The Pain Pill

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]tme wrote:
kodiak82 wrote:
tme wrote:
Good job making shit up, though.

You should try out to be one of Palin’s bullshit writers.

drop dead obamaist

Wow. Guess you really told me off, huh?

The idiots and liars spewing the “death panel” and “pain pill” bullshit should stop and think about how often private insurance companies deny coverage for “experimental” treatments, or just use delaying tactics and their own appeals process in the hope that by the time they are forced to approve treatment it will no longer be necessary. Deceased people don’t require expensive treatments. This shit happens every day, day in and day out, and yet for some reason it was never a problem until the government gets involved? Fucking insane.

Keep sucking on that insurance company dick, once they’ve got what they want they’ll brush you off like the parasite they’ve always considered you to be.

[/quote]
I can’t blame th insurance companies for not wanting to use experimental medicine. With all the lawyers waiting to sue can you blame them?

22

[quote]tme wrote:
kodiak82 wrote:
tme wrote:
Good job making shit up, though.

You should try out to be one of Palin’s bullshit writers.

drop dead obamaist

Wow. Guess you really told me off, huh?

The idiots and liars spewing the “death panel” and “pain pill” bullshit should stop and think about how often private insurance companies deny coverage for “experimental” treatments, or just use delaying tactics and their own appeals process in the hope that by the time they are forced to approve treatment it will no longer be necessary. Deceased people don’t require expensive treatments. This shit happens every day, day in and day out, and yet for some reason it was never a problem until the government gets involved? Fucking insane.

Keep sucking on that insurance company dick, once they’ve got what they want they’ll brush you off like the parasite they’ve always considered you to be.

[/quote]

I have made very clear my belief that the only thing worse than insurance companies dispensing health care would be the government doing it. Insurance companies are blood sucking greedy parasites that are made rich in direct proportion to how many people they can deny treatment to. Wanna see it get even worse? Just let this government start doing it.

23

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
tme wrote:
kodiak82 wrote:
tme wrote:
Good job making shit up, though.

You should try out to be one of Palin’s bullshit writers.

drop dead obamaist

Wow. Guess you really told me off, huh?

The idiots and liars spewing the “death panel” and “pain pill” bullshit should stop and think about how often private insurance companies deny coverage for “experimental” treatments, or just use delaying tactics and their own appeals process in the hope that by the time they are forced to approve treatment it will no longer be necessary. Deceased people don’t require expensive treatments. This shit happens every day, day in and day out, and yet for some reason it was never a problem until the government gets involved? Fucking insane.

Keep sucking on that insurance company dick, once they’ve got what they want they’ll brush you off like the parasite they’ve always considered you to be.

I have made very clear my belief that the only thing worse than insurance companies dispensing health care would be the government doing it. Insurance companies are blood sucking greedy parasites that are made rich in direct proportion to how many people they can deny treatment to. Wanna see it get even worse? Just let this government start doing it.
[/quote]

This alone sums up why the Healthcare Bill should not pass. The government is even more corrupt, clumsy, and greedy than insurance companies. Just look at the situation with the bailouts. Here you had people who intentionally cooked the books which led to the fall of the best economy in the world. What do we do? Our government gives them more money LOL, then they tried more corruption again with bogus bonuses to the same people who shisted the money in the first place.

I was fighing with my insurance company for 2 years because I had a surgery which they claimed was “medically experimental.” They changed their coverage leaving me with the whole bill to pay, 15 months after I had the surgery. Imagine that, 15 months after I have a surgery which they initially covered, they took back their payment and try to bill me $20k. I filed an appeal and it went to the Dept. of Managed Care (the State Supreme Court of Healthcare decisions basically), and I won.

Here is the kicker, my procedure IS FDA APPROVED and has been the entire time. These fuckers tried to pimp money out of me, just because, thinking I didn’t know any better and wouldn’t research my case. Mother fuckers thought I was lazy and would give up.

I think if the government controlled everything, we would have even less of a say in arguing our situation.

24

[quote]Gregus wrote:

NAIVE[/quote]

Please, all I’m doing is pointing out the complete lack of literacy that pervades many attacks against the democrats health reform. You really want to stop government run health care? Know how to mess up? Try making your side look like ignorant religious fools who can’t even understand basic English sentences.

What the anti-government health care people really need are clear, valid, sound arguments for the ills of government run health care. Argument grabbing and misrepresenting the president’s speech via scare tactics certainly won’t legitimize the position.

Even if you firmly believe Obama is the malicious monster many here seem to think he is, arguments like “see! he said x, but he really meant y!” will only mean anything to people who already believe them. You’re certainly not going to sway any Obama-care supporters like that.

25

[quote]stokedporcupine8 wrote:
<<< What the anti-government health care people really need are clear, valid, sound arguments for the ills of government run health care. >>>[/quote]

How bout the 10th amendment?

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Until FDR succeeded in propounding the hallucination that the commerce clause could be turned into an umbrella covering anything in the universe, the SCOTUS repeatedly struck down all kinds of crap far less statist and dangerous than this.

26

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
tme wrote:
kodiak82 wrote:
tme wrote:
Good job making shit up, though.

You should try out to be one of Palin’s bullshit writers.

drop dead obamaist

Wow. Guess you really told me off, huh?

The idiots and liars spewing the “death panel” and “pain pill” bullshit should stop and think about how often private insurance companies deny coverage for “experimental” treatments, or just use delaying tactics and their own appeals process in the hope that by the time they are forced to approve treatment it will no longer be necessary. Deceased people don’t require expensive treatments. This shit happens every day, day in and day out, and yet for some reason it was never a problem until the government gets involved? Fucking insane.

Keep sucking on that insurance company dick, once they’ve got what they want they’ll brush you off like the parasite they’ve always considered you to be.

I have made very clear my belief that the only thing worse than insurance companies dispensing health care would be the government doing it. Insurance companies are blood sucking greedy parasites that are made rich in direct proportion to how many people they can deny treatment to. Wanna see it get even worse? Just let this government start doing it.

This alone sums up why the Healthcare Bill should not pass. The government is even more corrupt, clumsy, and greedy than insurance companies. Just look at the situation with the bailouts. Here you had people who intentionally cooked the books which led to the fall of the best economy in the world. What do we do? Our government gives them more money LOL, then they tried more corruption again with bogus bonuses to the same people who shisted the money in the first place.

I was fighing with my insurance company for 2 years because I had a surgery which they claimed was “medically experimental.” They changed their coverage leaving me with the whole bill to pay, 15 months after I had the surgery. Imagine that, 15 months after I have a surgery which they initially covered, they took back their payment and try to bill me $20k. I filed an appeal and it went to the Dept. of Managed Care (the State Supreme Court of Healthcare decisions basically), and I won.

Here is the kicker, my procedure IS FDA APPROVED and has been the entire time. These fuckers tried to pimp money out of me, just because, thinking I didn’t know any better and wouldn’t research my case. Mother fuckers thought I was lazy and would give up.

I think if the government controlled everything, we would have even less of a say in arguing our situation. [/quote]

These are just classic T-Nation right-wingnut arguments, that are almost impossible to argue with. Mainly because you’re just left speechless by the breath and depth of ignorance, it’s just incomprehensible.

“Insurance companies suck, but the government might suck worse, so I don’t want to try to fix the health insurance industry.” Why? Because they might get mad and try to suck even worse?

And:

“My insurance company fucked me over for two years but I sued them and finally won. But the government might fuck me too, so I’m not willing to take that chance.” Again, they might fuck you harder? Or with less lube?

Ok, so some as yet unnamed federal agency may have an oversight role to prevent fraud and abuse by the industry and claimants. How in the world could that possibly be worse than a totally for-profit company whose only interest is to make money by collecting premiums and denying claims? How?

And go right ahead and shove the “socialized medicine” bullshit up your ass before you even bring it up. Almost everything in your life is socialized already. A local, state or federal entity collects taxes and uses the collective funds to provide a service. Roads, defense, trash collection, police, fire, public schools, libraries, the list goes on. All socialized for your enjoyment. Socialism = “for the good of society”. So why is it good for everything but health care? Simple: because the health insurance industry says so. And because they are opposing Obama and the Democrats, they must be right, and you can damn sure bet they have your best interests in mind, too!

27

[quote]tme wrote:
And go right ahead and shove the “socialized medicine” bullshit up your ass before you even bring it up. Almost everything in your life is socialized already. A local, state or federal entity collects taxes and uses the collective funds to provide a service. Roads, defense, trash collection, police, fire, public schools, libraries, the list goes on. All socialized for your enjoyment. Socialism = “for the good of society”. So why is it good for everything but health care? Simple: because the health insurance industry says so. And because they are opposing Obama and the Democrats, they must be right, and you can damn sure bet they have your best interests in mind, too!

[/quote]

Thank you! Finally, some honesty. You don’t know how tired I’ve grown of hearing that this isn’t a socialist move.

28

[quote]Sloth wrote:
tme wrote:
And go right ahead and shove the “socialized medicine” bullshit up your ass before you even bring it up. Almost everything in your life is socialized already. A local, state or federal entity collects taxes and uses the collective funds to provide a service. Roads, defense, trash collection, police, fire, public schools, libraries, the list goes on. All socialized for your enjoyment. Socialism = “for the good of society”. So why is it good for everything but health care? Simple: because the health insurance industry says so. And because they are opposing Obama and the Democrats, they must be right, and you can damn sure bet they have your best interests in mind, too!

Thank you! Finally, some honesty. You don’t know how tired I’ve grown of hearing that this isn’t a socialist move.
[/quote]

Is this the last time we will see TME post in the PWI?.. Stay tuned and find out.

29

Probably not. The fact that any idiot in congress or PWI can point to insurance industry reform and call it “socialized medicine” simply highlights the stupidity of that argument. Every day someone tells me that they know the current system is broken and is badly in need of reform, they just don’t want any “socialized medicine”. Why? How does attaching that label automatically make it wrong?

If giving the government more control = socialism, and all socialism = bad bad bad, then everything that the government controls therefore has to be bad. Military = bad. Fire department = bad. Police = bad. Military = bad. National Guard = bad. Roads = bad. Air traffic control = bad. You just aren’t making any sense. You’re simply parroting what the health insurance industry tells you is in your best interest. Stop for a few minutes and ask if it really is or not.

30

[quote]tme wrote:
Probably not. The fact that any idiot in congress or PWI can point to insurance industry reform and call it “socialized medicine” simply highlights the stupidity of that argument. Every day someone tells me that they know the current system is broken and is badly in need of reform, they just don’t want any “socialized medicine”. Why? How does attaching that label automatically make it wrong?

If giving the government more control = socialism, and all socialism = bad bad bad, then everything that the government controls therefore has to be bad. Military = bad. Fire department = bad. Police = bad. Military = bad. National Guard = bad. Roads = bad. Air traffic control = bad. You just aren’t making any sense. You’re simply parroting what the health insurance industry tells you is in your best interest. Stop for a few minutes and ask if it really is or not.

[/quote]

No, you aren’t making any sense. There are some functions that can be effectively undertaken by government despite what some of our resident anarchists may think. In fact there are even some that can ONLY be undertaken by government. Public enterprises like a few of the ones you mention are examples. The founders were very wise in making that distinction, some clearer than others.

Public institutions are supposed to safeguard the private lives of the citizenry which they are both free to pursue and bare responsibility for themselves. That is what made this country great. Anytime this government strays into the private lives of individuals and what’s left of families, food, clothing, housing, medicine, employment, etc. they have made utter shipwreck of the endeavor and our present drowning indebtedness is but one glaring symptom.

We are so far gone from that already I don’t know if we can ever recover our American identity under the best of circumstances.

31

[quote]tme wrote:
Probably not. The fact that any idiot in congress or PWI can point to insurance industry reform and call it “socialized medicine” simply highlights the stupidity of that argument. Every day someone tells me that they know the current system is broken and is badly in need of reform, they just don’t want any “socialized medicine”. Why? How does attaching that label automatically make it wrong?

If giving the government more control = socialism, and all socialism = bad bad bad, then everything that the government controls therefore has to be bad. Military = bad. Fire department = bad. Police = bad. Military = bad. National Guard = bad. Roads = bad. Air traffic control = bad. You just aren’t making any sense. You’re simply parroting what the health insurance industry tells you is in your best interest. Stop for a few minutes and ask if it really is or not.

[/quote]

You truly must have been shaken as a baby. Read the constitution, There is the reason why we in theory should be following it. Air traffic control should be privatized but that’s just me.

32

[quote]jawara wrote:

I can’t blame th insurance companies for not wanting to use experimental medicine. With all the lawyers waiting to sue can you blame them?

[/quote]

Go look up a list of the procedures that insurance companies believe are “experimental” that actually were once common, fda approved, or just so cost effective compared to expensive treatments. Case in point, the mirror box for military soliders and parapalegics who have phantom limb pain. The box costs like fifty bucks to make and has been shown to be incredibly effective, but normal phantom pain treatments that are incredibly inefective are the ones isnurance companies will only cover.

sure anyone can make it, but its the fact that insurance companies wont cover it, yet theyll cover a 10 dollar bottle of opiates as long as you go to see a doctor who will cost you thousands per visit.

33

[quote]John S. wrote:
<<< You truly must have been shaken as a baby. Read the constitution, There is the reason why we in theory should be following it. Air traffic control should be privatized but that’s just me.[/quote]

See how these guys think? Everything,s the same and everybody is responsible for everybody in the form of centralized federal oversight. I can almost see the vacuous confused scowl on his face while trying to grasp the distinction between public and private. Because to him, there isn’t one. Not a meaningful one anyway.

34

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

Public institutions are supposed to safeguard the private lives of the citizenry which they are both free to pursue and bare responsibility for themselves. That is what made this country great. [/quote]

Yeah, you mean stuff like health care, right? So if there was a “public option” for health insurance I could choose that, or I could opt to stay with my private employer-sponsored plan if I want, if I felt that coverage offered was a better match for my family’s needs? Gotcha!

Gee, sounds a lot like what that evil nazihitlermuslimfasistcommie Obama was talking about.

35

Speaking of Huck, an interesting article in Politico today…here’s a bit of it:

[i]Huckabee said on his radio show last week that under President Obamaâ??s health care plan, Ted Kennedy would have been told to â??go home to take pain pills and die.â??

ABCâ??s George Stephanopoulos called this a â??hand grenadeâ?? and said Huckabee was demonstrating that he was not going to be â??outmaneuveredâ?? by Palin when it came to courting conservatives.

Ed Kilgore of The New Republic wrote: â??This despicable rant should disqualify Mike Huckabee from any further liberal sympathy, no matter how much he tries to joke or rock-n-roll his way back into mainstream acceptability.â??

But Huckabee (who plays bass guitar in a rock-and-roll band called Capitol Offense) is probably not thinking too much about mainstream acceptability these days. Winning the Republican nomination by winning hard-core conservatives â?? the kind who vote in primaries â?? is very much on his mind.

So Huckabee doesnâ??t just oppose Obama on health care or make jokes about it. Huckabee says that â??Lenin and Stalin would love this stuffâ?? when it comes to Obamaâ??s â??health care rationing.â?? Huckabee also says: â??The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics may be dead, but a Union of American Socialist Republics is being born.â??

Huckabeeâ??s early poll numbers have been swell.[/i]

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=72A0DB7C-18FE-70B2-A8E304FFA0C35AF4

36

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
See how these guys think? Everything,s the same and everybody is responsible for everybody in the form of centralized federal oversight. I can almost see the vacuous confused scowl on his face while trying to grasp the distinction between public and private. Because to him, there isn’t one. Not a meaningful one anyway.[/quote]

I don’t have any problem with the distinction between public and private, I’m just trying to understand the logical disconnect you seem to have with the two. I’m still waiting for someone to explain (shaken baby, you know?) why such a fundamental and basic service as health care can only be handled by the private sector.

Medicare works fine, other than Congress fucking up the funding over and over, and that’s more “socialized” than any option being debated now.

So again, why is it that the goverment can handle some basic services, just not health care?

37

[quote]tme wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
See how these guys think? Everything,s the same and everybody is responsible for everybody in the form of centralized federal oversight. I can almost see the vacuous confused scowl on his face while trying to grasp the distinction between public and private. Because to him, there isn’t one. Not a meaningful one anyway.

I don’t have any problem with the distinction between public and private, I’m just trying to understand the logical disconnect you seem to have with the two. I’m still waiting for someone to explain (shaken baby, you know?) why such a fundamental and basic service as health care can only be handled by the private sector.

Medicare works fine, other than Congress fucking up the funding over and over, and that’s more “socialized” than any option being debated now.

So again, why is it that the goverment can handle some basic services, just not health care?

[/quote]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA MEDICARE WORKS FINE.

Reagan Audio - Don't say we weren't warned - YouTube Watch this it will explain why the government can’t. I can even expand further then he goes, but I think after you hear what he says you will be able to connect the rest of the dots.

38

[quote]tme wrote:
Medicare works fine, other than Congress fucking up the funding over and over, and that’s more “socialized” than any option being debated now.

[/quote]

Hoo-boy. Medicare is probably the biggest threat to this country. And, like David Walker, I include Osama Bin laden in the mix when I say that.

What would happen in 2040 if nothing changes?

“If nothing changes, the federal government’s not gonna be able to do much more than pay interest on the mounting debt and some entitlement benefits. It won’t have money left for anything else â?? national defense, homeland security, education, you name it.”

People are living way too long as tax consumers, with too few tax producers nowadays to support them. By 2040, we will have a crisis this country might not be able to recover from for a very, very, long time. The costs and the demographics don’t even come close to matching up. In 2011, I believe it is, when baby boomers begin to settle onto the Medicare dole, hopefully reality will set in. But it won’t. Entitlements, a helluva drug.

There is nothing progressive or charitable about shackling future generations to an obligation they can’t possibly meet. So before you folks pat yourselves on the back, so proud of your progressive generosity (with other people’s money), know that future generations will despise us. They will curse us. They will spit on our memory. They will wonder at the point of entitlements for the ‘needy,’ when the result is an entire nation in desperate need.

39

You know the saddest fact of all when it comes the progressive left? If anyone should have been the champions of traditional moral values, they should’ve. The demographics of tax consumers, tax producers, and the future cost of entitlement obligations speaks volumes. Think of an inverted pyramid balancing on it’s apex. An apex that’s slowly expanding while it’s base (the top here) expands at a frightening rate. You need a whole hell of alot more babies (laborers) being born in intact homes (less social costs) to keep up.

40

How exactly is it working fine?

“Medicare is now paying out more than it receives and it faces as a result insolvency in eight years, two years earlier than projected in last yearâ??s report, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said today in a statement”

Thats 8 years. 8.