Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 4 Sep 2009 08:18 In article <ie70a5pvpas9jeliqc5k3frbqpitoob991(a)4ax.com>, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 17:28:49 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > > >The Death Panel thing is a good one to work on though, because anyone > >who says they aren't going to be part of the system is lying. > > Palin's remark was so on target that the "end of life counseling" > provision was removed from the legislation. That's a pretty good > indication that she struck a nerve. Yes, just one more piece of the Bush regime legislation that goes into the trash. It's very full in there.
From: William Clark on 4 Sep 2009 08:20 In article <bbMnm.128956$sC1.50048(a)newsfe17.iad>, "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "Howard Brazee" <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote in message > news:ar7u95tu73u6hegjods8csud55cd581hg1(a)4ax.com... > > On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 17:28:49 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > > <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > > > >> The Death Panel thing is a good one to work on though, because anyone > >>who says they aren't going to be part of the system is lying. They > >>have to be there; someone has to allocate resources; you can't just > >>give everyone top quality care; we can't afford it, and we all know > >>it. > > > > Current insurance companies allocate which public care they are > > willing to pay for with the very old. The "Death Panel" that the > > Republicans jumped on is about counseling, more in the way of adding > > psychological care than anything else. Sure it is a Liberal thing > > (not to mention more money to be spent), but it has nothing to do with > > allocating care. > > > > -- > > "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, > > than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace > > to the legislature, and not to the executive department." > > > > - James Madison > > My information is that the counseling on end of > life issues is gone from the proposal and that it > was offered by a Republican in the first place. > Please correct me, if that is not the case. Please note the deafening silence.
From: The moderator on 4 Sep 2009 08:25 "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote in message news:lloydparsons-F22CD7.16200203092009(a)port80.individual.net... > In article <ie70a5pvpas9jeliqc5k3frbqpitoob991(a)4ax.com>, > Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 17:28:49 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr >> <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: >> >> >The Death Panel thing is a good one to work on though, because anyone >> >who says they aren't going to be part of the system is lying. >> >> Palin's remark was so on target that the "end of life counseling" >> provision was removed from the legislation. That's a pretty good >> indication that she struck a nerve. > > And that is because she did what she always does, sensationalize > something that wasn't a bad thing at all. > > You get that a lot from the truly stupid people of this world. What would you call a mandatory consultation to advise patients of government approved end of life options?
From: Lloyd Parsons on 4 Sep 2009 08:29 In article <4aa10721$0$23738$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote in message > news:lloydparsons-F22CD7.16200203092009(a)port80.individual.net... > > In article <ie70a5pvpas9jeliqc5k3frbqpitoob991(a)4ax.com>, > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 17:28:49 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > >> <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > >> > >> >The Death Panel thing is a good one to work on though, because anyone > >> >who says they aren't going to be part of the system is lying. > >> > >> Palin's remark was so on target that the "end of life counseling" > >> provision was removed from the legislation. That's a pretty good > >> indication that she struck a nerve. > > > > And that is because she did what she always does, sensationalize > > something that wasn't a bad thing at all. > > > > You get that a lot from the truly stupid people of this world. > > What would you call a mandatory consultation to advise patients of > government approved end of life options? You need to go back and read the bill, there is NO mandatory requirement.
From: The moderator on 4 Sep 2009 08:33
"Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4aa0d9ee$0$23966$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:41:17 -0700, dene wrote: >> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >> news:4aa043d7$0$4986$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >>> On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 02:42:12 -0700, gray asphalt wrote: >>> > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >>> > news:4a9ef43c$0$5657$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >>> >> On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:42:02 +0000, assimilate wrote: >>> >>> On 1-Sep-2009, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> No. Her career is mostly smoke and mirrors. She is largely >>> >>>> incapable of rational thought. >>> >>> >>> >>> this is just silly. you've no doubt read all the fashionable >>> >>> criticism and you think you know what she's capable of. A little >>> >>> knowledge is a dangerous thing. >>> >> >>> >> Bullshit. If you have any evidence of competence by all means >>> >> share. >>> > >>> > She stood up to the big oil interests re: Alaska. Imo, she has some >>> > character but doesn't have an education. >>> >>> She did some grandstanding and then she quit. Rinse, repeat. >> >> Ya know....you libs should clean up your own house first. The >> platitudes Ted Kennedy received were ridiculous. He should have been >> jailed for vehicular manslaughter, not to mention hit and run. And >> now, Charles Rangel..... Apparently he forgot he had a few hundred >> thousand dollars in a couple of accounts. >> >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/02/ > AR2009090203082.html >> >> It's understandable....I've been known to leave some $$ in the laundry >> bin. > > I do not care about Kennedy or Rangel. The discussion was whether Palin > is capable of holding high public office, and she clearly is not. Palin is not capable, but killers and tax cheats are qualified? |