Turns out there really are Death Panels...here comes the spin

Dont normal issurance companys do this anyway? Deny treatment when they thinks its gone too far?

Dont see people kicking up a stink about that.

reply to post by theantediluvian


Was there anything in my post that implied I was enamored with private insurance? I think I said it is not effective if it contains a lifetime limit....

I believe I was dismissing private insurance, but that as long as you have that private insurance, it is better in the short term than government insurance.

They both are bad, but at present, private insurance is slightly better for the short term. It is the lesser of two evils right now.

Maybe I should have made that more clear.

crazyewok
Dont normal issurance companys do this anyway? Deny treatment when they thinks its gone too far?

Dont see people kicking up a stink about that.

Yes, I think I said that in my posts, private insurance only works when you are under their lifetime deductible and for as long as you have their plan.

Yes, private insurance companies also determine what services are available.

reply to post by theantediluvian


Wow, it's going to be a long day if I have to provide you with images and videos and speeches from your side about Obama the messiah.

Geesh, it's like you embrace the "metaphor" then say "it's just a metaphor". Do you think Chris Matthews was being sexually attracted to Obama to cause the tingling up his legs?

BTW, I was watching that when he said it...

First...epiphany is solely defined as a revelation. I've had an epiphany, Obama isn't the messiah and I shouldn't vote for him. But when you use the word epiphany with light coming through a window, then it hearkens back to a religious experience.

Definition of epiphany...

capitalized : 1:January 6 observed as a church festival in commemoration of the coming of the Magi as the first manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles or in the Eastern Church in commemoration of the baptism of Christ
2 : an appearance or manifestation especially of a divine being
3 a (1) : a usually sudden manifestation or perception of the essential nature or meaning of something (2) : an intuitive grasp of reality through something (as an event) usually simple and striking (3) : an illuminating discovery, realization, or disclosure b : a revealing scene or moment

As the images of Obama were presented as a messiah-type figure, then the definition arises as number 2. Yes, he WAS presented as a Messiah. Therefore, you were encouraged to allow the appearance of a divine being, of which you should vote for.

Had he never been presented as a messiah, then number 3 would apply. But still, within the definition of 3, is a manifestation of the essential nature or meaning. Hmm, so he said you would have a manifestation of the meaning to vote for him.

As he was presented with the essential nature of a messiah, then by definition of epiphany alone, throws it back to a religious experience. So why would Obama choose to use the word epiphany with the iconography associated with religious imagery, instead of just saying realization?

He chose, at a time when he was presented as a messiah, to use the word epiphany with all its religious connotation and imagery. He reinforced this idea that he was a messiah.

Would you care for me to post every picture that reinforces this? There's not enough time.

And he goes on to say in another speech, "contrary to public belief, I was not born in Bethlehem in a manger, I was born in a galaxy far, far away". Wait just a second, if the held belief was that he was a messiah, that he then has to make a joke about, wouldn't that suggest to you that people believed it? And how would they arrive at that belief in the first place? From him. Not Evan Thomas.

At the 2012 Soul Train Awards, Jamie Foxx says this....

"It's like church over here. It's like church in here. First of all, give an honor to God and our lord and savior Barack Obama."

Was he joking when he said that?

It was televised when he said this. Imagine that, a celebrity endorsement of Obama as messiah. And you say to us, it's a metaphor?

And since you are blaming conservatives...here's the most liberal out there Mother Jones

Oh my, the quasi-Socialist liberal magazine even says the same thing I am telling you. I am a conservative, but even if the ultra-liberals can see it, then why can't you admit it.

From Jonathan Stein in 2008...

Barack Obama has a messiah complex and no one will convince me otherwise.

You don't have to admit it if a conservative charges it, but what about liberals? Will you deny this liberal told you so? Let's talk a little bit about how this liberal arrived at the same conclusion that conservatives did when it came to Obama.

reply to post by WarminIndy


Johnathon Stein is accusing Obama of having a messiah complex.

Barack Obama has a messiah complex and no one will convince me otherwise.

You can find the prepared version of last night's victory speech here, and you can video of his delivery here. Comparing the two reveals that Obama improvises quite a bit, and does so impressively. But what he improvises is some awfully heady, almost messianic, stuff.

This is our moment to do what? To march? To organize? No. To vote for Obama. As if simply by voting for one man, we make a mark upon this country as indelibly as those who fought the Nazis or sat at lunch counters.

Does this post play unhelpfully into the pernicious and growing Obamaism-as-cult meme that we'll likely see repeated over and over by the right wing if Obama gets the nomination? It does. Sorry. But Obama's rhetoric makes an undeniable suggestion: that his election, not an eight-year administration that successfully implements his vision for America, would represent a moment in America of the grandest, most transformative kind. And that's a bit much.

In this 2008 article, the argument is made that in Obama is placing too much emphasis on his election and in such a grandiose fashion that in the author's opinion, it seems messianic. As though the act of electing this man President would alone be enough effect positive change. In other words, he's accusing Obama of overselling himself and what he'll be able to accomplish. Ironically, he also acknowledges the then already growing Obamaism-as-cult meme that would be (and as you yourself demonstrate is being) repeated over and over.

Jamie Foxx doesn't speak for the left, he speaks for himself. If those are really his views, then shame on Jamie Foxx for his ignorance. I'm sure you feel as though this represents compelling evidence of liberals viewing Obama as a "messiah" and I'm not even denying that there are zealous fools who have that opinion but this speaks nothing to the percentage of people on the left who then or now view Obama as some sort of savior.

1. This speaks nothing to the actual percentage of people who may have this ridiculous view of the President. If it's a high number, then that only shows that there are too many wingnuts on both sides. You dismissing an liberal views on these grounds is tantamount to me saying that every conservative opposed to reforming healthcare is a religious nut or a racist or hates the poor so we should ignore them.

2. Even if everything you said were 100% true, it has absolutely no bearing on the article the OP referenced about the Canadian health system or his insinuation that this somehow had anything to do with the ACA. For that matter, it has no real bearing on any legislation passed under the current administration.

reply to post by WarminIndy


So I dont see the problem? There no diffrence.

If your Obama care crap denies you service pay for it privately as you would if a normal insurance company denies you treatment.

crazyewok
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

So I dont see the problem? There no diffrence.

If your Obama care crap denies you service pay for it privately as you would if a normal insurance company denies you treatment.

Hence the problem arises with the fact that people are going to be forced to pay for Obamacare, whether they want to or not.

You see the problem? It's not about whether or not you can pay with cash for medical treatments, it's about you no longer having the choice to pay with cash.

That's the whole issue, people are no longer going to have the choice of paying with cash, and people are no longer going to be able to get out of having insurance, even if they don't need it.

You are going to be paying cash for an insurance plan, that you have no choice of getting out of. You will be fined for not having insurance. That's what it's about.

You will be federally mandated to have insurance regardless if you need it or not. Here's your choice, take the insurance or pay the fine. So you pay the fine, good. But then you are asked again, take the insurance or pay the fine...over and over again. Do you understand what federally mandated means?

reply to post by WarminIndy


Sadly we have allowed the government to dictate every aspect of our lives, now even the way we most be treated, what kind of insurance we most have and how much we are to pay and how long we will live.

We should blame ourselves for the take over.

reply to post by theantediluvian


The drafters of this law always tell us to look at the way Canadians are doing theirs, and yet never show what is really happening behind the scenes.

They have propped the Canadian system up for us in this country, but never tell Canadians that the ACA is not about providing a choice in actually having insurance. It's wonderful that Canadians have a health care system, that they don't have to worry if something happens. But what the lawmakers are not talking about is the growing number of dissatisfied Canadians.

It was a joke way back a long time ago about the waiting lists for Canadians....

marg6043
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Sadly we have allowed the government to dictate every aspect of our lives, now even the way we most be treated, what kind of insurance we most have and how much we are to pay and how long we will live.

We should blame ourselves for the take over.

I agree.

But for those of us who see something coming, there's nothing we ever say that makes a difference to people who don't want to know.

bobs_uruncle

AutumnWitch657
I have no idea what this means. Death panel???

In the US, death panel has many meanings, it could be;

1. A panel of one, meaning Obama.
2. A panel, group or one member at the NSA or CIA
3. A group of telemarkers working for the health care industry making arbitrary decisions based on bottom line profit and loss statements per individual patient.

Cheers - Dave

edit on 10/22.2013 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)

You left out the most likely agency, as it is the one in charge of healthcare: IRS

Anyone, and I mean anyone, that thought it was a good idea to turn over health care to the IRS is on my list of people I simply can not rationalize or compromise with. Of all the agencies to give access to medical records and medical treatment payments over to we really chose the IRS? Really? I know Nancy said don't read it, just vote for it, but that's no excuse. How absolutely naive and completely out of their minds people of this country have become. The IRS? Hmpf... People are drunk on Republican and Democrat propaganda. What a bunch of idiots we all are. We deserve the incompetent governance we are receiving; and the Republican and Democrat platform ideology and "talking points" can be blamed equally. What a bunch of pathetic losers we are...

We are not an independent people. We should remove the 4th of July holiday from our national calendar.

reply to post by WarminIndy


But you can pay private? Surely you can still turn up to a hospital with 100k and ask them to treat you.

Not saying Obama care is good idea. But surely if your denied treatment you can still pay for the treatment you were denied outside of Obama care. You can on the UK NHS.

Plus I dont get this "dont need insurance" Surely unless your earning million and can affored to cover say a £500,000 cancer treatment or heart transplant with your own money Insurance is kinda the most importnat thing you need just below food. Cause last time I checked you cant predict when you fall ill.

crazyewok
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

But you can pay private? Surely you can still turn up to a hospital with 100k and ask them to treat you.

Not saying Obama care is good idea. But surely if your denied treatment you can still pay for the treatment you were denied outside of Obama care. You can on the UK NHS.

Plus I dont get this "dont need insurance" Surely unless your earning million and can affored to cover say a £500,000 cancer treatment or heart transplant with your own money Insurance is kinda the most importnat thing you need just below food. Cause last time I checked you cant predict when you fall ill.

Well now, the average American doesn't have $100,000. Maybe drug kingpins or mafia bosses, but the average American, no.

Since you are talking about showing up at a hospital, I am assuming you mean like for emergency services only. But since we are talking about the elderly and disabled, that $100,000 lasts for maybe a few days or weeks, depending on the type of service. That's why there are so many people who have fundraisers for children who must be treated for long term.

If the average American had $100,000, then they aren't average. And yes, if you had that much, it would be spent before your insurance would cover it.

Medicare and Medicaid forces you to report all of your assets including all bank account information.

Currently right now we have Ronald McDonald House for families to stay with children while they are in the hospital. And we have St. Jude's Childrens Hospital that has a yearly telethon to raise money. But if you have a catastrophic condition that requires long term care, $100,000 may initially cover the cost. But if you have multiple surgeries over several years or placed into a health care facility, then it's not going to be enough to cover you long term.

The average American doesn't have that kind of money. I suppose if you could, then you could pay with cash, but the point is, you don't have the choice when it comes to insurance.

Let's suppose though that you are relatively healthy, you go to the doctor once a year for a check-up. You don't need insurance in that case. You can pay for the doctor. But you won't have the choice to not take insurance. Already we are forced to have car insurance, and yet some people go many years without an accident or a ticket, do they get their money back after so many years? No, they still have to keep paying for it.

As insurance is basically to insure for some future event of illness, you can't predict in many cases what the future will be like for you. People like me already know the future of my course of illness. Right now, I am sitting on a $57,000 medical bill that private insurance didn't pay for, and that because I had private insurance at the time, Medicare will not pay for retroactively.

I was the average American middle-class. I made the average American middle-class wages. I had a house, I had two cars and I had the middle-class dogs. I paid local taxes, I paid state taxes. I paid income taxes. I paid for Social Security. What I didn't have was $57,000 to pay for a chronic illness that I had no choice in getting and that private insurance wouldn't pay for and what the government won't pay for.

And the middle-class became poorer since then.

spacedog1973

jjkenobi
Anyone with an ounce of common sense saw it coming.

And if you have a little more common sense you can see what else is coming. The IRS is in charge of Obamacare. The IRS is already guilty of targeting conservatives and the TEA party. Guess whose names will get pushed to the top of the death panel list?

Did you evens bother to read the link? First you have to provide an argument that defends a family's decision to keep someone alive well beyond any real prospect of recovery and whether by doing so is in the interests of the patient, or exploiting the patient for selfish but understandable reasons of close relatives to keep someone alive, but for all the wrong reasons.

Death panels is an emotive term, made by simpletons, for simpletons. Any investigation into the facts tells a far different story.

Then you Sir, are misinformed about the current state, of the United States. Our government is in the process of taking control of as many aspects of the citizen's lives as possible under the lie of "helping". While that is insulting enough that we are being told we can't care for ourselves, that is only phase one.

Phase two, which will never be detailed anywhere in writing, is to destroy the citizen enemy of the state. That would be Republicans, the Tea Party, Conservatives, patriots and eventually...anyone who disagrees with this administration. We have already caught the IRS and NSA doing so. They have positioned themselves (or so they believe) where they will never lose power by creating fear in the true simpletons and offering things they can not provide. Welfare, food stamps, Obama phones, ObamaCare, etc. They will give these things until they obtain the power they wish, and then pull them all.

They will create death panels and those panels, much like the IRS targeting conservative groups, will use the NSA collected data and people will die for their views and opinions. They will offer life to some, to gain control of their loved ones. They will also kill to continue to fund their already failed systems. You see...when one system is failing, you grow another to fund it. When that one begins failing, you grow another. By the time you can't sustain the whole system...it will be too late because they will control everything.

Don't support the government...no pay check. Oppose a new law...no health care. Speak badly of a political figure...loose your license, etc.

They will use the IRS, NSA and other loyal groups to financially bring down any dissenter. They will burn the Constitution and the rights of the people. They will lock the banks, take all you earn and make every citizen a slave to their will.

Sounds nutty? Follow the plan. Give to the simpletons to stay in power, take from the businesses and workers to fund their gifts, destroy the dissenters financially and through the restrictions on already paid entitlements and control everything. Really quite simple.

reply to post by WarminIndy


Yeah but if you dont have 100,000 to go private then Isurance is the only way you will ever get any sort of decsent medical care right? Even if the treatment fails and cuts you off in a death panel thats still a round of treatment they would not have been able to afford without insurance?

crazyewok
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Yeah but if you dont have 100,000 to go private then Isurance is the only way you will ever get any sort of decsent medical care right? Even if the treatment fails and cuts you off in a death panel thats still a round of treatment they would not have been able to afford without insurance?

That depends on what you mean by decent.

Suppose you are a healthy person, but you are in a tragic car accident, which requires surgery for a damaged spleen, and multiple amputations. You will get emergency services to get you to a hospital, which every hospital gives the patient rights posted, all they really are required to do is stabilize you. We see this for pregnant women, some hospitals are not equipped to handle this so the women have to go to another hospital, because all the hospital has to do is stabilize you.

I had a small stroke about 12 years ago, in which the hospital sent me home because the emergency room doctor determined because of my age, there was no way I could have a stroke. Fortunately for me, I had taken aspirin at the beginning because I recognized the symptoms. Now this is while I had private insurance, just because you might have insurance, the medical treatment is according to the doctor. But that wasn't so decent, to say because of my age something was impossible. It took me six months to be able to walk right again, but the deficits on my right side were evident. I still don't have full fine motor skills in my right hand and arm. I was fortunate in my case. But the way the doctor treated me was not decent. I was sent home without the necessary blood thinner medication.

It really depends on the location, the patient and the doctor about how well the treatment is.

METACOMET

dashen
Well "death panel" is not a good pr phrase. Maybe" life tribunal"?

That's a doubleplus good idea!

I also like "time allotment specialists"

Or the TickTockMan.

Repent Harlequin said the Ticktockman