I will take a lie that provides healthcare access over a lie that sends troops to to unnecessary wars overseas, destroys military families (death, on-going health problems, missed milestones of their children, costs trillions of dollars (even though you really can't determine the toll of it financially).

How was it a lie? Obama believed and still believes the health care act was allowable under the commerce clause. Just because the court found it was permissible under the ability of Congress to tax, does not mean Obama lied. I know that is the news Fox is spewing out, but people really need to think for themselves. They may not agree with Obama but at least be honest about your opposition.

What's funny is that Obamacare was based off of Romneycare. The big difference? Abortions and illegals were covered under Romneycare. Who's the liar/flipflopper/dishonest politician?

It was NOT defined as a tax until the Supreme Court categorized it as a tax. Until that point it was whatever the president wanted it to be. Truly, this isn't about a TAX because most Americans don't pay anywhere near what it takes to live in this amazing country. AS for me, I'd rather see my tax money help ALL Americans get affortdable health care than to watch 80 billion a month be spent on a war in the Middle East that has gained us NOTHING. And yes, that occurred under the previous president's administration.

When will y'all realize the Republicans & Democrats are just two heads of the same snake?

I can't find it in me to vote for any politicians. Dirty money has ruined our Union.

Democrats and Republicans are two heads of the same vile viper!!

When are you libs going to get a new line? If all you have is the same tired old line about the war, then you really need to understand something.
If, as you claim, Pres Bush lied to get us into a war in Iraq, then you HAVE to believe that Pres Clinton lied to divert attention from his Impeachment Hearings to attack Iraq. If Pres Bush, who you all think is an idiot, was smart enough to fool the American people into accepting the war, then John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and so many others who saw the SAME INTEL THE PRESIDENT DID are the most gullible people in the world. Finally, if the war is illegal, the Pres Obama is breaking the law by continuing it. (Not to mention his illegal acts in Libya, but that's another issue)
I know that 9/11 is 11 years ago, but have you forgotten that the defacto government of Afghanistan attacked us? The Taliban ran that country for years prior to 2001. What would you have us do? I realize that libs would rather switch than fight, but what should we have done? (I would have used the “Turn the other check” example, but some of you would explode at the religious connection)
We are 11 year post 9/11 and Libs are returning to 11 years pre-9/11. If this is your best argument you are in trouble.

Another Fox generated lie. Pelosi did not say "you get to read the bill after it has been passed". Do people think for themselves anymore?

Sean,
What then Speaker Pelosi said in from of the camera in March 2010 was "We have to pass the bill to see what's in it." Google it and see for yourself.

Sean - And you must have another doctored NBC or MSNBC tape. Pelosi absolutely DID say that you had to pass the bill to see what's in it. Blame Fox all you wish (another tired Democrat tactic/lie) but it was NBC, MSNBC, and CBS that have been CAUGHT using doctored audio, doctored video, and forged documents in their "News" broadcasts.

Bob...link please?

Sean -Do your own research before you make statements. Just google Pelosi and her Obamacare speeches. or you can google NBC doctoring 911 tapes in the Zimmerman case, videos in the Sandusky case, MSNBC doctoring tapes in Andrea Mitchell's show about Romney, etc. "The truth is out there"

Wait. Ok, so you think it's ok to have people dying for the sake of capitalism in healthcare? That's REALLY good. Yep - profits off the dying. Good indeed.

My friend's son's employer just announced that they will be discontinuing their health care benefits and opting to pay the Obama Healthcare TAX because it is cheaper....that's some peace of mind. One of many to come.

Can we all get nice cars and houses too? That would be cool. And maybe we should all have boats because I know that my peace of mind would be a lot better if I had a boat.

k, you son's employer stinks. Your son should seek out a better employer, one who will offer better health benefits. See how it works? I think the GOP calls it "competition - the thing that made America great".

Wow! So much for compassion being the motivation for the left's socialist policies. K shares that his/her son is going to lose their insurance and an Obama supporter of this horrid bill jumps in to say, "seek out better employment." If that were the answer, the Dems wouldn't have needed this bill to begin with. Maybe K's son could do so more successfully if the pipeline wasn't killed and the 30+ jobs bills that the house has passed were not dead in the senate.

K's son is soon to be one of the less fortunate without health insurance, and what does that mean? Mocking from Dems if he doesn't drink the Dem kool-aid and parrot their nanny state solutions.

franking, isn't competition the GOP mantra? If one employer doesn't offer health benefits and another does, who do you suppose will attract the better employees?

What employer is this? My guess is Imaginary & Sons Fabulists.

Sean, there is already competition in employment, athough there is less of in Obama's poor economy. Competition in health insurance would be freeing them to sell across state lines, and allowing individuals to take the same tax deductions employers can take for premiums. Before Obamacare, both parties agreed that we need to move away from employer provided, not do even more to encourage it.

But who knows what any Democrat believes, as you certainly can't trust them to tell the truth. Before the election, Obama was against a mandate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoSnqofelsQ

It's not a tax if you're insured. it's a tax if you still choose not to be.

The government has already done this in the past with far less furor. Let me give an example: homeowner tax credits. This is essentially a reverse tax on non-home owners. If you don't own a home, you don't get the credit.
Same with child tax credits. Those without kids don't get the credits - that's essentially a tax for not having children, isn't it?

Yet health care, everyone gets their panties in a bunch. If I were them, I'd be happy. Most of America is horribly out of shape and needs insurance anyway for all the diseases they inflict on themselves not genetics.

I'm also really not sure why some people are calling this a single payer system. I'm not 100% sure of course; but my current understanding is it's simply not the case. It's reorganizing the existing health care system, and subsidizing folks who can't afford health care now. Requiring tax payers to foot the bill for this, instead of much, much more when these same people walk into ER's and cost us far, far more.

Prevention = way cheaper then reactionary medicine.

I don't "love" this solution, but it's unquestionably better then what exists now. Only when it was passed did the Republicans get all worried like "Wait, we can fix this better..." right. Because they were sooo motivated before PPAHA.

of course, none of us will really know how this plays out until 5 years down the road. Assuming it doesn't get repealed.

Buzz, the court also said abortion is a constitutional right. Do you agree with that too?

Deeg: For me, it's a cost/benefit analysis above and beyond the morality of it all. Preventative medicine is far, far less expensive for us as a taxpaying community then reactionary.

This system will better mitigate risk in the longer term. We'll have less people out there choosing to be uninsured. Less people having to choose between insurance or food for the family.

Although there is no lack of individuals abusing the system, believe me, I know this - the reality is they are getting treated at hospitals everywhere regardless of what we do. Better to mitigate the losses through subsidizing insurance for them.

You want you to pay less for healthcare? Eat to live, don't live to eat. Read about obesity and the true cost it inflicts on taxpayers.

Deeg, it is not hard to understand the baffles. If one receives most of their news from Fox News, it has been shown they are amongst the most uninformed television viewers. That is not an opinion just fact. Fox has been one of the most vocal opponents of the Affordable Care Act that Fox routinely describes as Obamacare. Thus, their viewers believe what they hear without thinking for themselves, in my opinion. I am sure Fox would say the same of viewers of MSNBC.

The problem I find with most viewers of Fox is that they don't see the corporate dollars at stake behind Fox's views. Two brothers, the Kochs, will spend $400 million through their Super-Pac to elect Mitt Romney and defeat Obama. I find it unreasonable to believe that the Koch Brothers would not have significant influence over a Romney administration. Corrupt, nah, can't be as it is all legal (Citizens United) and as long as you don't "coordinate". Funny concept, "corporations are people too my friend."

Corey: Exactly. So many of these raging people are probably individual albatrosses to the system unnecessarily.

It's one thing if you're sick or have ailments through no fault of your own. It's entirely something else if you are 40 lbs overweight, or smoking against doctor's orders, etc.

Polly: Romney really has no choice in the matter - doesn't he?

I find it ironic that Democrats don't understand federalism.

I didn't imply anything of the kind. The MA state plan wasn't before the court.

However, they did strike part of the Medicaid demands to the states based on separation of powers.

In Polly's hateful and un-American rant that attempts to bash others simply for holding a different point of view, she mentions "drink that kool aid." Please learn some history. That idiom is a reference to the Jonestown massacre. The Rev. Jim Jones was a "social gospel" left-wing socialist, so it's pretty silly to try and make it applicable to those not buying the socialist line.

He thought he knew better about what was best for others, too.

Buzz, the Super Pacs alone are expected to spend nearly $1 billion dollars on behalf of Mitt Romney. George Soros is not in that league.

The above does not even consider what Romney raises on his own. You are comparing hand grenades to bombs. Unlike you to mislead on the facts.

Go to OpenSecrets at http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=
to see the spending going on. I exported the table provided and totaled the columns by conservative/liberal receipts.

Fact is Conservative Pacs have raised over $163,000,000 as of July 4, 2012 and liberals have raised just over $50,000,000. Just simple facts.

Happy 4th to you.

Sheldon Adelson is being investigated by the FBI for bribing the Chinese mafia.

Yes, and the libraries are all going to be closed because they are the most socialist program going. Where else can people with no money get access to books and the Internet for free? Please....get over this socialist system propaganda.

The second you cross Godwin's Law is the moment your argument loses any credibility.

John......stretttttttttttttch

This nationwide scam is not about healthcare...it's about power and money...dress it up any way you want but the bottom line will ALWAYS be the same...greed driven corporate profits for those that finance and buy elections...

So your solution here is that it's PREFERABLE to have millions of Americans go without healthcare because we don't have enough doctors?

My solution is to fix our government BEFORE attempting something as monumental as government controlled, forced healthcare.
Until campaign finance reform is accomplished our Country will remain severly broken

Buck: You and I will ALWAYS agree about Campaign Finance Reform. I was a sad panda when I saw the Supreme's shot down the Montana high court's ruling (essentially challenging this).

I assume you have some evidence supporting this simple, factual reason?

Well said John, when the competition opportunity was gutted from the plan as a result of political maneuvering, I decided it was tainted severly and will take tons of time and money to implement. It will take at least 10 years to produce the family care doctors that are needed, no one seems to talk about that. This social experiment does not have all of the pieces in place to begin successfully and will end up being far more expensive than projected in my opinion.

Do socialist do social experiments...?

As of 2014, all members of Congress will be required to purchase their health plans through the Exchanges established under the ACA. So they WILL be affected by this law, just like the rest of us.

If someone kisses the Frog, will he turn into the Prince above. Same DNA apparently.

The penalty for freely choosing not to participate is a tax.

My insurance company pays $65 per visit for non-specialist care and up to twice that for specialists. A typical contact time with All health care providers in the office is 10 minutes, perhaps half of that with the doctor. On an hourly basis, medical practitioners are well-imbued for their expensive education and their expertise, even when mal_practice insurance costs are factored in.

Thought about doctors? REALLY? You mean the ones living in exclusive neighborhoods, driving Beemers, Mercedes and Caddy's? The one's making enough to send their kids to private school and expensive colleges? Yeah, I feel REAL sorry for them. BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Alrighty then - you go ahead 'volunteer mom' and fight for those poor doctors and their rights. Hysterical.

You miss the point. If they are willing to accept less from insurance then they shouldn't be screwing the rest of us with higher costs. The cost should be the same. And then support tort relief so that malpractice premiums can go down (half of the judgement goes to attorneys - get them out of the equation and premiums go down).

Tort reform is something that's been long, long overdue.

Right on Ronald and Tom!

My family doctor charges $157 for a 15 minute visit. Sorry, sweets, that's ripping off patients.

If Americans are forced by the government to participate or be punished by a penalty tax...socialism prevails...

Buck: If that's your definition of socialism, then this country's been socialist for a long time now.

Prefer Obamanism...?

That's fascism.

Amy, go read the definition of fascism and write a report. Such garbage.

Obamanism = pre socialism...Happy 4th to you Paul !

Buck - you give educated responses and I read what you write. But, Socialism groups in the US are offended when Obama is called a Socialist because they say he is far from it.

Obamnism is the economic policy of redistributing wealth under the guise of "social justice" using regulations and federal agencies to bypass unpopular policies in congress.

Obama is as much a "socialist" as trickle down economics believers are "oligarchists".

Neither is factually accurate.

Pre-socialism....heading in that direction... Obamacare is in fact a social experiment, the outcome is yet to be seen....there aren't enough doctors for it to provide preventative care for all Americans and there won't be enough for quite some time.

Well then I fully expect doctors to get paid more, and more rich kids will be heading to medical school.

Demand eventually meets supply.

I'm still not quite sure how you're comparing a national health care program with a social experiment. Personally, I agree with Mitt Romney here, he talks about the individual mandate in 2007:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/14/romney_in_07_the_individual_mandate_is_ultimate_conservatism.html

Again, I'm not suggesting the PPAHA is perfect. It's much better then what exists now, and it's not like Republicans were racing to reform Healthcare pre - 101st congress, so...they lose. They're clearly bitter about it, too.

Obamacare offers no incentive for new med students to study preventative healthcare.
Specialized medicine pays much more and that is where the majority of students are at this point....they need the big bucks to pay for the education with best returns.....

Buck: I agree - see that's the whole problem with the existing system! Somewhere along the way, when you and I grew up, healthcare changed - for the worse and more expensive. We went from a system where prevention was more important, and family doctors actually were the doctors we were treated by, to a system where 'the family doctor' is just a gateway with a pad of referrals, and everyone's an overpaid specialist. This drove even the most honest health care system fees up, never mind the greed driven morally bankrupt companies.

Doctors will take these new roles when they find out they can't find work in "the big bucks". Med school is expensive, and even more expensive when you aren't working.
Nurses are always in need one way or the other.
Preventative medicine is finally catching hold with companies like Kaiser and BC/BS. These companies under some plans actually pay you to get a wellness screening.

I completely agree it'll be a slow process, but if we get this country's healthcare management more centralized, costs will go down dramatically - whether it's under Obamacare, or something similar.

Perhaps the reverse is true, the minority (Republicans), are the minority apparently for a reason. They don't get enough votes? Maybe Democrats and Independents don't want Republican garbage?

FIFA...actually Democrats just love handouts. A lot of people in Ho.Co. get free rent, food, utilities, cash, vehicles and healthcare. The root cause is a sense of entitlement. Unfortunately, the middle class is going to be paying the biggest share to support those who don't want to work. Why would they want to move up when they get everything handed to them? Take a drive by some of the subsidized housing in town - they have more bedrooms than me and new minivans to boot!

I know a lot of Republicans that love handouts too. Big handouts in the form of Farm Subsidies.

Ooh, got a nibble on the line! :-))

@JJ - you miss my point entirely. You and many others like you believe entitlements are only things like welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. You resent the fact that these people are getting stuff for "free" and you don't. You work you butt off to make ends meet and why should "they" get stuff for free? That probably sums up your position, true? And it is Democrats who want to take your stuff and give it to lazy no good for anything bums. I'm just guessing at that.

You are angry about that and I understand that.

I will concede there are some low life's with a scam or an angle at that end of the wealth scale. I probably would not want to trade with them, though, it is just not me.

What you miss and most never talk about, are the scams that are had at the other end of the wealth scale. The very rich (people and corporations) with their attorneys, accountants and lobbyists manage to get there own handouts through the tax system and get you to believe it is okay because they are the "Job Creators". They believe they should be held in high regard. No. 2 "Creator" they are.

The tax code is full of giveaways to the very wealthy. If you inherit $10 million you can go your entire life without paying any SSA tax, Medicare tax or income tax and still earn $400,000 per year.

Some system, huh?

Whats pathetic is Republicans who seem to think we didn't have national healthcare all along. it's called the ER.
I am supremely confident Obamacare will function more efficiently then the system in place previously.
Republicans are just crying they got beat to the punch on their own initiative, the initiative their candidate actually implemented as governor, by a Democrat.

@ JGault: except in Carroll County

@FIFA writes "The tax code is full of giveaways to the very wealthy. If you inherit $10 million you can go your entire life without paying any SSA tax, Medicare tax or income tax and still earn $400,000 per year."

If you inherit $10 million there will be inheritance tax at both federal and state levels.

That might be a relevant comment if we were talking about a government-run medical system, but we're not. Under the ACA, we are (unfortunately, in my view) keeping the current private-insurance system, we're just allowing more people access to that system. (Talk about a handout -- it's like Christmas morning for the insurance companies!)

Thanks for posting the truth - we're already short approx. 160,000 doctors to service all who demand into health care. Who would want to go into medicine when everything you do is monitored by somebody from the government. You don't offer care for 30 million more by wrecking it for everyone - that's a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Wait until seniors see what will be done to Medicare...500 billion gutting from that system to move those dollars into Obamacare and then the death panels kick in - that's the panel that will be appointed to act indendently and they are charged with finding the 500 billion. You think that won't result in limitations on care...long waits and telling old folks to take a pill for the pain and go away?

Let them die! You predict the future Escariot, but many others believe otherwise. Please give your links to facts that support your opinions. The sky is falling, I just don't believe you.

The posts from Karl and you are the scare tactics employed by those who benefit from the system as is. I will credit them, effective propaganda.

Did you ever think shortages may have something to do with societal priorities, too?When reality shows pay better than healthcare jobs, people glorify sports over being a teacher, karaoke shows rank higher than good grades. Those are our 'values' now.There is a lot more than just policy.

I agree with you Corey, societal priorities have become sick and skewed. I also agree with you, Escariot....I work in the health care profession too and I see a lot of things that are not right. It's not right to let someone die just because they are 60+ years old and therefore not a valued human life. So much is messed up in this world.

Let's not forget one of the primary drivers of health care cost increases and that's the onslaught of lawsuits and resultant costs in insurance that must be carried by doctors and hospitals. Why is there nothing in Obamacare to address the ridiculous overuse of the courts? I'll tell you exactly why - the trial lawyers association has democrats in thier back pocket.

You're kidding, right Karl? Yeah, let's complain that Obama didn't enact tort reform and cure cancer while passing this 1 bill. Let's also blame democrats for the lack of tort reform in this country since they're so obviously aligned with millionaire lawyers and republicans are so powerless to stand up to democrats and all their millionaire supporters. How much koolaid does it take for that to make sense in your head?

This is about the crafting of Obamacare as legislation supposedly to provide care to all while simultaneously reducing costs. That math doesn't work...and if the persons who crafted the bill cared about a fair and just way to reduce costs they would have put something in the bill to bring down those costs - the fact that there isn't is the fault of the persons who wrote the bill - there were no republicans involved. All in all reigning in the lawyers is of lessor concern to me than destroying our medical system as it exists based upon a series of lies and distortions.

There's no evidence that lawsuits are the primary driver of health care costs. The most generous studies put it at about 2-5%.

Buzz, you are simply wrong. Raising money for Super Pacs has nothing to do with performance. It is simply will the candidate support the contributor's message.

"we have patients in our hospitals from other countries, how many USA residents do you know that travel to europe and canada for healthcare?"

LOL, are you serious? Please google that and be shocked at how little you know.
e.g. "Experts say the trend in global health care has just begun. Next year alone, an estimated 6 million Americans will travel abroad for surgery, according to a 2008 Deloitte study. 'Medical care in countries such as India, Thailand and Singapore can cost as little as 10 percent of the cost of comparable care in the United States,' the report found."

Honestly, you have to be making a joke that's going over my head. Right?

Don't know that much about surgeries or other procedures, but I do know that day to day care; the medical care most families need is diminished in socialized systems. In Germany and Canada...you want to see a doctor right away you pay cash. You can languish for weeks with chronic pain before you can get in anywhere in Germany. Given that pain is natures way of telling you something is wrong how does waiting help anybody? Waiting can certainly equal death for certain cancers, etc. You can't make it work where you add people to a system, while you limit availability and witness a reduction in the availability particularly of family care physicians. People will die...plain and simple.

Escariot, studies have now shown that treatment for prostate cancer for older individuals do not result in longer lives. That is a fact, you know it.

Why is our health system rated lower than most industrialized countries? Your answer?

Medical tourism is primarily about plastic surgery - it's all done on a cash basis whether somewhere else or here in the US - it has nothing to do with health care or chronic illness or preexisting conditions...nada, zip, zilch. Nor is it about people seeking better medicine; it's about having insurance in the US for which doesn't cover rhinoplasty or breast inlargement - nor should it. That's a dishonest and misleading example.

And the dirty, nearly evil truth is Dr. Emmanuel doesn't believe the elderly are as deserving of a health care dollar as a 40 year old. Therefore, decisions about that dollar need to ration how it's spent and as the patient ages we must make cost analysis choices as to whether that life matters. In otherwords sometimes they should go home and die.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html

Quote:
"However, other things are rarely equal—whether to save one 20-year-old, who might live another 60 years, if saved, or three 70-year-olds, who could only live for another 10 years each—is unclear." In fact, Dr. Emanuel makes a clear choice: "When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get changes that are attenuated (see Dr. Emanuel's chart nearby).

Sure, the Koch Brothers who are expected to spend $400,000,000 on Super Pacs loyal to Romney,they do not do so based on Obama's "performance". Instead they wish unfettered access to do what they think is good for their business. Want more? You chase ghosts which is precisely what they want you to do. Look inside carefully, are you a follower or a leader Buzz?

Not sure about unions, but you are flat wrong (and clearly just parroting talking points) about Congress. As of 2014, the only health plans available to members of Congress will be those created by the ACA or offered through an Exchange established under the ACA. (Source: §1312 of the ACA.)

Actually, the posts show up across many of the Patch's affilated sites and I don't post on the Towson Patch. I use both computer and IPad. You are wrong, sir. For elderly males there is no discernible difference in life expectancy for prostate cancer regardless of treatment.

Oops, you are now going to the gutter in name calling. Do we really need to go there. I will if you continue, sir. At a snail's pace. Please stop, it is below you.

Honestly, once the system is fully integrated, employees will be BETTER off not getting insurance through companies. That's half the problem with the system as it exists today - lack of portability. Even Mitt Romney agrees.

Of course, you'll need to pay them more as independent contractors, or you may find yourself with some pretty steady turnover.

Good luck to you either way.

Ah the imaginary small business owner. I don't suppose you'd tell me what business you're in, or the name of your company.

LMAO. Another 'Socialist claim'. Hilarious. Social welfare has been a part of this country for generations.

You want to see a socialist? Look in France right now. The new guy (name escapes me ) is threatening to propose a 75% tax on all income over a million dollars over there.

Now THAT is a socialist :)

You know what's Bankrupting the country? playing world police for 15 years. Obama is finally getting us out of this role.

question Tony: So your sister abuses the system. What do you suggest? We completely cut her off and let her perish? Take away her liberties to smoke cigarettes? Take away other liberties? You know, the thing you folks seem to be crying about while you gladly gave away twice as many liberties under the previous president?

We already have socialized medicine long before this. Now is the time to actually get these people covered so it costs US less then it does currently, under the 'Hospital National healthcare plan" that we've been living with now.

additionally, what's bankrupting Europe isn't one single individual thing. The closest I could objectively come to one would be the fact that the entirety of Southern Europe produces/manufacturers next to nothing. All of the major manufacturing is in Northern Europe and Germany. They are managing better.

The causes of Greece's problem differs from Italy, and they differ greatly from Spain. There are, of course, ancillary similarities (just like with here in the States, pre Obama) but the core causes are different. Spain's problems are similar in nature to ours, the housing bubble destroyed them. Greece, it's primarily a situation where literally EVERYONE tax evades, and they've got nothing like the IRS there. In Greece if you aren't skipping out on taxes, you're in the minority.

If there was ever a shining example of entitlement nation, it's Greece. Even to this day, they act like they've done nothing wrong, and Germany should give them everything. It's ridiculous.

People not paying for insurance - that can AFFORD it - have kept *my* rates high for 46 years. Time to make everyone of the "super heroes" that think they will never get sick or use the ER as a family doctor to start paying into the system. Period. Sorry about your sister, but she is in the small majority. Most people work and earn a living, and there is a rather large portion of them that don't bother to get coverage on themselves or their kids (which is actually child neglect).

I asked you to analyze a different issue, when will you?

To answer your question, some followers do write under their real name, some do not.

I believe you have certain political positions that make you a follower. I believe you sometimes attempt to lead on a topic.

What I believe I see, is that on national topics, you are a follower. Generally towing the Republican establishment line. Those are my opinions. However you rarely write on national topics, but slip comments in every once in awhile.

Here is my challenge to you, write a blog on the impact of the Citizens United decision and Super-Pacs (both the anonymous and public type). Be objective. See what you come up with.

writing style LOL you are not a judge jury or elected official and only one promo in a whole career so sad YET AND STILL our little buzzy

FYI Escariot the United States Postal Service hasn't been run by the federal government for several years now. Hmmm, I thought everyone knew that by now. They are not only self-sustaining (or trying to be) but for the billions of dollars that they have to give to the feds, for what exactly I have no idea.

Also, unfortunately due to several health issues I've seen many doctors and NOT ONE has every had a problem with accepting Medicare, nor have I had to wait more than a couple of days at most to get an appointment. Additionally, every single one of them is in favor of the AHA. So put that in your pipe and smoke it.

These are according to the house ways and means committee.
1) 156% increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco 2) Obamacare individual mandate excise tax 3) Obamacare employer mandate tax 4) Obamacare surtax on investment income 5) Obamacare excise tax on comprehensive health insurance plans 6) Obamacare hike in medicare payroll tax 7) Obamacare medicine cabinet tax 8) Obamacare hsa withdrawl tax hike 9) Obamacare flexible spending account cap 10) Obamacare tax on medical device manafacturers 11) Medical itemized deduction from 7.5 to 10% of AGI being deductible by taxpayers 12) Obamacare tax on indoor tanning services 13) Obamacare elimination of tax deduction for employer provided retirement rx drug coverage in coordination with medicare part d 14) obamacare bluecross/blueshield tax hike 15) obamacare excise tax on charitable hospitals 16) obamacare tax on innovator drug companies 17) obama tax on health insurers 18) obmacare lime of exec salaries of 500,000 for healthcare ceos 19) obamacare employer reporting of insurance on W-2 forms
20) obamacare "black liquor" tax hike 21) obamacare codification of the "economic substance doctrine". Here is that link to the 83 percent of doctors that were polled that would consider leaving the medical field. http://investmentwatchblog.com/latest-survey-83-of-doctors-consider-leaving-field-if-obamacare-becomes-law/

Escariot, thank you for the link. I can only go at these one at a time since you have listed many. Let's start with the survey. The Doctors Medical Patient Association which conducted the survey states the following and I quote:

"The survey was conducted by fax and online from April 18 to May 22, 2012. DPMAF obtained the office fax numbers of 36,000 doctors in active clinical practice, and 16, 227 faxes were successfully delivered. Doctors were asked to return their completed surveys by fax, or online at a web address included in the faxed copy. Browser rules prevented doctors from filing duplicate surveys, and respondents were asked to provide personal identification for verification. The response rate was 4.3% for a total of 699 completed surveys."

You as a man of science would probably agree that the above is not a statistically valid survey and thus the results you quote are questionable at best. This is my point about statistics and links. I had to work to get the truth but here it is. I don't know if you intentionally misled people or not, I hope not. I will always question your opinions but I hope to never have to question your truthfulness.

On to more.

Here is the link as well:

http://www.dpmafoundation.org/physician-attitudes-on-medicine.html

83% are leaving the medical field? This sounds like a lot of high-pay job opportunities that will open up. This will decrease the unemployment level. Win-Win.

You incorrectly state that the tax increases affect everyone. Here we go.

1) the tobacco tax raises it from .39 cents to $1.01 per pack. Only 20% of Americans now smoke, I would say this is a good thing.
2) charging you for not having insurance, a good thing in my mind.
3) having more than 50 employees and not providing 50% of insurance coverage also a good thing.
4) Surtax on investment income only applies to individuals making over $200,000 and couples over $250,000. This will catch wealthy people whose sole source of income is investment income. They have avoided medicare tax for their entire lives.
5) The excise tax on comprehensive insurance plans or "cadillac" plans affects individual policies costing over $10,000 +/- for individuals and $27,000 +/- for families. These amounts are indexed for inflation. ...... to be continued.

.... continued

6) as in #5 above, affecting individuals with earnings over $200,000 and couples over $250,000
7) Interesting caricature - this means HSA and flexible spending accounts cannot be used for over the counter medications except insulin
8) HSA withdrawal penalty means if you take HSA money out for non-health reasons you have a 20% penalty instead of 10%
9) Flexible spending account limit will be $2,500 thus reducing rich folks from putting in a lot of money.
10) Medical devices subject to a 2.3% excise tax, a new tax. Items retailing for less than $100 are exempt.
... to be continued.

Escariot - I get that you are not fond of President BARACK Obama or his policies but for crying out loud at least have some respect for the office. I never referred to Daddy Bush or Son Bush by some other name that was not their own, until now. Knock it off already, it's just plain rude and disrespectful. But, perhaps that's how you roll.

Escariot, you know better than that. This is not a random sample. This is like ESPN voting. Only those who respond are counted? C'mon, you are better than that.

I am getting there to all of your questions/points.

FIFA - you guys paid by Obama to sit there an prop up this pile of excrement called Obamacare? Give it a rest - we can start with the known assumption that most doctors hate it. It would defy logic to think anybody would support working in a field in which the government expects to have a thumb on everything you do. I personally know of 3 cases where children of friends of mine are being discouraged to now go into medicine. It will happen - there's no question it will happen and the quality of care given the structure of this behemoth will go right into the crapper.

Karl - "we can start with the known assumption that most doctors hate it." is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen written, "the known assumption". LMAO. That belongs in the Hall of Shameful Writing.

Because if you have talented children there are other fields where the regulation wouldn't be as oppressive as medicine is doomed to become. There are other positive things to do in your life besides becoming a doctor...that's a pretty myopic half thought out statement on your part.

Shanna: Gutting 500B from medicare means that either care will be limited (you'll have fewer patients) or they'll reduce the amount of the medicare payments. I'm sure your clinic or office has a budget...assume within the next 4 years your payments come in at a 30% reduction from what they currently are...you think you'll all have your jobs? You think you'll all get raises? You think you'll all spend as much time with those patients? What will the managers in your office do; consider they might just get rid of 30% of the staff because they'd have to.

30 million new patients and 0 new Doctors. What a great start!

Hooray for the latest nonsensical comment! How on earth do you figure 30 million people are "new patients"?? You do realize people without heath insurance still seek treatment, right? They just bankrupt themselves paying for a preexisting condition of seek care at an ER on the taxpayer's dime. Who on earth could be against fixing either of those major issues?

Again, (I'm pretty sure that both you and Flipper are one and the same), you assume the only way to address any of the issues you raise is with a total overhaul of our existing system via Obamacare. Doing that only puts everyone's health care at risk.

Are you talking to me? You think Obamacare is a total overhaul of the healthcare system? That's a pretty unique opinion. I think people on both sides admit there is plenty this law doesn't address that still needs to be addressed. That, however, certainly won't happen anytime soon w/this Congress and Republicans continuing to double-down on being the do-nothing party.

This is not a start to improve healthcare...it's the beginning of a very expensive social experiment that will lead to disaster...

Does anyone seriously think that people will stop being doctors? I don't think that Obamacare is the end, but the beginning, imperfect as it may be. We have to make real changes in our healthcare system. And if anyone doesn't think we need changes, then you have never had a serious health issue.

Jessica D, most nurses make over 60k a year yet we have vast shortages of nurses do to nurses leaving floors and going into administrative positions and research. Why would it be odd for the same to happen to doctors?

Escariot, why are nurses leaving their positions? What kinds of nurses? While I am expect doctors or nurses in particularly high-stress areas (oncology, OB/GYN, etc) to find other career paths after a period time, I would not expect to find those who practice preventative medicine, or other lower-stress areas, to have as high attrition rate.

60K is not a lot of money for the work that many nurses do. (I know that will be a vastly unpopular statement!)

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2010/03/16/obamacare-driving-doctors-out-of-medicine/

Quote:
The study also shows how badly Obamacare supporters have lost the debate among physicians (closely tracking the popular numbers):

Physician Support of Health Reform in General
• 62.7% of physicians feel that health reform is needed but should be implemented in a more targeted, gradual way, as opposed to the sweeping overhaul that is in legislation.
• 28.7% of physicians are in favor of a public option.
• 3.6% of physicians prefer the “status quo” and feel that the U.S. health care system is best “as is.

Is your head exploding? These are facts...the funny thing about you, FICA and that Jag character is you bluster, but eventually when your talking points won't explain or fully refute you run off and predictably.

Karl sir, my name is FIFA, thank you.

You 28 month old survey is just that. Did you read your own post? Hah!

Only 3.6% of doctors believe the current system should stay! 62.7% feel health care reform is going too fast. Thanks for helping make our argument. At least is is not a "known assumption".

Who cares...63% don't support Obamacare and would prefer we move more slowly and incrementally. You're like a kid who sticks they're fingers in their ears when they don't like the truth. La, la, la, la, la...if you keep saying it loud enough all you'll ever hear is your own distorted realities.

@Karl - Frankly I don't give a care what doctors think about healthcare legislation. That's a fact.

Media matters? That Soros funded group?

Karl, I just quoted your "facts". Sucks doesn't it?

Pulling the "if you were a good Christian" card is as knee jerk as the race card so skip it because we all recognize it as merely a talking point tool. Besides that entire phoney premise assumes there are no other fixes for the health care issues other than Obamacare. There are...many and most could be done gradually and over time. You don't throw the baby out with the bath water...you don't turn all health care into crappy care for everyone trying to provide it to just a few more. That makes no sense whatsoever.

There is a very concise difference between empathy and stupidity. By overloading the healthcare system with taxes and more patients than can be handled the healthcare for the overall country is lessened. So your idea of being a good christian is to provide poor care for everyone, instead of gradually altering the system to ensure better health outcomes? Competition in a free market capitalistic society breeds innovation and better outcomes. If not for the comeptitive tech market and people like steve jobs we would not have those little tech gadgets that people so love and cannot seem to function without. How is giving your neighbor lack of access to doctors because they cannot get an appointment a criteria of complassion? Finally PaTayTay, would Jesus cut 500 billion from the healthcare of the elderly like Obamacare? Didn't he talk about respecting thy mother and father and elders of the society? Get back to me on those points.

Escariot - there isn't a line of 30 million people outside of a healthcare door. They are "in the system" already. And you say "respect thy mother and father and elders of society" - President Obama, like President Bush, are fathers - so respect them.

It indeed will be the elderly who pay the dearest price for Obamacare. I find it astonishig that so little is being said about the death panels, the opinion of people like Emmanuel who was used extensively to help draft the bill...he's openly suggested older people's lives have less value than the elderly who in his eyes should nearly just go to the woods and die. It's a hideous evil lack of compassion there that is beyond amoral. The most aggregious thing is the AARP led they're own members by the nose just to ensure they'd pick up the extended medigap...it's worth billions to them. There was so much collusion and bribery to get to where we are today can't imagine how some of the players look at themselves in the mirror - but we can't give up. We have to resist Obamacare because it's really not about medicine; it's about an enormous overreach into controlling our lives.

Karl, have you read that portion of the bill? I have. It s not a "death panel". That is a right wing talking point. Please go read it.

It's the Independent Payment Advisory Board and they are charged with finding the 500B Obama used to balance the costs for Obamacare. They are appointed and act independently of Congress. 500B is a lotta change...how do you think they get there? Don't tell me finding fraud because they just spend 100 million investing fraud and found 77 million to find just a little over 7 thousand.

http://www.policymed.com/2012/04/medicare-fraud-the-case-of-hhs-spending-77-million-to-find-7591-in-fraud.html

That has nothing to do with IPAB being tasked with finding 500B in Medicare savings to help fund Obamacare. Stay on point.

Maybe there is an underlying plan for population control...they would never tell us about that...

...so you act immature because others do? Try being the better person - that, my friend, is a win-win.

Wow. Just when you think it can't be any worse someone literally outlines and defends the moral validity of "but he did it first, so it's okay!" Your mom must be so proud. Not to mention you're the only one here insulting "Dubya." So because you insulted our last president, that gives you the authority to insult this one too? So glad to hear it. You really enjoyed the 4th, I'm sure. Such a patriot.

Exactly where I was I can't recall, but I do remember it. I didn't find it funny then or now. You are really assuming a lot about me. The fact that you have such a lack of respect for the highest office is reprehensible. But, defend if you must.

If it's good enough for your hero Sarah Palin it should be good enough for you.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20000152-503544.html

Hey Steve - she went to Canada for health care as a child in the 60s and you're using that to suggest today's Canadian health care is so great. I'll remind you your like minded little friend told me 2 year old information wasn't valid so certainly 50 year old information isn't the best source for reality.

Like any policy, it needs to be started and you work the kinks out - that is how things work in the real world. The Republicans, and Democrats are no better, do not want to work with the President on anything. Go see Congressman Boehner on what he said when President Obama took office. Imagine your employees telling you this when you start a new job.

Someone once said "the best way to get out of a hole is to stop digging". Karl, put the shovel down. It is okay, you are not a terrible person, misguided perhaps. ;-))

You got those fingers in your ears again? Continually proclaiming your own sense of superior argument does not make it so or doth you protest too much? Not quite sure if you have an inability to fully comprehend or are so blinded by idealogy you'd rather shoot yourself in the foot than put down your flag.

I'm still waiting for an educated response regarding where the doctors are coming from... we have hit a dead end with this very valid point.
Haven't seen a link posted, or any factual information regarding this massive obstacle..

I'm not done with you yet, Escariot. Had to take a break!

Of course not; they regurgitate thier assigned talking points and when you have them by the truth they run back under the rock.

Still waiting Frank....................

Get the dunce cap - the research was centered on people who had already developed Type 2 diabetes.

And what a quality of life? Amputation, dialysis, kidney transplants are not always inevitable outcomes.

Considering that i can read paps and breast fna's I do not suggest disregarding the american cancer society's guidelines concerning them. My point however is that the bill and its consequences are labeled as a cost saver, and that is wholeheartedly false and wrong. Add up the costs of preventative care, hiring irs agents and government workers to implement, monitor, maintain the obamacare act and you find an unsustainable monstrosity that will bankrupt the nation and lead to rationed care.

Read the study Jessica concerning preventative care, then find your space in the corner.

Temperance - you are so right!! I have a Medicare Advantage plan with Universal Health and the do the same thing to me ! Plust they just check in by phone a few times a year just to see how things are going. When I switched from regular Medicare to this company it was the smartest thing I did.

It's kind of nice knowing that they are looking out for me by way of their bottom line. Kind of ironic isn't it?

Read the above post by FIFA. I guess those studies are ridiculous.

I hear you Buzz. But as a former practicing CPA who did audits of large corporations and was trained to be objective and deal with facts, I always attempt to be objective in my analysis. However, I am a registered voter and have always voted. For me not to believe how I vote affects my objectivity at times would be unrealistic.

I would submit the same applies to you.

"Do the Right Thing" by who? I'm sorry but I've been around long enough and have been an educated voter for many years and most of the politicians wouldn't know the "Right Thing" for their constiuents if it bit them on the ass. I can only think of very few these days that are even worthy of my vote. And that friends cuts across all political lines.

Glad we got that one straight..!

I don't fall for the liberal sanctimonious victim stuff, and I don't owe you a thing. Unless you time travelled forward in time to read Escariot's post on July 6th, you mentioned kool aid drinking all on your own on June 30th. This is the quote I responded to:

"I'm so sick of hearing from the nutcases that drink that Fox kool aid. Too bad some of us actually not only have common sense but have a better understanding of how AHA will work."

That was part of a post posted by "Polly" on June 30th.

Try using some of that superior "common sense."

I'll give you a hint, it's #11 from the top of the posts (not the replies to posts) which stick out a little on the left.

LOL, when you thought I was mistaken, you thought I owed you an apology "big time." In your acknowledgement that you were wrong, you get crude and gauche. Do you always use those kinds of terms when talking to younger women? Do you kiss your grandchildren with those lips?

I hope your plan covers Thorazine, because your need for it is the only thing you're making a good case for.

That one simple post sums up the character of Polly, and her hypocrisy. First of all, i am independent that equally criticizes repubs and dems that do not legislate in accordance with the will of their constituents. Secondly, even if i was gay how would you explain your level of intolerance to those that are homosexual Polly? You accuse Palin of being intolerant yet you exhibit the exact same behavior that you allegedly abhor from the right. In other words, your posts and opinons are mere drivel coming from a bigoted person ruled by hatred for gays. I may disagree with gay marriage but i am not a bigoted person that calls posters "butt buddies".

Well Polly when all else fails just start name calling and cussing that is what you libs learn on NBC,CBS and MBCLSD. When the facts come out that is what you do.

It certainly is widely used. I just pointed out how silly it is when socialists use it.

It sure was, but that doesn't change the fact that the origin of the expression is rooted in the Jim Jones tragedy, when people willingly drank it or were forced to. It's those who like Obamacare who are drinking it now.

You conveniently fail to address the fact that the cost and quality of care subsequently went down in Mass. You also do not mention how Obama sent stimulus money to Mass to bail it out because the cost of such care was not sustainable. And you also missed the wealth of studies that indicate that preventative care does not save money, but it actually costs more in the long run. The fact that the doctors in your family applaud less care is a statement that reflects their character and not that of the majority of physicians polled and those that have spoke on record. Did doctors Emanuel and Berwick advise Romeny in Mass?

Good morning Escariot.

Using your same analogy, heart by-pass surgery does not save money either. Nor does radiation or chemotherapy treatments.

Most curious Escariot, your arguments could be considered that you would endorse "death panels", which would espouse saving money as a tool for determining care?

Preventive care practice will require thousands of doctors that simply don't exist....
The horse is in the gate with a broken leg...
Like sitting on the toilet with tissue no where in sight...

Buck, where your argument falls down is that preventative care equals less emergency room care, less doctors & nurses in the emergency room.

Most preventative care does not not have to be done by a "doctor", a physician's assistant does almost all of the work which is then reviewed by the doctor.

I would be one that says, have new doctors perform 3 years of service in a clinic (inner city or in the boondocks) at a salary of $75,000 per year and then pay off their student loans as a bonus for completing all 3 years. Similar to what we did when we needed teachers.

Regarding sitting on the toilet with no tissue in sight: 1) poor planning on your part (always have extra rolls nearby), 2) you found a way to get 'er done, didn't you?

FIFA...My facts snub your rosey vision in this case...

Buck you factless. You talk a lot, but that ain't facts.

FIFA...You seem to lack confidence in your posting....I understand why you would be afraid to use a real name as well....I speak facts, no fiction or assumed vision for the future. The facts in this case would indicate miserable and expensive failure regarding the implementation of Obamacare. Show me proof that there are enough primary care doctors to pull off forced nationwide healthcare and I will bow out gracefully. Pointless no name blurbs just don't cut it..

Facts. It is not a sales tax. Why do you pay Medicare tax on W-2 income and not on unearned income? Why are all forms of income except wages exempt?

Why do you report your income at all?

Jail comes to mind. I have seen your prior comments about no constitutional basis for taxation. Psycho talk right up there with Birthers. Avoid going there Buck, you embarrass yourself. Your theories have been debunked. Even Republicans don't go there.

FIFA.. Once again you speak rhetoric with no fact to back it up...
If you choose to volunteer paying an income tax that is your choice, however until someone can provide the statute which gives the government legal authority to take it without asking for voluntary participation I'll continue my pursuit of the truth related to it.
Just another blurb from a nobody...prove me wrong FIFA..

Frank it is worse than that. Buck tries to state that the 16 th amendment was improperly ratified. It is a tax protestor argument that has been thrown out by every court. Buck, give us one court that has held up your argument on appeal. Just one. That is right, there are Zero. Give it up Buck, you are wrong

Go see United States v. Benson, 941 F.2d 598 (7th Cir. 1991) (rejecting these arguments in a criminal case brought against the author of the "Law that Never Was" book); United States v. Foster, 789 F.2d 457 (7th Cir. 1986); Cook v. Spillman, 806 F.2d 948 (9th Cir. 1986) (calling the argument that the Sixteenth Amendment was never ratified "frivolous" and imposing sanctions of $1,500 on the party making it); United States v. House, 617 F.Supp. 237, 238-39 (W.D. Mich.1985).

Your hero lost.

I'm not sure who is more misinformed; Birther, tax protestor, climate change denier, or Sarah Palin? They all one thing in common.

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution was never fully ratified, thereby making it a non law..
The income tax is a volunteer process...see the title of the W4 that you sign upon beginning a new job. VOLUNTARY WITHHOLDING STATEMENT~Voluntary deductions...If this were truely law...why would this form say voluntary?
Courts at every level have been corrupt for quite a while..and are known to make frequent mistakes...dumbed down folks like FIFA and Frank will always be no name followers of the rulers command, out of fear...

Typical response from a no name without factual answers...I'll accept that as your surrender to this topic....you're done..

Are you asking about the plural of ellipse or an ellipse Frank...?..since you have surrendered to the other issues on this blog.

I use my real name Frank...a few of the Patch editors know me. Just because I won't allow a no name like you to have access to any of my information doesn't mean that you need to get your panties in a wad.
What are you hiding from Frank...afraid someone might try the same thing to you...?

Nothing tough about the truth Frank...except maybe for you to accept it...
Please provide some facts to support your comments related to Obamacare..
Have you surrendered this cause as well?
I simply seek the truth and live freely Frank...you should try it sometime...use your real name...it'll set you free. I accept your surrender..

Sorry plan was above. You obviously have no faith in capitalism Escariot. Simple supply and demand always takes care of shortages. Econ 101, did you ever take that class?

He's not supposed to be a politician, and we're supposed to be able to hold politicians accountable via elections. I agree with what you're saying, but I'm not sure he acted politically, at least not directly. He acted in a personal way that shows pride issues to a personal fault. In the wake of the Citizen's United decision, he was concerned with personal legacy issues and how he would be judged. He was so concered with not appearing to be political that he made it so.

Wanda, I doubt there will be a board there or any panel making individual thumbs up or down decisions. That IPAB panel will make broad sweeping decisions that will reduce the types of procedures they're willing to subsidize strictly based upon age thresholds and regardless of the vibrancy, mental or physical condition of the person. It'll be more like no chemotherapy for stage III and IV cancers for anyone over 75, no cat scans post 75, no breast cancer surgeries for recurrent cancers after 80, knee and hip replacements will be limited to certain individuals based again upon age and potential outcomes, etc. I expect it to be "soylent green light" and with a new push towards this whole "dignified death theory" where they basically want to push you along the way they do in Europe. It won't happen right away but will creep into policy because Obamacare coerces dollars away from elder care and toward younger and what they consider more productive citizens. They don't care that there are many, many 65-70 year olds that are far more productive than 20 year olds. I don't doubt that todays elderly are generally more white, and more conservative than Obama and his cronies like to have around.

Really Steve you think 20 year olds are more productive in every case? I'll tell you right now we had a 70 year old mechanic where I used to work that did circles around the kids...heck he's the one you'd ask if you needed something done right away because the kids either called in sick, otherwise made themselves scarce or had an attitude about it. I promise you there really is something about the "greatest generation" that is disappearing in todays culture and will be sorely missed and one of the most common threads is a superior work ethic.

Then are you saying limiting care; encouraging earlier deaths is superior to a nursing home. Be honest if that's what you believe - if that's so you wouldn't be the only one out there...Emmanuel who did offer advice for Obamacare absolutely believes that as well. My problem is not all 75 year olds belong in nursing homes so to make sweeping medical generalities sentences healthy older adults to a life with limited access to care regardless of their physicality. My 87 year old neighbor weeds the flower beds on cooler days - if she had a heart attack should we withhold care just because she's 87?

Just out of curiosity when is your cut off? Do we refuse care for 75 year olds? 80, 85...you say 100 and hardly anyone lives to be 100 there would be no savings there? You know there are a few centarians that are still active physically and mentally...they're not worth having around either?

Steve since you've been honest about your feelings that health care is wasted on old people which I appreciate at least for honesty's sake...just curious who do you describe as old? At what age should we begin to withhold care?

A few years ago I did a job in a nursing home. I met a wonderful lady named Rose. She walked down to the cafeteria every day even though they would have brought her meals to her. She played cards, enjoyed puzzles, and had an awesome disposition. She seemed to genuinely enjoy life and all that it has to offer. At the time of my jobs completion she was 103. I guess she doesn't deserve care because she is too old.

That's a very good question...is refusing care any worse that wrongfully poor care in terms of malpractice particularly given the hypocratic oath?

OMG, seriously? THIS IS NOT GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTHCARE!! This is the same insurance-company driven healthcare we've had, the ACA just opens the door to allow more people to obtain coverage. (But anyway, why would you want to sue for malpractice? Aren't you righties all about tort reform?)

I'm specifically talking about the gutting of Medicare to offset costs for Obamacare and the effects of IPAB on rationing care for the elderly.

Where does Dawn P think dr.berwick was coming from when he proclaimed healthcare was a matter of redistribution of wealth? Did she think it was going to be done magically by peter pan?

OK... Steve has surrendered facts to rhetoric...your done Steve...I accept your surrender as well

Who's going to regulate the way that government runs forced Obamacare..?

I assume you also want us to chase that shiney object too. I'm not taking the bait and I suggest others follow suit but I am curious. Since Steve has been honest enough to admit he'd prefer to limit care to older americans and redistribute those dollars to younger, assumably productive persons...you support that; so why don't you be just as honest. What is the age you think it morally just to begin to limit care for older americans?

Karl, please point to where I said that? While I have never said what you wish I said, I do think the country will some day have to deal with end of life care. Clearly doctors encourage terminal patients to spend bundles of money as life ends. I don't know what the answer is, but that ship has left port and is headed this way.

Regarding your shiny ball, I have decided that all negative comments by folks like you about Obama will now get a response that includes negative comments about your favorite Etch-a-Sketch.

FIFA, this is about Obamacare, and has nothing to do with Romney or Obama. If you support Obamacare you must understand it redistributes Medicare dollars to cover costs so surely you must think that's acceptable; correct? If so, limiting care to older americans must be OK with you...it only follows...

Oops, I forgot to ask you Karl, how many Swiss bank accounts do you have? How many accounts in the Cayman Islands do you have? Plead the Fifth like Romney?

Karl, I simply don't care how you wish to limit a discussion to only Obama. Romney was for Romneycare (Obamacare) until he decided to run for President. Romney was for the individual mandate too. Now he has flipped.

Karl, do you know how to read? Apparently not.

Oops, more if Romney wins. Repeal of the elimination of Don't Ask Don't Tell in the military. Ban gay marriage and most importantly Magic Underwear for all. Talk about a Manchurian Candidate. You folks talk about Obama being a Muslim?

I don't receive Medicare, but I know lots of folks that do. It's also not about hands off Medicare because the dollars are there (actually they aren't but for the sake of arguments let's pretend this country isn't flat azz broke), you can leave the 500B in Medicare or move it elsewhere. If you support moving it elsewhere (Obamacare) then you agree it's preferable to limit health care for older people.

Karl is weak. He can't answer the tough questions about Magic Underwear Romney, why Karl?

Jimmy Obama to the destruction!!!!! Tad-a-ta-ta!; 21 increases in taxes for all, medicare and tanning taxes, increased payroll taxes, epa carbon taxes, obamatax healthcare rationing-----all of this is guaranteed to cut healthcare costs and reduce the deficit!
What else-oooh ooohh, waivers for public and private sector unions, energy loans to bundlers and crooks like Corzine, job protection to teachers in schools that fail to educate, give illegals amnesty and jobs ahead of our own citizens, bring in sharia law under united nations treaties of international law, law of the sea treaty to give up american sovreignty, fast and furious, international arms treaty to ban weapons in the united states.....Did I miss any? Yup. Take an oath to uphold the constitution then violate it by giving non-secured creditors like the united auto workers union preference in the gm bankruptcy, non-enforcement of immigration laws, and solyndra investors ahead of the taxpayers in another bankruptcy case...

Escariot, I went through half of your taxes and they bore me. Maybe you and I can open Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts like Romney and make money. Make sure to wear your Magic Underwear.

Escariot at least be original.

Of course they do but this is about taking 500B in Medicare funding and using it to fund Obamacare all the while increasing gov't oversight and putting limits on eldercare and on steroids. 500B is a lot of money...that's a lot of "go home and take a pill".

Karl are you a Birther? Come clean.

Are you a Romney Republican? Dumb question from you.

I don't think you would know a fact if it bit you on your arse!

Buck, even Escariot thinks you have to pay income taxes. You are exposed as a tax protestor which is no better than a Birther. What is funny is when Escariot does not defend tax protestors or Birthers. He clearly is not independent as he claims.

PS Buck, I proved your tax protestor argument false. Your answer is that the courts were corrupt. May you rot in jail, but you probably pay. Big talk, no cajounes.

I don't protest the income tax...I question it's validity...like Obama's history.
I seek to pierce the illusion...thats all. Maybe most of the citizens that don't pay, know the truth as well. If you think otherwise...keep paying ...it's the easy way to avoid the truth....or you could always become an IRS agent... I here they are hiring.

My last comment was intended to be a regular comment...not a reply to Escariot...
hit the wrong button..

Escariot, thank you for showing you are a birther.

Why does Romney have Swiss bank accounts?
Why does Romney have secret accounts in the Grand Caymans?
How does Romney manage to have a secret IRA account worth $100 Million in the Grand Cayman.
Why is Romney hiding his tax returns.
What is the magical power of Romney's underwear?

It is time for you to defend your candidate. I have tired your continual repetitive attacks on Obama.

Thanks, Anna. Besides the profanity, I think his comment also constituted a personal attack against another user -- isn't that also against the TOS?

Thank You...

Guess these Hopkins executives in addition to working for one of the worlds foremost hospitals and most likely being leading administrators in the medical field are also birthers.

The "Doctor" problem will be solved over time thanks to our free market economy - more people will go to medical school, and physicians both new and established will focus their practices where they are needed/where the money is...

That is a hope...a vision Honeygal...not a fact...and how much time are we talkin here?
There are currently no incentives for med students to pursue a career in primary or preventative medicine...how long will it take for that important link to be connected?
That's just one of the missing links.....still have to figure out how to pay for the time that it takes to figure it out ....

We've already got a shortage of docs willing to go into general practice because they pay the same outrageous costs for med school and then can't expect to make nearly the same money as their specialist friends. These are the same doctors who'd most likely practice proactive, preventative medicine. You want to further load thier waiting rooms and then bury them with regulations and limits on compensation? It's a recipe for health care disaster.

So, Huck Barmon, you seem to be displeased with the response time of the free market? You would perhaps require the "socialist state" to plan and determine the number of primary care physicians?

In any college program there are courses and/or seminars about choosing the right career path given the latest trends, I think the medical schools will take care of that. And the existing doctors will find out, either from their buddies on the golf course or their declining bank balance.

How many typewriter repair shops have you seen lately? Auto mechanics used to know how to rebuild engines and transmissions, but as they became more reliable and technology advanced, they more likely use their wrench to remove the cover to get access to the computer. Times change.

Sorry I misspelled your fake identity...it was not intended..

Cart before the horse plans have a history of failing miserably......

Some might call that "entrepreneurial" spirit - you want to dial out the risk?

In this case this risk means most assuredly a reduction in medical care, the opposite of what the proponents of the bill claim as it's intent.

There is no shortage of Doctors in General Practice. They are the low achievers in Med School that don't get picked for Specialization. There is a pecking order in Med School. The top students get their choice of specializations and the dullards get stuck in GP or Emergency Medicine.

I'm not dodging, answer my questions. Playing your game now.

In case you forgot the questions:

Why does Romney have Swiss bank accounts?
Why does Romney have secret accounts in the Grand Caymans?
How does Romney manage to have a secret IRA account worth $100 Million in the Grand Cayman.
Why is Romney hiding his tax returns.
What is the magical power of Romney's underwear?

You have surrendered FIFA....no longer a need to limp...

This is your latest silliness Buck, "surrender"? I have answered dozens upon dozens of comments from you, Escariot, etc. It is time for you to defend your candidate for awhile as well.

Go ahead, take on the questions. Your turn. How about it?

Gee, Frank, that sounds kind of like a president that makes recess appointments when congress is not really in recess. Or maybe a President that violates federal bankruptcy law in awarded non-secured like the united auto workers union and solyndra bundlers to take more money than the secured creditors who were investors and taxpayers. Or maybe a president that signed an executive order to disobey federal immigration law, 2 years after clearly stating that he did not have the constituitional powers to do so. Hmmm...sounds to me like we have a dictator already in office now....

Frank....you have already surrendered your effectiveness to this blog...
Your pointless grey comments clutter the site at this point.
I can clearly understand why you are afraid to use a real name.....lame...

Why does Romney have Swiss bank accounts?
Why does Romney have secret accounts in the Grand Caymans?
How does Romney manage to have a secret IRA account worth $100 Million in the Grand Cayman.
Why is Romney hiding his tax returns.
What is the magical power of Romney's underwear?

Not a single answer yet from Escariot, are you afraid of the answers - here I'll help you.

Why does Romney have Swiss bank accounts?
---- To hide money from income taxes and bet against US Currency

Why does Romney have secret accounts in the Grand Caymans?
---- To hide money from income taxes

How does Romney manage to have a secret IRA account worth $100 Million in the Grand Cayman.
--- Took advantage of a loophole that only the wealthy have to allow high leverage of his account --- and needs to hide it.

Why is Romney hiding his tax returns?
--- he will have extraordinary difficulty explaining all of his offshore accounts and low tax rate.

What is the magical power of Romney's underwear?
--- when properly worn...provides protection against temptation and evil

FIFA, do you even read posts? 4 posts above the one that you just posted i answered that Romney was avoiding higher taxes with those accounts. I mentioned that he is doing the same as John Kerry parking his yacht out of state to avoid the same taxes. You may even want to check the timestamp on my post where i answered you. it is okay FIFA, i know that the glare from msnbc on your telly voided your vision of the screen....

It is funny have you always have excuses for Romney. I think you have been having way too many dreams about Sarah lately.

If that was Obama with all of those suspicious accounts you'd be like a fly on poop on it.

That article is more than 3 years old, which means it is based on data that is even older than that. Nice try, but you would need to find something a little more current to be relative to the discussion...

What is relevant is that doctors were leaving private practice 3 years ago because of revenue. With lesser medicare payments and taxes on medical equipment and supplies family practitioners will make even less, which will result in a bigger shortage.

Typical surrender comment from another no name....very revealing....

NO2O - You have succinctly laid out EXACTLY what is going to happen. The government, any government, is not good at doing anything efficiently - certainly not running health care. They have zero incentive to improve the process or reduce the cost. They will soak additional income from the few of us who pay taxes and kill any remaining incentive.

I was and have been for the last 15 years or so. How many of the top students pick GP? The top picks are almost always Neuro Surgery and Nephrology.

Steve...you have surrendered to this blog as well with pointless jib a jabs...you are very experienced at it though....must be sad and lonely... your done..

A good start would reverse the order of postings! That can't be hard!

Something we can all agree on! Better comment format!

A rating system would be nice, too. Like a thumbs up or down total.

I completely agree with you Sean....one of the worst formats I've experienced...
It was better before they messed with the pending approval process as well.
You could see the name of the response on the email notification..

Rating systems only cause additional problems because a handful of no name posters will abuse the process.... kind of the way that they do now but without the random tit for tat comments..

Sean,
We all have at sometime or another, your not alone. But see what you started !
an agreeable unified change, with good important suggestions. When something bad happens good flourishes. You have my respect,