marks2065 0 #101 August 13, 2009 QuoteQuote I don't trust the government especially after the last few years. I don't trust anyone over 30. Quotewhy didn't you say you couldn't be trusted at the start? would have saved alot of time. on the other hand you are saying that you would trust someone under 30 that has little to no practicle experience to make choices upon. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rivetgeek 0 #102 August 13, 2009 QuoteI not sure what doctors you are talking about, but all the ones I have talked to do not like obamacare http://www.pnhp.org/~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #103 August 13, 2009 QuoteQuoteI not sure what doctors you are talking about, but all the ones I have talked to do not like obamacare http://www.pnhp.org/ Quoteand tort reform will save over 500 billion a year plus reduce the number of test the doctors needlessly run to cover their asses. this article just shows how divided everyone is on the issue. the only common ground is that we need to help our health care system. why don't we fix a couple problems instead of scrapping one system for another that will have the same problems? Obama's plan changes nothing except who controls the $'s Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rivetgeek 0 #104 August 13, 2009 Quote Obama's plan changes nothing except who controls the $'s well that and the whole making sure everyone can go to the doctor when they get injured or sick...~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites georgerussia 0 #105 August 13, 2009 Quote Play what ever sophomoric word games you chose. The fact is right now I can transfer my existing employer provided policy to an individual policy with no lapse in coverage. You are able to transfer your existing employer provided policy to ANOTHER individual policy, which is very likely to have quite different terms and premium. Quote This is not allowed upon passage of the existing proposed bill. This is according to our carrier that addressed this issue two days ago to our group. I would definitely consider everything your carrier says on that matter with a grain of salt, because they are likely to be biased. Check the facts yourself.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites georgerussia 0 #106 August 13, 2009 Quote You don’t know that! How much do you want to bet that there will be people that lose their currant coverage? Depending on what they gonna get instead, some of those who "lose" their current coverage might be quite happy. Young and healthy will be among the most screwed. And "the rich", of course. Everyone else should benefit. Quote NO ONE can honesty tell you that in the end that they can guarantee that your insurance will be available. No one will guarantee your carrier, or even your insurance plan will be available tomorrow, or that it's cost won't go up 100%. Happened already.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,471 #107 August 13, 2009 >I guess you still have not read page 16 & 17 of the bills. I have! >it doesn't say you will have it taken away . . . PROGRESS! Cool, now we're getting somewhere. >but it does say you can not change any part of the policy, like adding a >dependant . . . No, it doesn't say that. In fact it explicitly says dependents can be added. "DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED.—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day." I fear you are one of the many people who just read what www.obamasucks.com says and never actually read the bill. Read it; it's a lot easier to look at the original than to just listen to what Limbaugh says about it. > just enough to cause a slow transition to government controlled >insurance coverage. Why would you choose government insurance if you don't like it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rivetgeek 0 #108 August 14, 2009 But...but...but the original doesnt come with talking points and buzzwords! How are they supposed to know what opinion to have if someone doesnt give them one?~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #109 August 14, 2009 Quote>I guess you still have not read page 16 & 17 of the bills. I have! >it doesn't say you will have it taken away . . . PROGRESS! Cool, now we're getting somewhere. >but it does say you can not change any part of the policy, like adding a >dependant . . . No, it doesn't say that. In fact it explicitly says dependents can be added. "DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED.—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day." I fear you are one of the many people who just read what www.obamasucks.com says and never actually read the bill. Read it; it's a lot easier to look at the original than to just listen to what Limbaugh says about it. > just enough to cause a slow transition to government controlled >insurance coverage. Why would you choose government insurance if you don't like it? Well kiss my grits YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. So what are they dropping then???? From one of your fav sites I believe! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090813/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_end_of_life_2 Quote Senators exclude end-of-life provision from bill Thu Aug 13, 1:55 pm ET WASHINGTON – Key senators are excluding a provision on end-of-life care from health overhaul legislation after language in a House bill caused a furor. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement Thursday that the provision had been dropped from consideration because it could be misinterpreted or implemented incorrectly. A health care bill passed by three House committees allows Medicare to reimburse doctors for voluntary counseling sessions about end-of-life decisions. But critics have claimed the provision could lead to death panels and euthanasia for seniors. The Senate Finance Committee is still working to complete a bill. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,471 #110 August 14, 2009 >YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #111 August 14, 2009 Quotehttp://www.pnhp.org/ Looks like a extreemist group, even obama does not want them. QuoteIs Physicians for a National Health Program the biggest threat to Obama’s health reform plan? February 19, 2009 KevinMD health reform Virtual Town Hall: Thursday, August 13th at 12:15pm Eastern Medical students want to become primary care doctors, until reality hits Should patients be striving for perfect health? Countries with worse health care systems than the United States PNHP is a fringe physician group that advocates for a single-payer health system. The Massachusetts branch came out recently and railed against the state’s health reform plan, which incidentally, is similar to what President Obama is likely to propose. According to its leadership, “nothing less than single-payer national health reform will work.” I’ve always thought they should compromise their stance on a single-payer system, which has next to zero chance of being passed. In fact, as I noted previously, influential Democrat Max Baucus “wasn’t going to waste his time” on the idea. Suffice it to say, PNHP didn’t take my advice, and today circled their ideological wagons. David Himmelstein, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and co-founder of PNHP, said that “if the reform plan looked like the Massachusetts reform he probably would prefer the status quo.” In essence, he’s saying that if the United States fails to adopt a single-payer system, he’d prefer doing nothing to change a system that doesn’t cover 50 million Americans and counting. It’s becoming increasing obvious that the biggest threat to health reform isn’t coming from Republicans and the right, but from these radical, far-left, groups causing liberals to fight amongst themselves. Maggie Mahar comments on the damage PNHP is doing to the progressive cause, noting that “the single-payer advocates are simply dividing progressive health care reformers at a time when [they] need to be united against the conservative opposition.” In order to pass meaningful health reform, the President will need all the support he can muster. It’s ironic that his biggest enemies will likely be those on his own side. http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/02/is-physicians-for-national-health.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rivetgeek 0 #112 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuotehttp://www.pnhp.org/ Looks like a extreemist group, even obama does not want them. QuoteIs Physicians for a National Health Program the biggest threat to Obama’s health reform plan? February 19, 2009 KevinMD health reform Virtual Town Hall: Thursday, August 13th at 12:15pm Eastern Medical students want to become primary care doctors, until reality hits Should patients be striving for perfect health? Countries with worse health care systems than the United States PNHP is a fringe physician group that advocates for a single-payer health system. The Massachusetts branch came out recently and railed against the state’s health reform plan, which incidentally, is similar to what President Obama is likely to propose. According to its leadership, “nothing less than single-payer national health reform will work.” I’ve always thought they should compromise their stance on a single-payer system, which has next to zero chance of being passed. In fact, as I noted previously, influential Democrat Max Baucus “wasn’t going to waste his time” on the idea. Suffice it to say, PNHP didn’t take my advice, and today circled their ideological wagons. David Himmelstein, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and co-founder of PNHP, said that “if the reform plan looked like the Massachusetts reform he probably would prefer the status quo.” In essence, he’s saying that if the United States fails to adopt a single-payer system, he’d prefer doing nothing to change a system that doesn’t cover 50 million Americans and counting. It’s becoming increasing obvious that the biggest threat to health reform isn’t coming from Republicans and the right, but from these radical, far-left, groups causing liberals to fight amongst themselves. Maggie Mahar comments on the damage PNHP is doing to the progressive cause, noting that “the single-payer advocates are simply dividing progressive health care reformers at a time when [they] need to be united against the conservative opposition.” In order to pass meaningful health reform, the President will need all the support he can muster. It’s ironic that his biggest enemies will likely be those on his own side. http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/02/is-physicians-for-national-health.html One guy says they are a fringe group so it must be fact eh? And where does it say anything about Obama stating he does not want them? Anything else you'd like to just make up and call fact? Is their (pnhp) stance a little too radical? Maybe, But I dont claim to support them, I found the site with a 30 second google search. I was refuting the point that there aren't many doctors that want the bill to pass.~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #113 August 14, 2009 Quote>YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Republicans Against the Terminally Ill (RAT-I). Has a nice ring to it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rivetgeek 0 #114 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuote>YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Republicans Against the Terminally Ill (RAT-I). Has a nice ring to it. Republicans Against the Terminally Sick makes a better abbreviation though ; p~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #115 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote>YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Republicans Against the Terminally Ill (RAT-I). Has a nice ring to it. Republicans Against the Terminally Sick makes a better abbreviation though ; p OK, RATS it is.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #116 August 14, 2009 Quote >YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Yep, got to agree with you, it is about idiots"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #117 August 14, 2009 +1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #118 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuote Obama's plan changes nothing except who controls the $'s well that and the whole making sure everyone can go to the doctor when they get injured or sick... Quotethey already can. Any person (even non citizens) can walk into any emergencey room and get treated. not one person can be turned down for any reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rivetgeek 0 #119 August 14, 2009 Quote Quote >YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Yep, got to agree with you, it is about idiots Either the government is totally inept and couldn't organize a bachelor party, or they are criminal masterminds that faked a birth certificate/election, moon landing, covered up alien conspiracies and jfk. You guys need to get your story straight~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #120 August 14, 2009 Either the government is totally inept and couldn't organize a bachelor party, or they are criminal masterminds that faked a birth certificate/election, moon landing, covered up alien conspiracies and jfk. You guys need to get your story straight QuoteObama could organize a bachelor party, that is what he did was organize, and it would probably be a good one. But the presidents job is a little different and Obama is showing he does not have the skills to do it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,471 #121 August 14, 2009 >It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment >to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would >say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Wow, Rush. You have turned into the people you despised four years ago. I admire the flexibility of your neck. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #122 August 15, 2009 Quote >It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment >to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would >say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Wow, Rush. You have turned into the people you despised four years ago. I admire the flexibility of your neck. So you label those with whom you disagre but when the lable comes back at you its different??? And it is here for all to see sir bill!! You are a proud one yes you are "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 5 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
rivetgeek 0 #102 August 13, 2009 QuoteI not sure what doctors you are talking about, but all the ones I have talked to do not like obamacare http://www.pnhp.org/~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #103 August 13, 2009 QuoteQuoteI not sure what doctors you are talking about, but all the ones I have talked to do not like obamacare http://www.pnhp.org/ Quoteand tort reform will save over 500 billion a year plus reduce the number of test the doctors needlessly run to cover their asses. this article just shows how divided everyone is on the issue. the only common ground is that we need to help our health care system. why don't we fix a couple problems instead of scrapping one system for another that will have the same problems? Obama's plan changes nothing except who controls the $'s Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rivetgeek 0 #104 August 13, 2009 Quote Obama's plan changes nothing except who controls the $'s well that and the whole making sure everyone can go to the doctor when they get injured or sick...~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #105 August 13, 2009 Quote Play what ever sophomoric word games you chose. The fact is right now I can transfer my existing employer provided policy to an individual policy with no lapse in coverage. You are able to transfer your existing employer provided policy to ANOTHER individual policy, which is very likely to have quite different terms and premium. Quote This is not allowed upon passage of the existing proposed bill. This is according to our carrier that addressed this issue two days ago to our group. I would definitely consider everything your carrier says on that matter with a grain of salt, because they are likely to be biased. Check the facts yourself.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #106 August 13, 2009 Quote You don’t know that! How much do you want to bet that there will be people that lose their currant coverage? Depending on what they gonna get instead, some of those who "lose" their current coverage might be quite happy. Young and healthy will be among the most screwed. And "the rich", of course. Everyone else should benefit. Quote NO ONE can honesty tell you that in the end that they can guarantee that your insurance will be available. No one will guarantee your carrier, or even your insurance plan will be available tomorrow, or that it's cost won't go up 100%. Happened already.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #107 August 13, 2009 >I guess you still have not read page 16 & 17 of the bills. I have! >it doesn't say you will have it taken away . . . PROGRESS! Cool, now we're getting somewhere. >but it does say you can not change any part of the policy, like adding a >dependant . . . No, it doesn't say that. In fact it explicitly says dependents can be added. "DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED.—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day." I fear you are one of the many people who just read what www.obamasucks.com says and never actually read the bill. Read it; it's a lot easier to look at the original than to just listen to what Limbaugh says about it. > just enough to cause a slow transition to government controlled >insurance coverage. Why would you choose government insurance if you don't like it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rivetgeek 0 #108 August 14, 2009 But...but...but the original doesnt come with talking points and buzzwords! How are they supposed to know what opinion to have if someone doesnt give them one?~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #109 August 14, 2009 Quote>I guess you still have not read page 16 & 17 of the bills. I have! >it doesn't say you will have it taken away . . . PROGRESS! Cool, now we're getting somewhere. >but it does say you can not change any part of the policy, like adding a >dependant . . . No, it doesn't say that. In fact it explicitly says dependents can be added. "DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED.—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day." I fear you are one of the many people who just read what www.obamasucks.com says and never actually read the bill. Read it; it's a lot easier to look at the original than to just listen to what Limbaugh says about it. > just enough to cause a slow transition to government controlled >insurance coverage. Why would you choose government insurance if you don't like it? Well kiss my grits YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. So what are they dropping then???? From one of your fav sites I believe! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090813/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_end_of_life_2 Quote Senators exclude end-of-life provision from bill Thu Aug 13, 1:55 pm ET WASHINGTON – Key senators are excluding a provision on end-of-life care from health overhaul legislation after language in a House bill caused a furor. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement Thursday that the provision had been dropped from consideration because it could be misinterpreted or implemented incorrectly. A health care bill passed by three House committees allows Medicare to reimburse doctors for voluntary counseling sessions about end-of-life decisions. But critics have claimed the provision could lead to death panels and euthanasia for seniors. The Senate Finance Committee is still working to complete a bill. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #110 August 14, 2009 >YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #111 August 14, 2009 Quotehttp://www.pnhp.org/ Looks like a extreemist group, even obama does not want them. QuoteIs Physicians for a National Health Program the biggest threat to Obama’s health reform plan? February 19, 2009 KevinMD health reform Virtual Town Hall: Thursday, August 13th at 12:15pm Eastern Medical students want to become primary care doctors, until reality hits Should patients be striving for perfect health? Countries with worse health care systems than the United States PNHP is a fringe physician group that advocates for a single-payer health system. The Massachusetts branch came out recently and railed against the state’s health reform plan, which incidentally, is similar to what President Obama is likely to propose. According to its leadership, “nothing less than single-payer national health reform will work.” I’ve always thought they should compromise their stance on a single-payer system, which has next to zero chance of being passed. In fact, as I noted previously, influential Democrat Max Baucus “wasn’t going to waste his time” on the idea. Suffice it to say, PNHP didn’t take my advice, and today circled their ideological wagons. David Himmelstein, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and co-founder of PNHP, said that “if the reform plan looked like the Massachusetts reform he probably would prefer the status quo.” In essence, he’s saying that if the United States fails to adopt a single-payer system, he’d prefer doing nothing to change a system that doesn’t cover 50 million Americans and counting. It’s becoming increasing obvious that the biggest threat to health reform isn’t coming from Republicans and the right, but from these radical, far-left, groups causing liberals to fight amongst themselves. Maggie Mahar comments on the damage PNHP is doing to the progressive cause, noting that “the single-payer advocates are simply dividing progressive health care reformers at a time when [they] need to be united against the conservative opposition.” In order to pass meaningful health reform, the President will need all the support he can muster. It’s ironic that his biggest enemies will likely be those on his own side. http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/02/is-physicians-for-national-health.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rivetgeek 0 #112 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuotehttp://www.pnhp.org/ Looks like a extreemist group, even obama does not want them. QuoteIs Physicians for a National Health Program the biggest threat to Obama’s health reform plan? February 19, 2009 KevinMD health reform Virtual Town Hall: Thursday, August 13th at 12:15pm Eastern Medical students want to become primary care doctors, until reality hits Should patients be striving for perfect health? Countries with worse health care systems than the United States PNHP is a fringe physician group that advocates for a single-payer health system. The Massachusetts branch came out recently and railed against the state’s health reform plan, which incidentally, is similar to what President Obama is likely to propose. According to its leadership, “nothing less than single-payer national health reform will work.” I’ve always thought they should compromise their stance on a single-payer system, which has next to zero chance of being passed. In fact, as I noted previously, influential Democrat Max Baucus “wasn’t going to waste his time” on the idea. Suffice it to say, PNHP didn’t take my advice, and today circled their ideological wagons. David Himmelstein, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and co-founder of PNHP, said that “if the reform plan looked like the Massachusetts reform he probably would prefer the status quo.” In essence, he’s saying that if the United States fails to adopt a single-payer system, he’d prefer doing nothing to change a system that doesn’t cover 50 million Americans and counting. It’s becoming increasing obvious that the biggest threat to health reform isn’t coming from Republicans and the right, but from these radical, far-left, groups causing liberals to fight amongst themselves. Maggie Mahar comments on the damage PNHP is doing to the progressive cause, noting that “the single-payer advocates are simply dividing progressive health care reformers at a time when [they] need to be united against the conservative opposition.” In order to pass meaningful health reform, the President will need all the support he can muster. It’s ironic that his biggest enemies will likely be those on his own side. http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/02/is-physicians-for-national-health.html One guy says they are a fringe group so it must be fact eh? And where does it say anything about Obama stating he does not want them? Anything else you'd like to just make up and call fact? Is their (pnhp) stance a little too radical? Maybe, But I dont claim to support them, I found the site with a 30 second google search. I was refuting the point that there aren't many doctors that want the bill to pass.~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #113 August 14, 2009 Quote>YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Republicans Against the Terminally Ill (RAT-I). Has a nice ring to it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rivetgeek 0 #114 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuote>YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Republicans Against the Terminally Ill (RAT-I). Has a nice ring to it. Republicans Against the Terminally Sick makes a better abbreviation though ; p~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #115 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote>YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. Republicans Against the Terminally Ill (RAT-I). Has a nice ring to it. Republicans Against the Terminally Sick makes a better abbreviation though ; p OK, RATS it is.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #116 August 14, 2009 Quote >YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Yep, got to agree with you, it is about idiots"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #118 August 14, 2009 QuoteQuote Obama's plan changes nothing except who controls the $'s well that and the whole making sure everyone can go to the doctor when they get injured or sick... Quotethey already can. Any person (even non citizens) can walk into any emergencey room and get treated. not one person can be turned down for any reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rivetgeek 0 #119 August 14, 2009 Quote Quote >YOU said that the death thingy was not in the bill. It's not. > So what are they dropping then? Because idiots don't read the bill. It's actually easier to change the bill to make them think it's not there than to have them read it to realize it's not there to begin with. So they take out a provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling for terminally ill patients. Congratulations, you screwed them. It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Yep, got to agree with you, it is about idiots Either the government is totally inept and couldn't organize a bachelor party, or they are criminal masterminds that faked a birth certificate/election, moon landing, covered up alien conspiracies and jfk. You guys need to get your story straight~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #120 August 14, 2009 Either the government is totally inept and couldn't organize a bachelor party, or they are criminal masterminds that faked a birth certificate/election, moon landing, covered up alien conspiracies and jfk. You guys need to get your story straight QuoteObama could organize a bachelor party, that is what he did was organize, and it would probably be a good one. But the presidents job is a little different and Obama is showing he does not have the skills to do it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #121 August 14, 2009 >It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment >to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would >say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Wow, Rush. You have turned into the people you despised four years ago. I admire the flexibility of your neck. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #122 August 15, 2009 Quote >It is about idiots alright! It is about idiots who would trust this govenment >to run health care! It is about idiots would believe anything the great BO would >say after his string of continuing lies and broken promises. Wow, Rush. You have turned into the people you despised four years ago. I admire the flexibility of your neck. So you label those with whom you disagre but when the lable comes back at you its different??? And it is here for all to see sir bill!! You are a proud one yes you are "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
