It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Palin 'death panel' claim sets Truth-O-Meter ablaze

page: 6
30
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife

AND, this is different from the FOR-PROFIT Health Insurance Companies denying needed medical care and dropping patients rather than paying claims.....this is different how, again???


Its actually quite simple really, if an insurance company has a tendency to do that, actions can be taken to move to a new insurer. Activism on the part of people who point these things out can force insurers to change their ways, or be forced out of business as people are made aware of what they are doing and dump their policy with them. Remember...vote with your wallet.

Now if this is a government panel, where are you going to move to? Will they exempt themselves from lawsuit like they do for the Pharma companies and their vaccines? This option is unamerican. Plain and simple. So while Palin is using wordsmith tactics, she doesn't appear to be as dumb or clueless as you try to convince yourselves. I personally am on the Ron Paul train, but this snipping between party lines seems to me to be nothing more then a bunch of dopes still buying into the left-right paradigm to oblivion. Sarah Palin wouldn't be my first choice, but she is undeserving of this 'pile on' in this instance.




posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


As a veteran who is disabled and works for the VA, I think you should force the VA to re-evalute you. Get that 100% rating. I am at 50% and have free health care for life with the VA. But I also have my own insurance that I choose to use more then I do VA care.

I am insting that you go and get your disabilty rating re-evaluted we are here to help our Vets. I respect what you went through in Nam I really do, Because of you guys my generation did not have to suffer the horrible homecoming and after war crap you men put up with.

As far as the flu shots, they have either provide them there at there Hospital or one of there CBOCs. If they dont which I dont understand why, but if they dont they HAVE to provide transportation to where its offered, or refer you to a local NON-VA hospital for free.

There are a ton of options for you out there to utilze I encourage you to use them (as a vet) before they dry up.

[edit on 11-8-2009 by poedxsoldiervet]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I severely dislike the guy, but he is good at spewing the rhetoric he does. He is good at attempting to browbeat people and sounds completely confident in his speech when he does so. Does that make him right? Not at all.

He claims there is no 'worthiness factor,' when Obama himself has said there are factors that go into play to decide whether someone receives care or not. The entire thing is spelled out in the bill, which I guess Mr. Olbermann has refused to read, and is content in just re-emphasizing the party line, by vaguely responding to her comment, calling her an idiot, and then comparing her to racists. He never rebutted what she said, he never gave anything other than, "It doesn't exist, and won't exist, because this is OBAMA we're talking about. C'mon! OBAMA." (Not a direct quote)

I believe the health system needs reform, but not like this.

One thing I have seen people fail to mention is that, in spite of the insurance companies making the "same decisions," they are still in competition with eachother. They still have to strive to give benefits to the best of their ability, and they have to provide adequate service, or people will just turn to another company. If the government takes over, there will be a monopoly on health coverage. Under this bill, they will completely regulate the healthcare industry, they will determine which providers are able to provide care, who won't, and effectively control anything and everything to do with it in the United States. This is a scary prospect, given that even with COMPETITION, you see people dying because of stupid decisions insurance companies make. What about when there is no competition, and the government is striving to keep as much money in their bank account as they can, since, after all, we are in a recession and horribly in debt?



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by skycopilot
 


ROFL, I can agree with that, being a victim of "mistake" in Afgan mountains. Those warthogs are scary... evening scarier when you are the receiving end... Buuuurrrrrppppp



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 



AND, this is different from the FOR-PROFIT Health Insurance Companies denying needed medical care and dropping patients rather than paying claims.....this is different how, again???


...the fact that the Health and Human Services Secretary will appoint a panel...


THIS is the very same sort of fear-mongering junk that was uttered by Fmr Gov. Palin last Friday, because it smacks as an almost exact copy of her (false) claims of a Gov't "death panel".

That sort of shameless rhetoric, from a person who just a few months ago was outraged by a comedian's joke about (what he thought was) her adult daughter, yet this same woman has no qualms about using her infant son as a prop in this political charade???

ALL of the BS coming down the pike about the "perils" of a Health Care Bill is fostered by ---[drumroll, please]---the INSURANCE COMPANIES!!!

The same insurance companies that saw their corporate profits nearly quintuple!!! between years 2000 and 2007...(Hmmmm, who was President then???) and average Insurance Company CEO compensation?? $11.9 MILLION. Per year.

Remember those old TV commercials for Gravy Train dog food?? Well, if you don't, I sure 'betcha' these guys do!!!
_______________

This is straight from the house bill, not from Palin, or any other "Side of the aisle." A lot of you would rather paint all conservatives and republicans with the same wide brush. Just because you had 8 years of government you didn't agree with, doesn't mean we should spend another 4 with more government we don't agree with. If in 2004 there would have been a better candidate on either side besides Fmr. President Bush, I would have voted for them. But I disagree with your views on this health care reform. Our health care is the best in the world. This bill in it's present form will cripple not only health care, but capitalism as as we know it. I am an independent, that votes for the best candidate, the best American for the job. Not a party line.

So, before you immediately paint something republican fear mongering, or any other thing, read the bill. Before you besmirch the posters, read the bill so you know what their talking about. All I have seen on the democratic side led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid is saying "Republicans bad! Democrats good!" Nancy says people were bringing swastikas. Where was the news report on that? CNN, MSNBC, all the news would have been all over that. Now mysteriously a swastika is painted on a Georgia congressmans office.

There was corruption on the republican side when Bush was in Office, now there is even more in my opinion in this administration. I am not calling names, or deflecting the questions on to Palin. I think she's an idiot too, but she made alot of people do one thing that Nancy Pelosi did not. She made a lot of people read the bill, when they did, that is when they started flooding the town hall meetings.

I never saw any uprisings on the level they are at during the bush administration. I think CNN and the left leaning media would have been all over that.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by andrewh7
You can't condemn the government option by criticizing things that are currently done by private insurers routinely. That would be absurd.


Is it really that absurd to want the change promised by Obama? It's absurd to want the government to rectify the wrongs that are committed by the private insurers?

[edit on 11-8-2009 by Highground]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


I read your post... But that was in 1997 under Bill Clinton. Not that I am by any means a fan of Bush, but to a point he has taking care of the vets. As well as the miltary.... To a Point mind you. The VA has seen a huge upswing in funding. but there are to many Vets, My point is look at how many Vets there are to Civies.... Now if this current goverment plan goes into effect I feel it will be way worse... really think about the goverment needs to come up with something better before I give my nod of approval.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by HighgroundIs it really that absurd to want the change promised by Obama?




"wanting the change", that is the problem, its all airy fairy, the specifics are rather different- I could want it to rain chocolate but I have to live in the real world- unfortunately many of Obama's supporters seemed to have suspended all notions of reality

*remembers classic youtube vid of woman saying she would not have to pay her mortgage once the chosen one got elected*



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Bush took care of the vets? I really think you need to go back and look at that one. One of the sharpest arrows of the left was pointing out how bad the va hospitals were and the cutting of funding for vet affairs. I really can't say it's any better now because frankly I don't know that but I do know that Bush didn't take care of the vets any better than he took care of the soldiers by forcing them to remove armor from old vehicles in order to protect themselves. (remember that one? when Rumsfeld threatened soldiers with charges)



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   
one thing is for sure, Bush was no "true" right winger



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka


Wow... not like I needed this to realize that Palin never speaks truth, let alone truth to power.

But when you read the truth-o-meter, it's amazing how much FALSE rumors are being circulated.

As I sit here and watch the loonies on TV at these town halls (yep loonies... some are downright throwing tantrums), I'm amazed at how much of the American public, and ATSers are consistently duped by fear.

It's almost as if thats the biggest weakness America has.. it's fear.

Check out the truth-o-meter. It's a great dose of fresh air, amidst the aroma from the scat that exists right now.

www.politifact.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


You have a point there.Those loonies sure showed their a__. kind of reminded me of those left wing loonies that show up to disrupt anyone who has a conservative point of view, And reminds me of those union goons who show up to strong arm anyone who isn't on the same page as the messiah Obama.

You also mistake fear for being pis__d off. there is a difference. The left wing kool-aid drinking goon squads are finnaly seeing what it's like for the shoe to be on the other foot.

This loud shouting, up in arms , in your face, strong arm tactics, call the other guy a racist if he doesn't agree with you, works both ways. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. As far a Palin goes, she's a private citizen, and it's makes no difference what she says, and again, she's no different that the left wing vile spewing garbage I have heard from that side. Detractors of Palin conviently forget to mention the liars on their side. No side has a monoply on truth streatchers, so don't denounce one side without mentioning the other side. You want the truth don't you?? Both sides lie---that's the truth.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by HighgroundIs it really that absurd to want the change promised by Obama?




"wanting the change", that is the problem, its all airy fairy, the specifics are rather different- I could want it to rain chocolate but I have to live in the real world- unfortunately many of Obama's supporters seemed to have suspended all notions of reality

*remembers classic youtube vid of woman saying she would not have to pay her mortgage once the chosen one got elected*


Good for you, but that has nothing to do with the issue. He was remarking that it's absurd to ask the government to do anything different from the private sector, and I'm stating that's exactly what Obama promised to do. Is it so absurd to want to hold a candidate to their campaign promises?



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by damwel
Bush took care of the vets? I really think you need to go back and look at that one. One of the sharpest arrows of the left was pointing out how bad the va hospitals were and the cutting of funding for vet affairs. I really can't say it's any better now because frankly I don't know that but I do know that Bush didn't take care of the vets any better than he took care of the soldiers by forcing them to remove armor from old vehicles in order to protect themselves. (remember that one? when Rumsfeld threatened soldiers with charges)


Okay durning the 90s under a Democrat President and A Repub congress VA funding was Slashed hard. Under bush VA funding increased, when the wars started it increased even more. Under Obama VA funding has gone up alot as well. So yes Bush did take care of them.

On the miltary side there were huge gaps in pay (again in the 90s under clinton) for fedearl civilians employees and military. After Bush left offices the gaps had closed to with 3% points. Not to sure how Obama is doing on this, But I heard his wife has become the Champion Voice for Military Famlies and there Issues.(kudos to her.)

Bush never forced any soldier to take armour off old humvees and put it on there victor for reason... There was no ARMOUR ON ANY OF THE HUMMERS when the war started. I drove into Iraq with freaking sandbags on my hummer. After the intial war was over and IEDs started to come into Play we began to tear apart Iraq military Victors to add armour to ours. The pentagon took notice and began to develop the current armour and vechs we see now. the problem was it was just to damn slow getting onto the battlefeild. Thats why that soldier was pissed off and I dont blame him for it.


The issue is They (bush and the pentagon) were not prepared for the war that we fought there. hence why we had soft skined vechs instead of the armour ones you see today. But after the new vechs were deemed combat worthy bush and congress rolled those suckers out pretty quick, fast, and in a hurry.
But really please check your facts before you step into something you dont know to much about.


And no I am not a bush fan, I like some of the things he did, but do not support him.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

WHAT ARE THE GOP so afraid of????

THAT is the question you should be asking, and the "conspiracy" you should be looking for.


I would ask, "what are DEMOCRATS afraid of?" They have control of the legislature, they don't need the GOP to pass this bill. So why hasn't the bill been finalized and went to vote yet?



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by HighgroundGood for you, but that has nothing to do with the issue. He was remarking that it's absurd to ask the government to do anything different from the private sector, and I'm stating that's exactly what Obama promised to do. Is it so absurd to want to hold a candidate to their campaign promises?



Well you were talkin about wanting the "change" Obama promised, but that was part of the problem, loads of talk of change, loads of pr, but not great on specifics (a quick glance at his record as a man/politician would have shown the lack of reason to believe in any great notion of "change")



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Yep... it's pretty much the Insurance companies who have the most to gain from stopping the health care bill.

Starred!


You people simply amaze me. Can you NOT see the big picture here? Do you not know who the thirteen families are and their relatives who own and are running this world? What do you think their endgame is.

Step back for a moment, read the Consitution and the Declaration of Independence, read Thomas Jeffersons' writings.

The Federal Government has absolutely NO enumerated powers to pass ANY law or bill affecting the several states. ANY law which they pass that the people feel is unconstitutional, they may be ignore with utter impunity, Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Ala.

Arguing about the stupidity of some peoples claims and the 2-party box is hilarious to me.
Your attention is being diverted from the real issue. How are WE going to set the record straight and get our FREE and SOVEREIGN country back. Have any of you studied the medical field from 150 years ago or 100 years ago. Take care of your self and we wouldn't NEED the insurance companies period.

I could explain how the SURETY BOND used to work back then too but that would be a long post. We wouldn't need ANY insurance companies. Who do you think OWNS the insurance comapies? What don't you people, again, not get here? It's all a scam to divert your attention and thought on what really matters, yourself.

We must never allow this country to slip into socialism because communism isn't far behind, and I understand communism is not really a bad thing until you get the power mongering elite that want to rule and then everyone's life is in danger. Look at the former Soviet Union, talk to a few of those poeple.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Highground
 


A star for you my friend. Yes, Capitalism works. A free market economy works. Competition works.

Many seem to be forgetting that the government will be eliminating much of this healthy competition.

Again, I ask these questions.

1. For MILLIONS of Americans who are covered under their employers insurance, what incentive is there for an employer to continue to provide health benefits ($$$) in lieu of free government care? Maybe the employer cares about their employees, but I think they care about the bottom line even more.

2. For those MILLIONS of Americans who are now without a plan due to #1, how many do you think can afford the cost of private health insurance? Very few. And for those who have or take private insurance, even the slightest change in that plan will force you to find a plan equivalent to what you had or drop it according to the proposed legislation. How many of you have time to shop for insurance plans? And what are the chances of you finding another plan that matched what you had. Slim to none.

3. And because of the growing numbers of Americans being FORCED to sign up underneath government health care (due to #1 & #2), where will the competition be amongst the private insurance market? How many private insurance companies will dry up? Of course, we'll probably have to have yet another stimulus to bail them out as well.

Deny ignorance folks. This is socialism plain and simple.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
Well you were talkin about wanting the "change" Obama promised, but that was part of the problem, loads of talk of change, loads of pr, but not great on specifics (a quick glance at his record as a man/politician would have shown the lack of reason to believe in any great notion of "change")


You misunderstand. He was saying that we cannot criticize the government because of something they do if the private sector does it. I was saying that we are criticizing the government because they are not doing what the promised to do. We were promised "change," so is it absurd to want what we were promised, whether or not we will actually get it? I didn't vote for Obama, I'm on the same side as you, however, I think we still have a right to say, "You said you would do this, where is it?" It's time to hold people accountable for their lies and deceit.

Obama never intended to change anything, that's painfully obvious, however, his supporters wanted change, and he tries to claim he is pushing change. Because of this, the disillusionment will start when people start pointing out there is no change in anything he is doing. His campaign promises were lies, and nothing more.

It may not make sense at first, but I don't know how much better to explain it than that.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Highground
Obama never intended to change anything, that's painfully obvious, however, his supporters wanted change, and he tries to claim he is pushing change. Because of this, the disillusionment will start when people start pointing out there is no change in anything he is doing. His campaign promises were lies, and nothing more.
.


This is a bit or rhetoric that I hear often. It seems a bit ironic to me and honestly...very confusing.

If Obama is miserably failing to deliver "change" ...then why all the outrage and hysteria about his proposals for healthcare reform? Climate change? etc..

If he is failing to "change" anything at all...then how is he turning America into some kind of Socialist Nazi state?

It makes me think of the election rhetoric...
First he was so inexperienced that he wouldn't be able to get anything done in Washington and then all of a suddent he was doing too much? Stop him! Stop him! He's the anti-christ...He's inelligible!!

Is he changing the system too much?...or no change at all?...

Completely inexperienced/ineffective at governing?...or too effective? and changing us into Nazi Socialists.

Just confused on how the extreme partisans reconcile in there own minds the rhetoric they are fed and repeat.

[edit on 11-8-2009 by maybereal11]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by kernalpanic

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife

AND, this is different from the FOR-PROFIT Health Insurance Companies denying needed medical care and dropping patients rather than paying claims.....this is different how, again???


Its actually quite simple really, if an insurance company has a tendency to do that, actions can be taken to move to a new insurer. Activism on the part of people who point these things out can force insurers to change their ways, or be forced out of business as people are made aware of what they are doing and dump their policy with them. Remember...vote with your wallet.

Now if this is a government panel, where are you going to move to? Will they exempt themselves from lawsuit like they do for the Pharma companies and their vaccines? This option is unamerican. Plain and simple. So while Palin is using wordsmith tactics, she doesn't appear to be as dumb or clueless as you try to convince yourselves. I personally am on the Ron Paul train, but this snipping between party lines seems to me to be nothing more then a bunch of dopes still buying into the left-right paradigm to oblivion. Sarah Palin wouldn't be my first choice, but she is undeserving of this 'pile on' in this instance.


You can't just drop your insurance coverage one day and go to another one tomorrow. It takes time to switch carriers. Plus, there's this icky little thing called, "pre-existing conditions" that might suck for the patient.


Insurance companies try to discourage people from waiting until they get sick in order to purchase health insurance. One way in which they do this is to impose pre-existing condition exclusion periods. This means that if you have a medical problem which exists at the time you enroll in or purchase your health insurance, the insurance company will deny all claims pertaining to this medical problem for a certain period of time.


Source\

Basically, if you got denied for a cancer treatment under one carrier, you couldn't just "switch" and have it covered.

This is nothing new and has been the case with insurance companies since we've had health insurance. Consumers can't "vote with their wallet" when the insurance industry sets pricings and standards as a whole and not on an individual corporate basis.

Car companies are a good example: ever wonder why car prices are all similar? Economy cars are all priced similarly, regular cars are all priced similarly, and luxury cars are all priced similarly. It's because, like the insurance industry, the car companies are an oligarchy.

Oligarchies and monopolies = not good for the nation.

Honestly, I'd rather have imperfect legislation that lowers medical expenses and covers all Americans than no legislation that keeps medical costs skyrocketing and doesn't come near covering all Americans.




top topics



 
30
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join