So..does it..or doesn't it....

[Wagner]

How Abortion Coverage Could Affect Health-Care Reform - TIME

The President also routinely mentions the issue of abortion. "You've heard that this is all going to mean government funding of abortion," Obama said recently in a call to religious leaders. "Not true."

But this last statement, while technically correct, does not tell the whole story. The health-care reform proposed by House Democrats, if enacted, would in fact mark a significant change in the Federal Government's role in the financing of abortions. "It would be a dramatic shift," says Representative Bart Stupak, a Michigan Democrat who has vowed to oppose the bill because of how it would affect abortion. Stupak says dozens of House Democrats may join him in opposing a final health-care compromise unless the abortion language is changed, presenting a clear challenge to Democratic vote counters that could imperil a party-line vote.

It would really help the Dems and the Admin if they could explain, clearly and finally, what the hell they are attempting to do.....where is Phil Collins and "Land of Confusion" when you need it

I also love the part in the article where the Fed Govt says they will keep separate pots of money for funding... excuse me...with SS right now that whole concept of the "Fed Govt" understanding where money comes from is just hilarious.

[chile1]

[QUOTE=Wagner;653168]How Abortion Coverage Could Affect Health-Care Reform - TIME

It would really help the Dems and the Admin if they could explain, clearly and finally, what the hell they are attempting to do.....where is Phil Collins and "Land of Confusion" when you need it
[QUOTE]

The "Land of Confusion" is being created by the Republicans (incl. Sarah Palin and friends) and Faux News to discredit what this administration is trying to do.........

This distortion has convinced some of their faithfull followers that there's death panels in the bill. And who put that idea in their heads? Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is settling very well into her new job as a rigthwing blogger. Sarah Palin quit her job as governor of Alaska to spend more time on Facebook.

[Wagner]

[QUOTE=chile1;653188][QUOTE=Wagner;653168]How Abortion Coverage Could Affect Health-Care Reform - TIME

It would really help the Dems and the Admin if they could explain, clearly and finally, what the hell they are attempting to do.....where is Phil Collins and "Land of Confusion" when you need it

The "Land of Confusion" is being created by the Republicans (incl. Sarah Palin and friends) and Faux News to discredit what this administration is trying to do.........

This distortion has convinced some of their faithfull followers that there's death panels in the bill. And who put that idea in their heads? Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is settling very well into her new job as a rigthwing blogger. Sarah Palin quit her job as governor of Alaska to spend more time on Facebook.

Didn't know TIME & CNN were right-wing publications

[MrLabGuy]

Originally Posted by Wagner

How Abortion Coverage Could Affect Health-Care Reform - TIME

It would really help the Dems and the Admin if they could explain, clearly and finally, what the hell they are attempting to do.....where is Phil Collins and "Land of Confusion" when you need it



Didn't know TIME & CNN were right-wing publications

Classic Chile...Comment without reading because he and others are too busy spouting the party line and party rhetoric. I also love how much power they give Sarah Palin.

Fact is the original draft had a "Review Board" who would decide paid coverage of certain procedures based on rationed care. For example denying coverage for an 80 year old in need of hip replacement who already outlived the average life expectancy. Forget that his family before him lived to their late 90's. He has no use to the Democrats and in their mind is wasting government resources.

[chile1]

[QUOTE=Wagner;653196][QUOTE=chile1;653188]

Originally Posted by Wagner

How Abortion Coverage Could Affect Health-Care Reform - TIME

It would really help the Dems and the Admin if they could explain, clearly and finally, what the hell they are attempting to do.....where is Phil Collins and "Land of Confusion" when you need it
Didn't know TIME & CNN were right-wing publications

I wasn't refering to the article you attached so you can ridicule all you want. Nevertheless, the only confusion here is being created by those that oppose Obama (incl. your boy Glen Beck) without even giving it a chance.

Sarah Palin is settling very well into her new job as a rigthwing blogger. She quit her day job as governor of Alaska to spend more time on Facebook.

[Wagner]

[QUOTE=chile1;653383][QUOTE=Wagner;653196]

Originally Posted by chile1

I wasn't refering to the article you attached so you can ridicule all you want. Nevertheless, the only confusion here is being created by those that oppose Obama (incl. your boy Glen Beck) without even giving it a chance.

Sarah Palin is settling very well into her new job as a rigthwing blogger. She quit her day job as governor of Alaska to spend more time on Facebook.

So it is "ok" when Time and CNN do it but not when Fox News does it....woohoo...go logic

Oh, so your post had no bearing on reality...awesome

Yes, give socialism a chance..it worked well with USMAIL (which your boy used as an example..go no teleprompter) and SS....

[alewifebp]

Originally Posted by chile1

The "Land of Confusion" is being created by the Republicans (incl. Sarah Palin and friends) and Faux News to discredit what this administration is trying to do

If you feel that way, why don't you set us straight with facts, rather than bashing critics? If the end of life review boards are not in any bills, please educate us on how we are wrong.

And what is the administration trying to do? Are they trying to insure the 47 million allegedly without insurance? Why do they need a 1,000+ page bill with a greatly increased government role at the center of it?

Additionally, a question I've asked in several places that no one has been able to answer is, what does the government do that would be considered efficient? Do people really think that by swallowing a huge chunk of our economy in to the public option will somehow magically bring about cost savings and expedient, quality care? And before you echo the liberal talking points, how would you feel (hypothetically speaking of course) about this bill if the exact same thing were proposed by Bush and a Republican majority?

[Krimson X]

Originally Posted by alewifebp

If the end of life review boards are not in any bills, please educate us on how we are wrong.

How do you prove a negative? You want someone to prove that the end of life review boards are not in the bill?

In the real world, the burden of proof is on the one bringing the allegation.

[Quicksilver]

Not interested is arguing all this other stuff but I can answer this question.

#1 Veterans hospital and medical center at least for me was and still is
well oiled and efficient each time I go in for any medical care.

#2 I get my social security check on time every month.

#3 Medicare works with my regular insurance without issue
every time I seek medical care.

From where I sit I believe that could be considered efficient.......

Originally Posted by alewifebp

What does the government do that would be considered efficient?

[Quicksilver]

Fact is The president didn’t say that government would decide what treatments or procedures would be allowed for each individual. He said the opposite: "I don’t want bureaucracies making those decisions," and "we want doctors and medical experts to be making decisions," based on scientific evidence of what is likely to result.

We have already debunked certain claims about rationing of care in Britain or Canada, whose single-payer systems are not what Obama or members of Congress are trying to duplicate, false assertions to the contrary. We have also written about the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, a creation of the stimulus bill passed in February, which is empowered to coordinate research into what treatments work best and which are most cost-effective, but has no power to tell doctors what treatments and procedures to perform or prescribe.

Fact check.org goes on to mention We don’t know whether or not some form of rationing would eventually take place if one of the pending bills were to become law. We would note, as does Obama, that denials of coverage are routine among private health insurance companies and under Medicare in our current system, and we asked McClusky about that. Why would such decisions about care be more objectionable under a public plan, for instance, than they are when Aetna or UnitedHealthcare denies coverage? "We find it more troubling when the federal government is doing it," he said. "It’s the 800-lb gorilla."

Originally Posted by MrLabGuy

Fact is the original draft had a "Review Board" who would decide paid coverage of certain procedures based on rationed care. For example denying coverage for an 80 year old in need of hip replacement who already outlived the average life expectancy. Forget that his family before him lived to their late 90's. He has no use to the Democrats and in their mind is wasting government resources.