He apologised for it and was clearly quite moved by the discussion. He was also a massive history buff and gave me loads of recommendations on British history, one of his specialist subjects. I have to admit i was in complete awe of him.

 

What you sayin like?

 

I was only young at the time, so someone correct me if i'm wrong but when Clinton the white man was pushing for reform, there wasn't any support from big business, more complete opposition with millions spent on negative ad campaigns. There was also hardly any opposition whatsoever amongst the people, certainly not the passionate resistance we see with organised protests calling the president a commie.

 

This time the health industry have spent millions in support of the bill, and it's the people Fox news have whipped into a frenzy with irrational fear of the black man that oppose.

 

Either way, the will of the people seems irrelevant. As long as Obama did what Clinton failed to do and made it palatable to the health industry peeps, they wouldn't stand in it's way.

 

Don't think they wanted to stand in the way of OB's first sortie into the unknown, anyway the medicine is modified enough so as 'special interests' haven't had to go to defcon 5. Big Pharma sees America as a big dumb market and is self-aware enough not to rock the boat too much. I was personally shocked at the whole 'illegal immigrants' will suck our money if there is reform bollocks...Anyway the financial crisis is just about to take another turn for the worst...so this will pale into the background...

 

 

Obama made agreements with big Pharma (no drug re-importation and bulk price negotiations) and Insurance (no public option) so as they wouldn't kick up a fuss against his plan. In '93 they rocked the boat like mutha fucka's without those kind of assurances.

 

It wasn't a case of sitting this one out, they aggressively pursued their interests so that if change was going to happen they'd be ok. Once they were secure of that that, they left the politicians they'd contributed just under £178m to to have a political slanging match over how best to deliver their profits.

 

They did what in 93? Insurance companies were the big spenders against reform back then, as were conservatives. There were no pharma company run ads against reform in 93.

 

Drug re-importation doesnt benefit anyone but the wholesalers, even the EU backed away from diverting profits from those who research and develop new health technologies, to parallel wholesalers who merely leech resources away from healthcare. The discount to the patient / consumer is eroded by the transport costs and the margins taken by the traders. These are just logistics firms who trade across borders, not healthcare investors or partners.

 

Also, back then the bill was madly complex...

 

the core element of which was an enforced mandate for employers to provide health insurance coverage to all of their employees

 

Also

 

In 2005, referring to her previous efforts at health care reform, Hillary Clinton said "I learned some valuable lessons about the legislative process, the importance of bipartisan cooperation and the wisdom of taking small steps to get a big job done." Again in 2007, she reflected on her role in 1993-1994: "I think that both the process and the plan were flawed. We were trying to do something that was very hard to do, and we made a lot of mistakes.

[Park Life 71]

Basically I should run America as a benevolent dictator (Berlesconi model). All would be solved in one year.

[Happy Face 29]

 

Obama made agreements with big Pharma (no drug re-importation and bulk price negotiations) and Insurance (no public option) so as they wouldn't kick up a fuss against his plan. In '93 they rocked the boat like mutha fucka's without those kind of assurances.

 

It wasn't a case of sitting this one out, they aggressively pursued their interests so that if change was going to happen they'd be ok. Once they were secure of that that, they left the politicians they'd contributed just under £178m to to have a political slanging match over how best to deliver their profits.

 

They did what in 93? Insurance companies were the big spenders against reform back then, as were conservatives. There were no pharma company run ads against reform in 93.

 

Drug re-importation doesnt benefit anyone but the wholesalers, even the EU backed away from diverting profits from those who research and develop new health technologies, to parallel wholesalers who merely leech resources away from healthcare. The discount to the patient / consumer is eroded by the transport costs and the margins taken by the traders. These are just logistics firms who trade across borders, not healthcare investors or partners.

 

Aye, insurance were the most vocally opposed. I see it as a necessary evil to get business to go along....Obama promised he'd do that in the open with full transparency. He did it in back room deals the White House denied as long as they could.

 

Also, back then the bill was madly complex...

 

the core element of which was an enforced mandate for employers to provide health insurance coverage to all of their employees

 

Also

 

In 2005, referring to her previous efforts at health care reform, Hillary Clinton said "I learned some valuable lessons about the legislative process, the importance of bipartisan cooperation and the wisdom of taking small steps to get a big job done." Again in 2007, she reflected on her role in 1993-1994: "I think that both the process and the plan were flawed. We were trying to do something that was very hard to do, and we made a lot of mistakes.

 

That's the same excuse they are still using against the current bill.

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25594.html

 

As if the most important thing about passing legislation to protect tens of millions of people is that it should fit in a pamphlet no bigger than a Newcastle program.

 

EDIT: and again, there's been no success whatsoever in bipartisan cooperation. 100% of repblicans voted no despite all the concessions. Certainly 'no abortions' and that would have convinced lots of democrats to vote in favour though.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Happy Face

[ChezGiven 0]

 

Obama made agreements with big Pharma (no drug re-importation and bulk price negotiations) and Insurance (no public option) so as they wouldn't kick up a fuss against his plan. In '93 they rocked the boat like mutha fucka's without those kind of assurances.

 

It wasn't a case of sitting this one out, they aggressively pursued their interests so that if change was going to happen they'd be ok. Once they were secure of that that, they left the politicians they'd contributed just under £178m to to have a political slanging match over how best to deliver their profits.

 

They did what in 93? Insurance companies were the big spenders against reform back then, as were conservatives. There were no pharma company run ads against reform in 93.

 

Drug re-importation doesnt benefit anyone but the wholesalers, even the EU backed away from diverting profits from those who research and develop new health technologies, to parallel wholesalers who merely leech resources away from healthcare. The discount to the patient / consumer is eroded by the transport costs and the margins taken by the traders. These are just logistics firms who trade across borders, not healthcare investors or partners.

 

Aye, insurance were the most vocally opposed. I see it as a necessary evil to get business to go along....Obama promised he'd do that in the open with full transparency. He did it in back room deals the White House denied as long as they could.

 

Also, back then the bill was madly complex...

 

the core element of which was an enforced mandate for employers to provide health insurance coverage to all of their employees

 

Also

 

In 2005, referring to her previous efforts at health care reform, Hillary Clinton said "I learned some valuable lessons about the legislative process, the importance of bipartisan cooperation and the wisdom of taking small steps to get a big job done." Again in 2007, she reflected on her role in 1993-1994: "I think that both the process and the plan were flawed. We were trying to do something that was very hard to do, and we made a lot of mistakes.

 

That's the same excuse they are still using against the current bill.

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25594.html

 

As if the most important thing about passing legislation to protect tens of millions of people is that it should fit in a pamphlet no bigger than a Newcastle program.

 

EDIT: and again, there's been no success whatsoever in bipartisan cooperation. 100% of repblicans voted no despite all the concessions. Certainly 'no abortions' and that would have convinced lots of democrats to vote in favour though.

 

From your link "It may go too far to say that Americans are too dumb to understand concepts like “bending the cost curve.” Or too preoccupied by “America’s Got Talent” to decide whether “evidence-based medicine” is a euphemism for rationing."

 

Made me laugh

[Cid_MCDP 0]

Basically I should run America as a benevolent dictator (Berlesconi model). All would be solved in one year.

 

Get in line, bucko.

[Park Life 71]

Basically I should run America as a benevolent dictator (Berlesconi model). All would be solved in one year.

 

Get in line, bucko.

 

Can't be left to an American are you fucking crazee?!!

[Cid_MCDP 0]

Basically I should run America as a benevolent dictator (Berlesconi model). All would be solved in one year.

 

Get in line, bucko.

 

Can't be left to an American are you fucking crazee?!!

 

[Rob W 0]

How long before the republicans are shouting "you can trust us with Universal health care - those Democrats want to cut it!"

 

I reckon about 5 years...........................

[ChezGiven 0]

On that note, Krugman in the NYT.

 

The day before Sunday’s health care vote, President Obama gave an unscripted talk to House Democrats. Near the end, he spoke about why his party should pass reform: “Every once in a while a moment comes where you have a chance to vindicate all those best hopes that you had about yourself, about this country, where you have a chance to make good on those promises that you made ... And this is the time to make true on that promise. We are not bound to win, but we are bound to be true. We are not bound to succeed, but we are bound to let whatever light we have shine.”

 

And on the other side, here’s what Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House — a man celebrated by many in his party as an intellectual leader — had to say: If Democrats pass health reform, “They will have destroyed their party much as Lyndon Johnson shattered the Democratic Party for 40 years” by passing civil rights legislation.

 

I’d argue that Mr. Gingrich is wrong about that: proposals to guarantee health insurance are often controversial before they go into effect — Ronald Reagan famously argued that Medicare would mean the end of American freedom — but always popular once enacted.

 

But that’s not the point I want to make today. Instead, I want you to consider the contrast: on one side, the closing argument was an appeal to our better angels, urging politicians to do what is right, even if it hurts their careers; on the other side, callous cynicism. Think about what it means to condemn health reform by comparing it to the Civil Rights Act. Who in modern America would say that L.B.J. did the wrong thing by pushing for racial equality? (Actually, we know who: the people at the Tea Party protest who hurled racial epithets at Democratic members of Congress on the eve of the vote.)

 

And that cynicism has been the hallmark of the whole campaign against reform.

 

Yes, a few conservative policy intellectuals, after making a show of thinking hard about the issues, claimed to be disturbed by reform’s fiscal implications (but were strangely unmoved by the clean bill of fiscal health from the Congressional Budget Office) or to want stronger action on costs (even though this reform does more to tackle health care costs than any previous legislation). For the most part, however, opponents of reform didn’t even pretend to engage with the reality either of the existing health care system or of the moderate, centrist plan — very close in outline to the reform Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts — that Democrats were proposing.

 

Instead, the emotional core of opposition to reform was blatant fear-mongering, unconstrained either by the facts or by any sense of decency.

 

It wasn’t just the death panel smear. It was racial hate-mongering, like a piece in Investor’s Business Daily declaring that health reform is “affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.” It was wild claims about abortion funding. It was the insistence that there is something tyrannical about giving young working Americans the assurance that health care will be available when they need it, an assurance that older Americans have enjoyed ever since Lyndon Johnson — whom Mr. Gingrich considers a failed president — pushed Medicare through over the howls of conservatives.

 

And let’s be clear: the campaign of fear hasn’t been carried out by a radical fringe, unconnected to the Republican establishment. On the contrary, that establishment has been involved and approving all the way. Politicians like Sarah Palin — who was, let us remember, the G.O.P.’s vice-presidential candidate — eagerly spread the death panel lie, and supposedly reasonable, moderate politicians like Senator Chuck Grassley refused to say that it was untrue. On the eve of the big vote, Republican members of Congress warned that “freedom dies a little bit today” and accused Democrats of “totalitarian tactics,” which I believe means the process known as “voting.”

 

Without question, the campaign of fear was effective: health reform went from being highly popular to wide disapproval, although the numbers have been improving lately. But the question was, would it actually be enough to block reform?

 

And the answer is no. The Democrats have done it. The House has passed the Senate version of health reform, and an improved version will be achieved through reconciliation.

 

This is, of course, a political victory for President Obama, and a triumph for Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker. But it is also a victory for America’s soul. In the end, a vicious, unprincipled fear offensive failed to block reform. This time, fear struck out.

Edited March 24, 2010 by ChezGiven

[Park Life 71]

YOu really couldn't make it up.

[Cid_MCDP 0]

On that note, Krugman in the NYT.

 

The day before Sunday’s health care vote, President Obama gave an unscripted talk to House Democrats. Near the end, he spoke about why his party should pass reform: “Every once in a while a moment comes where you have a chance to vindicate all those best hopes that you had about yourself, about this country, where you have a chance to make good on those promises that you made ... And this is the time to make true on that promise. We are not bound to win, but we are bound to be true. We are not bound to succeed, but we are bound to let whatever light we have shine.”

 

And on the other side, here’s what Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House — a man celebrated by many in his party as an intellectual leader — had to say: If Democrats pass health reform, “They will have destroyed their party much as Lyndon Johnson shattered the Democratic Party for 40 years” by passing civil rights legislation.

 

I’d argue that Mr. Gingrich is wrong about that: proposals to guarantee health insurance are often controversial before they go into effect — Ronald Reagan famously argued that Medicare would mean the end of American freedom — but always popular once enacted.

 

But that’s not the point I want to make today. Instead, I want you to consider the contrast: on one side, the closing argument was an appeal to our better angels, urging politicians to do what is right, even if it hurts their careers; on the other side, callous cynicism. Think about what it means to condemn health reform by comparing it to the Civil Rights Act. Who in modern America would say that L.B.J. did the wrong thing by pushing for racial equality? (Actually, we know who: the people at the Tea Party protest who hurled racial epithets at Democratic members of Congress on the eve of the vote.)

 

And that cynicism has been the hallmark of the whole campaign against reform.

 

I always have to laugh whenever a group of people who are tasked with doing a job tell me they can't do their job. Our government can't figure out how to handle healthcare so we shouldn't even attempt to undertake it. It's kinda like our douchebag supplier quality engineer here at the plant who tells us time and time again that suppliers won't listen to him- if you can't ever get us good parts, why in the hell do we bother having a supplier quality engineer?

 

 

 

Yes, a few conservative policy intellectuals, after making a show of thinking hard about the issues, claimed to be disturbed by reform’s fiscal implications (but were strangely unmoved by the clean bill of fiscal health from the Congressional Budget Office) or to want stronger action on costs (even though this reform does more to tackle health care costs than any previous legislation). For the most part, however, opponents of reform didn’t even pretend to engage with the reality either of the existing health care system or of the moderate, centrist plan — very close in outline to the reform Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts — that Democrats were proposing.

 

I love this one too- I've been saying it ever since Obama was elected and the Republicans all of a sudden became fiscal conservatives (and also started this crap about how George W. was actually not a conservative and was a Republican in name only)-

 

Where were all of you budget hawks when we started two bullshit wars costing us a billion a day? Where were you budget hawks when you decided to bailout the bullshit banks for well more than this healthcare plan is projected to cost and at no value whatsoever to the American consumer?

 

I mean seriously, how in the world any of these bastards can get in front of people or a TV camera and talk about fiscal responsibility with a straight fucking face is beyond me. Used to, politicians in this country would wait at least three or four years before completely reversing their position on a given topic, now it's a matter of months, if that.

 

Instead, the emotional core of opposition to reform was blatant fear-mongering, unconstrained either by the facts or by any sense of decency.

 

It wasn’t just the death panel smear. It was racial hate-mongering, like a piece in Investor’s Business Daily declaring that health reform is “affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.” It was wild claims about abortion funding. It was the insistence that there is something tyrannical about giving young working Americans the assurance that health care will be available when they need it, an assurance that older Americans have enjoyed ever since Lyndon Johnson — whom Mr. Gingrich considers a failed president — pushed Medicare through over the howls of conservatives.

 

And let’s be clear: the campaign of fear hasn’t been carried out by a radical fringe, unconnected to the Republican establishment. On the contrary, that establishment has been involved and approving all the way. Politicians like Sarah Palin — who was, let us remember, the G.O.P.’s vice-presidential candidate — eagerly spread the death panel lie, and supposedly reasonable, moderate politicians like Senator Chuck Grassley refused to say that it was untrue. On the eve of the big vote, Republican members of Congress warned that “freedom dies a little bit today” and accused Democrats of “totalitarian tactics,” which I believe means the process known as “voting.”

 

Without question, the campaign of fear was effective: health reform went from being highly popular to wide disapproval, although the numbers have been improving lately. But the question was, would it actually be enough to block reform?

 

And the answer is no. The Democrats have done it. The House has passed the Senate version of health reform, and an improved version will be achieved through reconciliation.

 

This is, of course, a political victory for President Obama, and a triumph for Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker. But it is also a victory for America’s soul. In the end, a vicious, unprincipled fear offensive failed to block reform. This time, fear struck out.

 

Won't matter much at the end of the day, I'm afraid. A bunch of red states have already started drafting documents that'll allow them to sue universal healthcare out of existence.

 

Anybody over there got a spare room? I'm not much of a cook, but I'll fix your computer.

 

My signature in all its icy sarcastic coffee grounds bitterness has never been more appropriate.

Edited March 24, 2010 by Cid_MCDP

[Happy Face 29]

Without question, the campaign of fear was effective: health reform went from being highly popular to wide disapproval.

 

 

 

Americans oppose the health care plan by a margin of 59-39%, but a sizable portion of those opposed -- 13% -- oppose it because "it is not liberal enough"

 

Thus, a majority of Americans either support the plan or believe it should be more liberal (52%), while only a minority (43%) oppose the plan on the ground that it is too liberal.

[Park Life 71]

What a dumbass country.

[Billy Castell 0]

Any country that has Glenn Beck on TV as a popular political pundit must be a bit wrong. If he was in this country, he'd probably be standing outside a supermarket with a tinfoil helmet trying to avoid the men in white coats who'll take him away and read his mind. He's mental.