• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Specter: Protests not 'representative of America'

Quote a little more surrounding it please, but it should be the patient in consultation with the doctor decides. In other words, a patient can decide against some measures to sustain life, which I personally would choose to do. If I am going to die anyway, just make me as comfortable as possible and let me die, don't put me on life support or such.



here is where I got it from


Health Care Bill Page 425 - The Truth


What we can agree on, I hope, is there are a lot of questions....
 
Quote a little more surrounding it please, but it should be the patient in consultation with the doctor decides. In other words, a patient can decide against some measures to sustain life, which I personally would choose to do. If I am going to die anyway, just make me as comfortable as possible and let me die, don't put me on life support or such.

People already do end of life counseling, routinely, when they have medical care. It's called a living will. I chose to sign one when I gave birth to my son (because I had surgery at the same time). Such counseling is routine even when you have relatively minor surgery.

My parents did this ten years ago, we had to go in and sign that we would serve as their decision-makers (my brother and I did) if something incapacitated them, because my mom and dad do not want their lives prolongued through artificial measures. Most people don't.

Don't you people remember the Terry Schiavo debacle?
 
Nope, one final bill will be passed based upon the three options, and the one that I am hearing most is for the government plan, which has attrocious pitfalls written into it.



There is already a proposal for a federal soda tax to patially fund this bill, furthermore, the bill can state whatever it will, the facts are if the government is paying it can deny payments to whatever it deems appropriate and you cannot sue the federal government for damages. If a doctor deems a surgery necessary it may happen.....when the government clears for said surgery to be paid for, thus, the final decision would be with the fed.



The problem with us laughing about it is that these idiots in Washington are trying to pass this thing off as some kind of miracle plan, a solve-all if you will, and the reality is it is so loaded that it will undoubtedly create more damage than solutions.

The federal soda tax bill has like, zero support and is already basically dead. Obama's lead legal advisor was a guest on NPR yesterday afternoon and admitted that the government option would most likely be dropped in favor of co-ops, as long as the provision to end refusal of coverage for pre-existing conditions was included.
 
here is where I got it from


Health Care Bill Page 425 - The Truth


What we can agree on, I hope, is there are a lot of questions....

I read your link, as well as the actual bill, though I must mention that this is only one of three, and nowhere does the bill say "must", "compelled", or "mandatory." It only states that physicians should make individuals aware that POA, and other decisions should be considered in case the patient is unable to make determinations about healthcare choices.

I do agree there are many questions, but the biggest deal with this legislation is the fearmongering and lies being used to derail it and maintain the status quo.
 
here is where I got it from


Health Care Bill Page 425 - The Truth


What we can agree on, I hope, is there are a lot of questions....

Ok got it.

(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items—

This means you can opt for full treatment, or less than full treatment in advance, in consultation with your doctor. You get to choose.

(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;

This means you can give a DNR(DO Not Resuscitate) order or similar instruction.

It's a delineation of choices you can make in a "Living Will". It continues:

(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;

(iii) the use of antibiotics; and

(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.

I don't see these questions you see in this area. Setting up a Living Will or Care plan is a good thing.
 
Last edited:
So, basically, the same factors that are already taken into consideration whenever you have any medical procedure in a hospital...

I'm scared! Hold me, Redress! Obama is trying to KILL ME!
 
It doesn't stop them from trying and fighting tooth and nail to protect their corporate profits and dividends.

As I said....Healthcare reform is going to pass. Just like you said....ultimately the GOP is too powerless to stop it.

:lol: You'd better hurry. Obama's at 47 percent and plummeting, and 2010 is around the corner.

This could be worse than '94 was for Clinton. :lol:
 
The federal soda tax bill has like, zero support and is already basically dead.
Basically dead isn't dead, and these same representatives had the idea to begin with, that should show us where they are at.
Obama's lead legal advisor was a guest on NPR yesterday afternoon and admitted that the government option would most likely be dropped in favor of co-ops, as long as the provision to end refusal of coverage for pre-existing conditions was included.
Think about it, how many people are going to take the "no pre-existing conditions" option, it's untenable and those thugs know it. That would be like asking me if I'd rather be stabbed in the kidney or have my arm broken.
 
Basically dead isn't dead, and these same representatives had the idea to begin with, that should show us where they are at. Think about it, how many people are going to take the "no pre-existing conditions" option, it's untenable and those thugs know it. That would be like asking me if I'd rather be stabbed in the kidney or have my arm broken.

So you think that people should be denied for pre-existing conditions? Back in the 90's, when Clinton attempted healthcare overhaul, the insurance companies said they were all for getting rid of the pre-existing condition exemptions in insurance, yet after the effort died they never looked back and still will not cover those with pre-existing conditions.
 
:lol: You'd better hurry. Obama's at 47 percent and plummeting, and 2010 is around the corner.

This could be worse than '94 was for Clinton. :lol:

Actually, as of today he is at 50%, with 42% disapproving and 8% undecided. If the HC plan goes through and people realize it is not what Republicans are painting it, the GOP can kiss their ass goodbye.:2wave:
 
Actually, as of today he is at 50%, with 42% disapproving and 8% undecided. If the HC plan goes through and people realize it is not what Republicans are painting it, the GOP can kiss their ass goodbye.:2wave:

Where do you get your numbers?... CBS?... NBC?... CNBC?... Try a real polling company.

Overall, 47% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. That’s the lowest level of total approval yet recorded. The President’s ratings first fell below 50% just a few weeks ago on July 25. Fifty-two percent (52%) now disapprove.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 29% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-seven percent (37%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a rating of -8 percent

Nationally, support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. Just 42% favor the plan while 53% are opposed.

Do you really think it will pass? :roll:

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports
 
Last edited:
Do you really think it will pass? :roll:

I do indeed. But if I were you and your party, I would be seriously praying against it. When people realize that it isn't what the GOP attempted to scare them with, that party will have hell to pay.:2wave:
 
So you think that people should be denied for pre-existing conditions? Back in the 90's, when Clinton attempted healthcare overhaul, the insurance companies said they were all for getting rid of the pre-existing condition exemptions in insurance, yet after the effort died they never looked back and still will not cover those with pre-existing conditions.
I'm not a fan of pre-existing conditions, nobody is, insurance companies included, but they exist because of the economic reality of their expense. That doesn't mean that people with a bad health coverage history can't get covered, it just means some extra insurance shopping will be in their future. And again, when professionals in the insurance business cann't get pre existing conditions to affordability what makes you think that a bunch of economically incompetent beaurocrats can? And that fact would cause the states to balk.

Actually, as of today he is at 50%, with 42% disapproving and 8% undecided. If the HC plan goes through and people realize it is not what Republicans are painting it, the GOP can kiss their ass goodbye.:2wave:
I don't trust gallop, but if they were right, you had better pray for Democrat sanity. It won't be what's promised(never is), they can't get it right(they never do), and the Democrats will take the blame for 100% of the fallout.
 
I'm not a fan of pre-existing conditions, nobody is, insurance companies included, but they exist because of the economic reality of their expense. That doesn't mean that people with a bad health coverage history can't get covered, it just means some extra insurance shopping will be in their future. And again, when professionals in the insurance business cann't get pre existing conditions to affordability what makes you think that a bunch of economically incompetent beaurocrats can? And that fact would cause the states to balk.

I don't trust gallop, but if they were right, you had better pray for Democrat sanity. It won't be what's promised(never is), they can't get it right(they never do), and the Democrats will take the blame for 100% of the fallout.

Bravo La, Bravo. :applaud :cool:
 
I'm not a fan of pre-existing conditions, nobody is, insurance companies included, but they exist because of the economic reality of their expense. That doesn't mean that people with a bad health coverage history can't get covered, it just means some extra insurance shopping will be in their future. And again, when professionals in the insurance business cann't get pre existing conditions to affordability what makes you think that a bunch of economically incompetent beaurocrats can? And that fact would cause the states to balk.

I don't trust gallop, but if they were right, you had better pray for Democrat sanity. It won't be what's promised(never is), they can't get it right(they never do), and the Democrats will take the blame for 100% of the fallout.

We shall see. And remember, if it is right, we get 100% of the credit.
 
We shall see. And remember, if it is right, we get 100% of the credit.
There is no guess work here tl, socialized medicine hasn't worked yet, the Obama plan is based on the worst parts of the other systems, so when, not it, it fails, it's the Democrats alone going down. I will bring this analogy back out, this proposal is for the Democrats a grenade with the pin pulled.
 
There is no guess work here tl, socialized medicine hasn't worked yet, the Obama plan is based on the worst parts of the other systems, so when, not it, it fails, it's the Democrats alone going down. I will bring this analogy back out, this proposal is for the Democrats a grenade with the pin pulled.

Once again, my friend, drop the "talking points," this is not proposed socialized medicine. I do understand you are an insurance man and only want to protect your industry, but please do so without the misleading rhetoric.

Oh, and you do appear to be 10% crazier, more for the money I suppose.:lol:
 
Once again, my friend, drop the "talking points," this is not proposed socialized medicine. I do understand you are an insurance man and only want to protect your industry, but please do so without the misleading rhetoric.
It's not about my industry, it's about the end of the entitlement mentality, the end of bad government policy(this turd of a bill qualififies), and the end of this damn run Washington is making for power. There is no misleading rhetoric, these idiots on the hill have been saying the things they call misleading information the whole time, and this thing is the exact definition of socialized medicine, in fact, the idiot in the white house said in his own words he wants UHC in his first term, it's pretty cut and dry who the lying side is. The Dems are lying, they are desperate, and they are playing with a grenade, unfortunately we're all in the blast radius. Finally, and no one has answered this question yet. If the government plan is so good, why did the representatives vote an exemption for themselves and supporters and have it written into the bill?
 
It's not about my industry, it's about the end of the entitlement mentality, the end of bad government policy(this turd of a bill qualififies), and the end of this damn run Washington is making for power. There is no misleading rhetoric, these idiots on the hill have been saying the things they call misleading information the whole time, and this thing is the exact definition of socialized medicine, in fact, the idiot in the white house said in his own words he wants UHC in his first term, it's pretty cut and dry who the lying side is. The Dems are lying, they are desperate, and they are playing with a grenade, unfortunately we're all in the blast radius. Finally, and no one has answered this question yet. If the government plan is so good, why did the representatives vote an exemption for themselves and supporters and have it written into the bill?

Well, way to go off the rails there. Ask yourself this, read what you said and think whether you actually believe this, or is partisan rhetoric getting to you? I would expect you, by now, to be a little bit more informed than the average dimwit on the street. Politicians say a lot of things on campaign trails, and they hold a lot of views and ideas that are not always implemented. Fact is, and saying otherwise is just a sad red herring, we are not getting UHC. Throwing that out there serves absolutely no purpose other than to end discussion. Maybe you should look at this another way, maybe be glad that some are NOT pushing their own personal believes over a more realistic and pragmatic approach?
 
It's not about my industry, it's about the end of the entitlement mentality, the end of bad government policy(this turd of a bill qualififies), and the end of this damn run Washington is making for power. There is no misleading rhetoric, these idiots on the hill have been saying the things they call misleading information the whole time, and this thing is the exact definition of socialized medicine, in fact, the idiot in the white house said in his own words he wants UHC in his first term, it's pretty cut and dry who the lying side is. The Dems are lying, they are desperate, and they are playing with a grenade, unfortunately we're all in the blast radius. Finally, and no one has answered this question yet. If the government plan is so good, why did the representatives vote an exemption for themselves and supporters and have it written into the bill?

If you are against a entitlement mentality, then I suppose you are against handouts in the form of tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations as well, yes? Also, you are opposed to the government paying-out whatever pharmaceutical companies charge for medicare prescriptions, and actually have the ability to negotiate, just as the insurance companies do, right?

And it is not a socialistic system, you are stuck in talking points mode. Stop reading your companies fliers to employees. I bet they are telling you guys to write your congressman and tell them to vote against the HC Reform Bill, aren't they?:lol:
 
Last edited:
We shall see. And remember, if it is right, we get 100% of the credit.

ABSO-FREAKING-LUTELY! You and your fellow Liberals get ALL the credit. Frankly, there won’t be a single Republican vote for this thing except for the two or three Liberals posing as Republicans in the Senate.

I will be the first in line to say I was wrong; they didn't raise everyone's taxes and we don't have to wait MONTHS if not YEARS for critical operations, AND, the cost was not in excess of $1 trillion dollars adding to the National Debt and funny money we call the dollar.

:2wave:
 
There is no guess work here tl, socialized medicine hasn't worked yet, the Obama plan is based on the worst parts of the other systems, so when, not it, it fails, it's the Democrats alone going down. I will bring this analogy back out, this proposal is for the Democrats a grenade with the pin pulled.

...which is why a lot of SANE Democrats are not supporting it either.
 
Back
Top Bottom