Thread: The GOP in Meltdown

Originally Posted by awesome adjunct

^
"well at least we weren't as bad as Bush"

It would be impossible to be any worse.

Originally Posted by theudonshawn

A useful tool for determining such things would be a useful scrap of paper commonly referred to as the Constitution.

Which the Bush Gang did more to dismantle than anybody. Part of the brilliance of the Constitution is that balance of power was built in. And as they say, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. More and more of it is slipping away while the corporate crowd cries Big Government when someone tries to start a program for the public good (Healthcare) and "Gimmie gimmie" when tax breaks, subsidies, contracts roll around.

Originally Posted by theudonshawn

mean really... imagine going to the hospital is like going to the DMV...

Another fatous comparison with no data to support it. Veterans and members of Congress recieve Govt. run Healthcare and I don't hear any DMV comparisons. Not from Medicare or Medicaid either. Doesn't seem to compare with most countries where they have Govt. run healthcare either.

Originally Posted by MrG

members of Congress receive Govt. run Healthcare and I don't hear any DMV comparisons. Not from Medicare or Medicaid either. Doesn't seem to compare with most countries where they have Govt. run healthcare either.

Congress. Too funny. Yep, they don't balk at all.
Beg to differ on VA, medicare/caid, and folks in govt-run HC in other countries. You be generalising with your socialist brethren, boy.
PS, I corrected your typo in "receive" for ya.

Originally Posted by awesome adjunct

What arguement will the dems make in 2010 and 2012 that they should remain in power?

Considering that it is a few months into the new administration and few steps taken to battle the global crisis have yet to be implemented who knows . . . You are talking about 4 years down the line . . . who knows what other obstacles or windfalls will take place.

As of now the Republican Party has become riddled with extremists, toilet-gropers and adulterers . . . pretty much everything the party opposes . . .

The only way back for the Republicans is to become (for the US' standards) more centrist and stop pandering to the extremes.

Originally Posted by MrG

Veterans and members of Congress recieve Govt. run Healthcare

yeah... I'm a vet and I'm happier with my AIA health insurance (or no insurance) here in Thailand at the hospital down the road than I was driving 2 hours to the nearest va hospital to wait in line for 3 hours and get seen in 3 months for a hernia that had me walking like a fucking gimp. "Take this Tylenol 2 with codeine and don't complain Marine" Compare that to the Tri Care coverage we got on active duty... (drink water and take this motrin... I'm sure the swelling and sickly purple color will go away shortly) Mr. G, sorry to break it to you, but you apparently don't talk to a lot of vets about their VA health coverage. I would describe it as adequate. I try not to complain as it was free. (lookin the gift horse in the teeth an all) It was indeed nice to have and thank you uncle Sam for that. But on reflection, it sucked big hairy goat balls.

Originally Posted by MrG

the Bush Gang

Who in my opinion were almost as bad as the Obama Syndicate... possibly worse. AS I've said... How many Presidents are on the books for starting a war? How many are on the books for starting 2 wars? (though there is something to be said for prior foreign imperialist policy and blow back)

To the rest of you government loving folks... do you REALLY think that there isn't big business pulling Komrade Obama's strings? Do you REALLY think he isn't 100% bought and paid for by somebody?

And just for good measure one of the most interesting things I've heard in a while was said by Dr. Walter Williams (a most outstanding libertarian red-blooded black skinned son of Uncle Sam)

"And for those of you who are Christians out there, I'm very sure that when God gave Moses the commandment "thou shalt not steal," he did not mean that thou shalt not steal unless you got a majority vote in Congress. Moreover, if you were to say to God, "Well, I know you say thou shalt not steal, but is it OK to be a recipient of stolen property?" He would probably consider that a sin as well."

While I like that... Crazy JC the long-haired, Sandal-wearing hippie said something like, "Render unto Caesar" Still... While the biblical reference doesn't really hold water... confiscatin' my money on threat of kidnappin' is thievin' and thievin' is wrong, even if you have a majority vote in the syndicate.

All governments put the interests of business first.
It is the basis of parlimentary politics.
It is the degree to which they allow individual autonomy that is the difference.

Originally Posted by panama hat

Considering that it is a few months into the new administration

Geez, is this still April?

Load of crock. Obama is showing just how disingenuous he really is after nine months in office. He wants to control America, not lead it and follow the wishes of the people.

Originally Posted by theudonshawn

Mr. G, sorry to break it to you, but you apparently don't talk to a lot of vets about their VA health coverage. I would describe it as adequate.

You're right. I don't presume to deny your experience and I don't talk to enough vets about this topic, so my information is limited to what I read, and like anything else, the sources I trust. Below is an example of the things I see most often.


"...Yet here's a curious fact that few conservatives or liberals know. Who do you think receives higher-quality health care. Medicare patients who are free to pick their own doctors and specialists? Or aging veterans stuck in those presumably filthy VA hospitals with their antiquated equipment, uncaring administrators, and incompetent staff? An answer came in 2003, when the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."
Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.
It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals. Not convinced? Consider what vets themselves think.

The piece goes on if anybody wants to read it. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0501.longman.html

Originally Posted by theudonshawn

do you REALLY think that there isn't big business pulling Komrade Obama's strings? Do you REALLY think he isn't 100% bought and paid for by somebody?

No I don't think Obama is immune to big business string pulling. It's in the system, just like any system has it's share of interests who, one way or another, have the privelidged of access to power. Hopefully he is of a mindste to move the ball forward the other way, towards a govt. more representative of that quaint notion called "The People". It remains to be seen if he is of that mindset and if he will or can do anything about making access to power more equitable to all.

No. I do not think he is bought and paid for by somebody else.

There is another side to VA care. (Do you believe everything you read, MrG?)

Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.


This is the world of Building 18, not the kind of place where Duncan expected to recover when he was evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Iraq last February with a broken neck and a shredded left ear, nearly dead from blood loss. But the old lodge, just outside the gates of the hospital and five miles up the road from the White House, has housed hundreds of maimed soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

more...
Soldiers Face Neglect, Frustration At Army's Top Medical Facility - washingtonpost.com

^
Good point (for a change). What happened at Walter Reed was worse than an insult to the respectful care American fighting forces should be getting, and you can bet Bldg. 18 wasn't were members of Congress go for their care.

But we're talking about the system of insuring medical care. There are plenty of examples in the papers of the private sector falling down on that score, denying care that's already in the insurance contract, dropping people for previous conditions or any technicality they can find. That's what we're trying to get rid of.

But denying reform with cries that it won't be perfect is a paper tiger. Human nature being what it is, once a better system is in place it will be subject to the same fallabilities, corruption and neglect as anything else, and should be scrutinized by the same standards.

^ True. But if I had my own private HC coverage, I would not want to be shoved in line with a bunch of welfare recipients.
Every time the govt gives more info on the bill, the less people like it. Guess that's why it's a no-go on posting the bill on the Net.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

True. But if I had my own private HC coverage, I would not want to be shoved in line with a bunch of welfare recipients.

I wouldn't characterize middle class workers, homeowners and shopkeepers who have been bancrupted by medical bills as welfare recipients.

I have private healthcare coverage and I wouldn't want to trade it away either, unless I could get the same care for less money because the administrative fees, CEO and other executive saleries and the absolutely unforgivable demand to maximize profits regardless of the cost to the State and the society.

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

True. But if I had my own private HC coverage, I would not want to be shoved in line with a bunch of welfare recipients.

I wouldn't characterize middle class workers, homeowners and shopkeepers who have been bancrupted by medical bills as welfare recipients.

Jet,

How would welfare reciepients be "shoved in line" with holders of private health insurance?

Originally Posted by Milkman

How would welfare recipients be "shoved in line" with holders of private health insurance?

In terms of universal coverage, Milkie.

^ Govt control of the whole biz and single payer.

^you have no idea what you're posting about.....again.

can we move away from one poster's repeated displays of ignorance, to a GOP candidate for gov. of california....and how she hasn't voted in 28 years.

and her response to questions from reporters:

"I did not vote. I should've voted. It is inexcusable," she said. "I've said what I'm going to say about it."

she hasn't been engaged in the political process in nearly 3 decades (approximately her entire adult life), and now she thinks she's qualified to be gov.
Voting record an issue for GOP candidate - More politics- msnbc.com

you really can't make this stuff up.

Originally Posted by raycarey

she hasn't been engaged in the political process in nearly 3 decades (approximately her entire adult life), and now she thinks she's qualified to be gov.

Maybe she'll be like a fresh breeze, unencumbered by the rubbish that piles up when you're actively involved in politicking . . . who knows . . . can't be the worst candidate ever can she be? (That spot is taken by Palin . . . safe and secure)

Originally Posted by raycarey

can we move away from one poster's repeated displays of ignorance, to a GOP candidate for gov. of california....and how she hasn't voted in 28 years.

and her response to questions from reporters:

"I did not vote. I should've voted. It is inexcusable," she said. "I've said what I'm going to say about it."

she hasn't been engaged in the political process in nearly 3 decades (approximately her entire adult life), and now she thinks she's qualified to be gov.
Voting record an issue for GOP candidate - More politics- msnbc.com

you really can't make this stuff up.

No, you can't make it up.

Nobody in the CA GOP party vetter her?

Not voting for such a long time usually does not fly. It didn't in the past in with other potential candidates.

I highly doubt she'll continue.

Originally Posted by slackula

Least favourite
9) Michael Savage (15)

attaboy needs to get a blog.

^^ Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin top of the list.

^ What's so funny about that? We have Boon Mee and Jet Gorgon!