Without Bush to kick around

[Gonz]

she would be among those coming for to be rid of undesireables!

Unlike the leftists, conservatives deem those undesirable who actually commit a heinous crime. If you're poitically confused or socially different, you can stick around.

After all, we need examples, slaves & designers.

 

[randomJACKASS]

*delusions not based in reality* (as per usual)

 

[Cerise]

yeah wonderful quote. what it's supposed to mean... oh right be tuff and make a stand!!!

I believe it has something to do with one standing by and apathetically supporting the decisions of an oppressive government until one by one all your rights are gone.

See, mjs said he wouldn't mind seeing me go to the "death panel." Of course, the next day it may be the people that are genetically predisposed to drug addiction or suffer from mental illness.

 

[Cerise]

1. Nothing in the passages you quoted refers to the doc initiating the subject.

It clearly states that a consultation is mandatory every 5 years, and more often if there is a significant change in the health of an individual, including admission to a nursing home.

 

[randomJACKASS]

See, mjs said he wouldn't mind seeing me go to the "death panel." Of course, the next day it may be the people that are genetically predisposed to drug addiction or suffer from mental illness.

Are you really that thick?

Joke  [johk] Show IPA noun, verb, joked, jok⋅ing.

–noun
1. something said or done to provoke laughter or cause amusement, as a witticism, a short and amusing anecdote, or a prankish act: He tells very funny jokes. She played a joke on him.
2. something that is amusing or ridiculous, esp. because of being ludicrously inadequate or a sham; a thing, situation, or person laughed at rather than taken seriously; farce: Their pretense of generosity is a joke. An officer with no ability to command is a joke.
3. a matter that need not be taken very seriously; trifling matter: The loss was no joke.
4. something that does not present the expected challenge; something very easy: The test was a joke for the whole class.
5. practical joke.
–verb (used without object)
6. to speak or act in a playful or merry way: He was always joking with us.
7. to say something in fun or teasing rather than in earnest; be facetious: He didn't really mean it, he was only joking.
–verb (used with object)
8. to subject to jokes; make fun of; tease.
9. to obtain by joking: The comedian joked coins from the audience.
Origin:
1660–70; < L jocus jest


sar⋅casm  [sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2. a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.
Origin:
1570–80; < LL sarcasmus < Gk sarkasmós, deriv. of sarkázein to rend (flesh), sneer; see sarco-

You see that was exactly what I was making fun of. If someone told you Obama was quitting smoking, from what I have seen of you it would not surprise me one bit if you took that to mean tobacco will soon be banned in this country. Jesus! Stop taking everything (including yourself) so freaking seriously! I assure you none of us take you seriously even maybe when we should because you have such an active exaggerating paranoid imagination in your postings!

 

[randomJACKASS]

If I thought for a minute that all these death panel bullshit stories had anything to them I'd be freakin' more pissed than you who believe that nonsense. I just am not that paranoid anymore, and life is so much more enjoyable sans unreasonable paranoia.

Oh yeah, and Cerise, I wish you nothing but all that I would want for myself in this life. I'll let you come up with your own paranoid interpretation of what that means!

 

[valkyrie]

It clearly states that a consultation is mandatory every 5 years, and more often if there is a significant change in the health of an individual, including admission to a nursing home.

Consultation means what it says ... what are your wishes? "Do you want to be kept on life support indefinitely?" This is living will stuff and should be done anyway, but isn't talked about.

WTF do you think it is?

 

[spike]

It clearly states that a consultation is mandatory every 5 years, and more often if there is a significant change in the health of an individual, including admission to a nursing home.

No Cerise, it clearly nowhere states that they are ever mandatory. You're not reading what is right in front of you.

It says they are authorized every 5 years. That means they are allowed every 5 years if you want them. because they are optional.

Read your own quotes.

 

[Gonz]

It says they are authorized every 5 years. That means they are allowed every 5 years if you want them. because they are optional.

If they're optional, why is there a time limit?

 

[spike]

If they're optional, why is there a time limit?

What time limit. Every 5 years you have the option to have the counseling. You can't have it daily.

WTF is so hard about this Gonz?

Every 5 years you have an option to have counseling. It's really not that difficult to grasp if you try just a little.

 

[randomJACKASS]

All you people worried about "rationing" and "death panels" are basically either ignorant of the current system, paranoid, or plain stupid! The only hope you have if you, even in middle age, develop a long term costly condition is if, you either have the money to start paying cash, or to retain a good lawyer to sue your insurance company to make it do right by you.

Thousands of Americans also lose health insurance each year through a practice called rescission.
When a person is diagnosed with an expensive condition such as cancer, some insurance companies review his/her initial health status questionnaire. In most states’ individual insurance market, insurance companies can retroactively cancel the entire policy if any condition was missed – even if the medical condition is unrelated, and even if the person was not aware of the condition at the time. Coverage can also be revoked for all members of a family, even if only one family member failed to disclose a medical condition.10
A recent Congressional investigation into this practice found nearly 20,000 rescissions from three large insurers over five years, saving them $300 million in medical claims11 – $300 million that instead had to come out of the pockets of people who thought they were insured, or became bad debt for health care providers.
At least one insurance company has been found to evaluate employee performance based in part on the amount of money an employee saved the company through rescissions.12 Simply put, these insurance company employees are encouraged to revoke sick people’s health coverage.

Source

If that doesn't make you mad, then you are in denial of reality, or again just plain stupid. The government is not as evil as you seem to think. They want to put an end to practices like the aforementioned for our best interest.

The "evil" part of government is you fools who keep feeding peoples paranoia along with your own by buying the insurance lobby's line of horse shit! The evil is that our system allows lobbyists to essentially buy your congressmen!

We need to stop fighting health care reform!

We need to fight for tort reform!

We need to fight for reform of our lobbyist special interest driven congress!



OK, now back to your ignorance and paranoia....

 

[Gonz]

The government is not as evil as you seem to think.

I'll type this slowly so you don't miss anything.

It's not their job.

They want to put an end to practices like the aforementioned for our best interest.

20,000 over 5 years. A big number. Question is, in relation to how many paid claims...20,000 out of 45,000,000 is statistically insignificant.

The "evil" part of government is you fools who keep feeding peoples paranoia along with your own by buying the insurance lobby's line of horse shit! The evil is that our system allows lobbyists to essentially buy your congressmen!

Ain't dat the troof

We need to stop health care reform!

Much better.

We need to fight for tort reform!

What do you suggest?

We need to fight for reform of our lobbyist special interest driven congress!

That's what we're trying to do. Unfortunately, we keep getting called stupid, nazis, morons, etc. Power to the people only when it's what you believe in?

 

[spike]

It's not their job.

It is their job to protect the citizens.

Unfortunately, we keep getting called stupid, nazis, morons, etc. Power to the people only when it's what you believe in?

Who said all that? I seem to remember you wanting to ignore what the majority of the people want pretty often. Including if the majority want healthcare reform.

It looks like you gave up on the mandatory death panel nonsense at least though.

 

[Gonz]

protect, not babysit.

 

[randomJACKASS]

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

What do you suggest?

blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

I suggest that lawsuits against doctors have hard and fast limits to damages one can sue for. There also needs to be mechanism to review lawsuits for actual merit, before they can even be tried.

Much more emphasis needs to be put on suspending revoking licenses to practice, and gross incompetence should be a criminal matter, rather than a get rich quick scheme.

You can clearly see what I thought about the rest of your post.

 

[Gonz]

Hindsight is 20/20

 

[randomJACKASS]

Hindsight is 20/20

What the hell is that supposed to mean? You are a proponent of tort reform, what do you think about the general concepts I just commented on?

What would you suggest?

Is it just that you are afraid to agree with me on general principal?

I have always been quick to point where I agree with people who are normally my political opponents. Some others here have shown that ability too. I have almost never seen you admit to agreeing with anything someone who you normally disagree with says. Why is that?

 

[randomJACKASS]

Wait, there was another thing to address.

20,000 over 5 years. A big number. Question is, in relation to how many paid claims...20,000 out of 45,000,000 is statistically insignificant.

Preposterous!

Statistically insignifigant? That is until it happens to you or one of yours! You aren't very thorough in you statistics. You don't account for this being data compiled from just three companies. You don't account for the vast majority of paid claims being ones that the insurance company can settle cheaply and still keep those premiums rolling in. You also don't count all the probably 100K that they tried to weasel out of but could not! You are looking at only what you want to see that supports your narrow minded view of the situation and telling us that 20,000 people who got fucked over because of legalese, and the predatory practices of the company that is supposed to be protecting, is STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT?

I hate myself for this, but all you folks with this attitude, I hope rescission, hits close to home!

 

[spike]

protect, not babysit.

Cool, keeping them safe from the leading threats to their lives definitely falls under the former.

 

[Gonz]

20,000 people who got fucked over because of legalese, and the predatory practices of the company

Did you personally investigate every one of these claims?

If not, then, according to spikes rules, you are lying.