kapkomet

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 09:19 AM) No, it won't, because all tort costs, including defensive medicine, only amount to a couple of percent. Also, where in the bill(s) is this? House Bill 3200. I also like the fact that it keeps being thrown around that "there's no bill". It makes for great political theatre. People know what these Congresspukes (and Obama) are up to, and they don't like it.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 08:59 AM) This is pretty much the only solution I've been seen getting presented by town hall protesters when they are asked. I really don't have any idea what they want. The immediate concern is to get this clusterf*** of a bill killed. Then, let's talk about real reform. What's going on today isn't reform, it's revamping (removing), and there's a total difference. Reform means to correct and make elements better, not scrap and start over. Tort reform is a pretty big element because it will lead to changes of testing, which is a big part of cost. Also, there needs to be a restructure of medicare and medicaid. You can't continue programs with $35+ trillion in unfunded obligations. The great LIE is the "if you like your insurance you'll get to keep it". Nevermind the fact that you cannot change at all or you automatically go to "public option". Not to mention that there's really no choice to newly enroll in private insurance, you are forced to enroll in "public option". Not to mention that as all these "change of status" people and newborns all don't have the option except "public option" that will kill the private industry. They know what they are doing. Of course, TECHNICALLY, you can keep your insurance. You just can't have a change in life event or you go into the "public" plan.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 08:39 AM) Oh i know the body is the same. You would figure if they removed the head, they would try and edit the hand too There's a really bad joke in there somewhere.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 08:41 AM) Additionally, a lot of states have put forth tort reform measures. Missouri for one, on the healthcare point, it's done nothing to reduce individuals costs. But on my part, on the examples like yours, I think everyone can agree compensation is in order. However, doctors getting sued for making mistakes on high risk surgery, I should like to see some reform. And those high risk surgeries result in pretty high lawsuit claims. It's all a perpetual clusterf*** cycle that needs broken and REFORMED.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 07:03 AM) In an interview on NPR this morning, Michael Steele revealed that he does not know what the word "nuanced" means. Also, he talked out of both sides of his ass the entire time. "Government health care is awful! It'll be the death of us all!" "They want to raid Medicare! It's important to have that last line of health coverage for seniors!" "We can't have government interfering with health care!" "Insurance companies need more regulation!" Well, to be fair, Obama speaks out of both sides of his ass every time he speaks about it as well.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 09:26 PM) and who got the republicans elected. Not ambulance chasing tort lawyer guys and union masses, that's for damn sure. Some other evil groups.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 06:17 PM) A couple of months ago Obama told the GOP leadership he was open to tort reform, and he asked what they would give him in return if he put it in the bill. He got silence for an answer. That silence actually says a lot. There should be nothing in return. It just needs to be done, but it won't be on Obama's watch. They got him elected, and he will not sell them out, just like the unions. Those two are Obama.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 05:40 PM) Except the problem is that the GOP leadership doesn't. The political reality of this is anything passes that has "health care reform" attached to it will be a big victory for Obama. If Obama was really all about being a hack, he'd have well abandoned the public option - knowing that liberals won't stray in big enough numbers and 18 months won't be a long enough time to realize a real benefit or problem from any legislation for major reform. The GOP leadership is full of hacks. They know that any reform is a bad thing for their chances in 2010 which, despite an incredibly steep road in the senate does historically signify a moderate gain in the house next year. Blocking health care reform makes Obama less effective. The GOP has to be the party of no in order to foment enough anger to win an election in the midterm or have a shot with the extremely shallow primary field that you see for 2012 at the moment. There's no Obamas, Clintons or even Edwards's there. Just Romney, Santorum and other people who haven't won anything at all recently. Bull, Rex. Bull. The FIRST priority is to defeat this crap legislation. Which, candidly, I hope leads to Obama getting slowed down because he's done a lot of disruptive crap (my kids will be paying for Obama's "plans" and probably my grandchildren at this point). The focus has to be getting this gone. Obama cannot abandon the public option, because he doesn't get what he wants. It's all or nothing, baby. And he knows it. With that said, reform COULD BE fixing what's wrong, but they don't want any part of that, they want "government option" on the table because they know damn well that in 5 years that means the end of the "private option". I heard it said today that the legacy of Kennedy should be to pass health care legislation - the same health care he got. Amen.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 05:32 PM) She got full of herself and went whackjob pretty quickly IMO. She's been roundly ignored and marginalized for quite a while. Couple years or so I think. Yea, because the Democrats have power, she has no purpose anymore.

Until the cheap s*** China/India takes over the manufacturing of the planet to keep Western inflation in check movie started, I think so.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 04:22 PM) He's even throwing out runners now. I've got no complaints with AJ. I think he's played damn fine this year.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 04:05 PM) I'm the opposite. I go up to people and punch them in the face in real life if they even look at me sideways. He does too. I'm bloodier then a f***ing Bloody Mary on Sunday.

I guess I'm confused, because I don't see AJP as a problem at all, yet some of you are suggesting that?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 03:16 PM) And which country paid to rebuild France, (half of) Germany and the UK? Oh yeah, the United States. Where's the complaining about the deficits that we ran up in the post-war period which came before the historically unprecedented growth in America during the immediate post-war and the 50's? And which country ended up getting paid back a whole lot in spades through trade and other mechanisms?

LMAO. This thread is just irrelevant now.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 12:37 PM) I'm sure the growth of government from 1929 to 1940 was much larger than what would occur here. The government size has steadily grown this century but has ebbed and flowed, privatized parts of itself, shed it's skin in many parts. This is undoubtedly major reform and I think that scares anyone of failure. But this is going to come down to whether you view this as something our society should be setting up through our government. People have varying opinions. But whether the Republicans and blue dogs succeed in killing 'Obamacare', that can't be the end of it, some form of health care reform absolutely needs to get passed. It can't be like 2005 with social security. I think we all agree with this.

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 12:24 PM) Or it works from smaller to bigger as the society expands. It should only be to a small extent, and it's not.

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 08:27 AM) I have debated here for years that the government deficits are our greatest long term threat, that much like Russia, we will borrow ourselves into extinction. And many people here have explained why we need to cut taxes and increase the deficit during these tough economic times. /popping some corn Which is a complete fabrication. /burns some corn

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 12:21 PM) No doubt. He was a partisan political lion, and it is impossible to separate him from the partisan political arena. Look at this thread, four posts in an the worst moment of his life was mentioned. Which btw I believe was fair. It probably kept him from being President. I also believe he did far more as a Senator for all these years than he would have done as a President for four or eight years. It is interesting that he also gained respect from many on the other side of the aisle. IMO, his best speech was RFK's eulogy. That was his hardest and best moment.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 12:13 PM) but significance is one. We've had fairly vanilla legislature, when was the last time there was intense heat with many special interests keenly involved. At the very least I'd have to say the SO2, because that was pretty heated with the coal states. I kept looking at the SO2 and thought, what are you talking about? Ah, now I'm with you - the carbon tax legislation. That's pretty significant but not as significant as health care. Civil Rights and Medicare were done at the same time, and those are IMO the last time we went through this, but the thing is, in terms of scale, nothing compares to what they are trying shove down this time in terms of power grab. If this passes, 20-30 years from now, there will be something bigger... and it will just keep cycling that way. That's how this works - erosion of private into government.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 12:03 PM) that's the last "major" reform? What about the civil service reform under Carter or the SO2 cap and trade that was 20 years in the making IMO, those are not as significant.

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 12:03 PM) Kennedy was one of the standard bearers of the party and a popular partisan target. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ Kennedy to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery. And he dished it better then no other. They don't call things Kennedy did "borking" for nothing. But he clearly did some good things as well.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 11:59 AM) You'd seriously have a better idea than I would. Perhaps tax reform or whatever bill it was under GHWB that helped lead to budget surpluses but effectively ended his career. 1964/5. Medicare.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 11:58 AM) keep fightin the good war against non-existent soldiers kap See? There you are. Obama's the one who had to sit there and say (paraphrasing) Kennedy was subject to partisan attacks, etc. NONE of that had to be brought up today, but he had to get that in there, and that just shows what he's more interested in when passing his messages on.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 10:53 AM) I'm 50/50 on that, but we'll know more by about January or so. It's going to take longer then that. We're not going to see really strong GDP for a long, long time - and I think before that, we will see another huge downturn. 1% growth sucks, and I doubt we see a lot higher then that... although, they are going to play with the numbers - cash for clunkers, etc. is going to have a "MAJOR IMPACT" on 3rd quarter numbers - all signs that "OBAMAPLAN" is working.