Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

#1 reason to vote for health care reform proposed by Congress

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #1 reason to vote for health care reform proposed by Congress

    Rush Limbaugh Says He'll Leave the US If Health Care Reform Is Passed - AOL News

    If some of the other bags-of-hot-air would follow suit and join him in some faraway place, I'd go on a letter writing crusade to get it approved!!!

  • #2
    Please Congress pass this. Limbaugh in another country incredible for us, those poor people that get him.

    Take Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and that nitwit Palin with, please.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by azdave View Post
      Please Congress pass this. Limbaugh in another country incredible for us, those poor people that get him.

      Take Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and that nitwit Palin with, please.
      And Rachael Maddow, Jon Stewart, Michael Moore... we can play this game all day. Or we can remember that free speech means that people whose opinions we don't like get to speak.

      Anyway I don't think Rush is serious. It's just like all the people who said they'd move to Canada if Bush was re-elected. Didn't happen.

      ~Brent

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Threeleggedyoyo View Post
        And Rachael Maddow, Jon Stewart, Michael Moore... we can play this game all day. Or we can remember that free speech means that people whose opinions we don't like get to speak.

        Anyway I don't think Rush is serious. It's just like all the people who said they'd move to Canada if Bush was re-elected. Didn't happen.

        ~Brent
        People seem to forget that a lot.

        Comment


        • #5
          come on Yanks. Move out of the dark ages. Get health care, for god's sake.

          We were against it too, in the 60's....

          It's only Humana and UnitedHealth that are holding you back.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by goalieboy29 View Post
            come on Yanks. Move out of the dark ages. Get health care, for god's sake.

            We were against it too, in the 60's....

            It's only Humana and UnitedHealth that are holding you back.
            And your richest people come here for the best health care why?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by grizzlygoalie View Post
              And your richest people come here for the best health care why?
              and the poor only wish they could come here for health care

              wonder why.



              BUT: to answer your question; in Canada, (in thoery), the health care system is impartial. It has no prejudice against the income level of the recipient of care. therefore the bum off the street, to the billinaire Torontonian, walking into a hospital are treated as equals and both get the level of service needed when the time allows for it. No jumping the line. No better service, no worse service.

              The Rich Housewife who wants the MRI just cause of a minor headahce twice a year, doesn't get priority over the 18 year old who hit his head working the factories and needs an MRI.

              so why do the rich go to the states instead? cause they have an overwhelming sense of self entitlement. "I am rich, therefore, why should i have to wait for anyone else". in the states, where the patient is a customer first, the one bringing the most bucks, gets the most service.

              it has nothing to do with "quality". it has to do with the fact that they believe they are more entitled to something faster.
              Last edited by Sprawl; 03-09-2010, 10:49 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Lets see Palin goes to Canada for health care and yet rips on it.

                Jon Stewart??? You do realize that show is a satire of the so called news shows on Fox??
                You left off Oberman, is he okay to stay here? Moore makes movies and oddly enough they seem to be pretty much right on the money. But I will make this deal, if Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck go we will give you Rachel and Stewart and even Ed. Palin can stay that way you guys can nominate her to be your presidential candidate. Gee I wonder who she will get for her running mate. I can see it now the D&D campaign. (Dumb and Dumber)

                BTW just for kicks tell me in one paragraph or less why she is presidential material. Please, I need a good laugh.

                Funny how all the Canadians I know are fine with their health insurance plan. Odd how we Americans can criticize a health plan that works. Does ours?
                Last edited by azdave; 03-10-2010, 12:00 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Of course the American health care system works. It's so profitable that the insurance companies are fighting tooth and nail to keep things the way they are.

                  It's just a question of what people think it is supposed to do. Draining money out of people's pockets has long been an honorable thing to do in the US.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Timberwoof View Post
                    Of course the American health care system works. It's so profitable that the insurance companies are fighting tooth and nail to keep things the way they are.

                    It's just a question of what people think it is supposed to do. Draining money out of people's pockets has long been an honorable thing to do in the US.
                    Quoted for truth.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by azdave View Post
                      Lets see Palin goes to Canada for health care and yet rips on it.

                      Jon Stewart??? You do realize that show is a satire of the so called news shows on Fox??
                      Yeah, I know. And it's painfully leftist and not very funny. Every once in a while I tune in to it to watch something funny and end up just feeling like my intelligence is being insulted. For whatever it's worth, I don't really watch Fox News, either and don't have much personal experience with them to have an opinion. But if Fox is one-sided conservatives masquerading as News, that's one thing. Jon Stewart is a one-sided liberal masquerading as a comedian. Same insult, different formats.


                      Originally posted by azdave View Post
                      You left off Oberman, is he okay to stay here? Moore makes movies and oddly enough they seem to be pretty much right on the money.
                      I didn't mention Oberman because I'm not familiar with him. If he continues to stay off my radar then he's not really bugging me.

                      Moore, on the other hand, is a very poor journalist. He markets his editorials as both "movies" and "documentaries," both of which are incorrect. They are movie-length editorials with extremely poor (read: deceptive) journalistic practices.

                      If you think my opinion of him is because I'm usually conservative and he is a liberal, you are incorrect. I formed this opinion of him after his first big movie, Bowling for Columbine, which was about a subject I feel very neutral and conflicted on - gun control. It's an issue I haven't really chosen sides on because I can see both sides from what little I've looked at about it, and guns are not at all a big part of my life. Since then, though, he's continued with the same ax-grinding garbage and people actually take him seriously. I hate him first and foremost because he's dishonest. That he's accusive and hypocritical and liberal mostly just makes him more annoying.

                      Originally posted by azdave View Post
                      But I will make this deal, if Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck go we will give you Rachel and Stewart and even Ed. Palin can stay that way you guys can nominate her to be your presidential candidate. Gee I wonder who she will get for her running mate. I can see it now the D&D campaign. (Dumb and Dumber)

                      BTW just for kicks tell me in one paragraph or less why she is presidential material. Please, I need a good laugh.
                      Limbaugh is an angry windbag who I think is right relatively often in principal and some of the time in specifics. Same goes for O'Reilly. I don't know much about Hannity. I'll actually stick up for Beck in that when I've looked at his books or listened to him (not too often, but a little) so far I've liked a surprising amount of what he's said.

                      But the fact is that all of them on both sides (with the possible personal exception of Beck), in my opinion are entertainers first and newspeople/educators/opinion leaders/whatever they're supposed to be second. Their shows get ratings. Duh. If they were all soft-spoken, reasonable, correct people, they wouldn't be entertaining. Even Rachel gets my attention for a moment or two flipping channels because something in me likes to be mad at her. I don't get it, but it's there. I can admit that.

                      As for Palin... I don't know that I'm a huge fan. I don't know that I like her or don't like her. I feel like the Republicans are really dropping the ball lately and not sticking to the beliefs of their core voters and haven't been too excited about any of their candidates in some time. But it's been a while since I've looked at her political stances. I do know that I think her crusade against the word "******" comes off as a little silly, but what do I know. I also think she gets a bad rap for the way she talks. Anyone who talks "different" in our country tends to be unfairly considered stupid. If you honestly think she's stupid, that's fine, but it seems like the substance of a lot of the jokes about her come down to "she talks funny." Although I have an inherent mistrust of anyone who gives her children terrible names.

                      Why might she be a good president? Well, at the very least, she seems sincere in her beliefs and driven by principals, and that is something the presidency desperately needs these days. I think her relative inexperience could also turn out to be a good thing in that she might not be so entrenched in party politics. For a Democrat, I like(d) Obama for the same reasons although I don't like a lot of what he's doing.

                      Originally posted by azdave View Post
                      Funny how all the Canadians I know are fine with their health insurance plan. Odd how we Americans can criticize a health plan that works. Does ours?
                      I've actually been unhappy with our health plan in the US for a long time now. I'm glad we're working on something different. Really am. My only concerns are that it seems like when our government gets involved, it seems to make things much less efficient and never more efficient, and I'm very concerned about that influence when it comes to my personal health choices. I'm also concerned about the inevitable tax jump that will come with it.

                      To me it seems like a choice between malevolent, greedy insurance providers and a bumbling, beurocratic, money-sapping government. I'm not sure which is better. I'd like to try some of the more conservative approaches first, though, like allowing insurance companies to compete over state lines. If none of them work any better (maybe I'm uninformed and this has been done after all?) I'm not against a state option, just wary.

                      I'm also concerned about two additional things that may or may not be real problems:

                      1) The capitalistic drive fosters medical research. While most other countries have state-run medical programs, doesn't the US do most of the research? If so, would this same level of (important) research continue should we go with a public system?

                      2) Call me selfish, but I really don't want my tax money (read: MY money) spent on preventable diseases like smoking-related cancer. I'd rather people pay for their own preventable treatments rather than robbing me for their own stupid mistakes. If health care in the public option ends up costing me significantly more, and the money is being used for a lot of these kinds of things, then I've got a problem with it.

                      So... yeah. Not all conservatives are untempered wackos.

                      ~Brent
                      Last edited by Threeleggedyoyo; 03-10-2010, 02:37 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        In other news I just discovered out swear filter agrees with Palin.

                        ~Brent

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Threeleggedyoyo View Post
                          1) The capitalistic drive fosters medical research. While most other countries have state-run medical programs, doesn't the US do most of the research? If so, would this same level of (important) research continue should we go with a public system?
                          Actually, no. Yhere is a lot of research done in the US, but due in large part to the number of facility. There is a lot of ground breaking work done in Canada. Most of our hospitals are teaching hospitals, associated with medical schools. These universities do research like any other universities.

                          Look at the latest, very promising, research on MS. It came out of Italy. A country with Universal Health Care.

                          Doctors and scientists will always do research. It's what they do.

                          2) Call me selfish, but I really don't want my tax money (read: MY money) spent on preventable diseases like smoking-related cancer. I'd rather people pay for their own preventable treatments rather than robbing me for their own stupid mistakes. If health care in the public option ends up costing me significantly more, and the money is being used for a lot of these kinds of things, then I've got a problem with it.
                          How about your hockey injuries? Should your insurance pay for those? After all, other people's premium help pay for those costs.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Good to know about the research... I hope you're right.

                            Originally posted by habs-fan View Post
                            How about your hockey injuries? Should your insurance pay for those? After all, other people's premium help pay for those costs.
                            I agree, it's a slippery slope. I would hope sports injuries would be covered. But diseases that come from foolishly taking crap into your body like cigarettes seems like a whole different category to me. Sports are good for you. Cigarettes, drugs, getting drunk enough to hurt yourself, etc. in my mind have no redeeming value at all.

                            It's not that I don't want to be a good samaritan. It's just that medical treatment can be super expensive and I'd rather put that money towards my own family or, say, research for non-preventable diseases than the guy who chooses to smoke all his life and then *surprise* gets lung cancer.

                            The fact, though, that there are bound to be a lot of disagreements on the issue may be one pros of a private system. If you don't like what's covered with private insurance, switch to a different provider. When it's the government (who is going to take your money no matter what) it's a bit more personal.

                            ~Brent

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Threeleggedyoyo View Post
                              Good to know about the research... I hope you're right.



                              I agree, it's a slippery slope. I would hope sports injuries would be covered. But diseases that come from foolishly taking crap into your body like cigarettes seems like a whole different category to me. Sports are good for you. Cigarettes, drugs, getting drunk enough to hurt yourself, etc. in my mind have no redeeming value at all.

                              It's not that I don't want to be a good samaritan. It's just that medical treatment can be super expensive and I'd rather put that money towards my own family or, say, research for non-preventable diseases than the guy who chooses to smoke all his life and then *surprise* gets lung cancer.

                              The fact, though, that there are bound to be a lot of disagreements on the issue may be one pros of a private system. If you don't like what's covered with private insurance, switch to a different provider. When it's the government (who is going to take your money no matter what) it's a bit more personal.

                              ~Brent
                              I undertand your point of vue but think about it this way. What if you end up with skin cancer because you spent one too many hours under the scorching sun without wearing any sunscreen? What if you end up with any other type of life threatening disease that may or may not be your fault? That's what universal health care is. It's for the reckless driver, the chain smoker, the weekend warrior or the guy renovating his home that ends up cutting half his hand on the bench saw because he failed to use the guard and was distracted by his wife walking by

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X