Principia Discordia

Quote from: http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Poll%3A+Health+care+views+take+sympathetic+tilt+-+USATODAY.com&expire=&urlID=408522157&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fwashington%2F2009-08-12-poll-12_N.htm&partnerID=1660By Susan Page, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The raucous protests at congressional town-hall-style meetings have succeeded in fueling opposition to proposed health care bills among some Americans, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds — particularly among the independents who tend to be at the center of political debates.

In a survey of 1,000 adults taken Tuesday, 34% say demonstrations at the hometown sessions have made them more sympathetic to the protesters' views; 21% say they are less sympathetic.

Independents by 2-to-1, 35%-16%, say they are more sympathetic to the protesters now.

The findings are unwelcome news for President Obama and Democratic congressional leaders, who have scrambled to respond to the protests and in some cases even to be heard. From Pennsylvania to Texas, those who oppose plans to overhaul the health care system have asked aggressive questions and staged noisy demonstrations.

The forums have grabbed public attention: Seven in 10 respondents are following the news closely.

"No one condones the actions of those who disrupt public events," House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said in an op-ed article published in today's USA TODAY. "But those in Washington who dismiss the frustration of the American people and call it 'manufactured' do so at their own peril."

White House adviser David Axelrod questioned the USA TODAY survey's methodology, saying those who report being more sympathetic to the protesters now were likely to have been on that side from the start. "There is a media fetish about these things," Axelrod said of the protests, "but I don't think this has changed much" when it comes to public opinion.

A study by the non-partisan Pew Research Center concluded that 59% of the airtime last week on 13 cable TV and radio talk shows were devoted to the health care debate.

In the USA TODAY Poll:

• A 57% majority of those surveyed, including six in 10 independents, say a major factor behind the protests are concerns that average citizens had well before the meetings took place; 48% say efforts by activists to create organized opposition to the health care bills are a major factor.

• There's some tolerance for loud voices: 51% say individuals making "angry attacks" on a health care bill are an example of "democracy in action" rather than "abuse of democracy."

• Some actions are seen as going too far. Six in 10 say shouting down supporters of a bill is an abuse of democracy. On that question, unlike most others, there isn't much of a partisan divide: 69% of Democrats and 58% of Republicans agree.

In Hagerstown, Md., Wednesday, nearly 1,000 people turned out for a forum held by Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin; only 440 could fit in the community-college theater. The crowd often interrupted the senator, but was generally respectful.

In State College, Pa., Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter was jeered at a forum at a Penn State conference center. The 90-minute meeting at times became a shouting match between bill backers and foes.

Contributing: The Associated Press

Quote from: LMNO on August 13, 2009, 07:21:23 PM
"progress" doesn't necessarily mean things get better.

Quote from: Richter on August 13, 2009, 07:23:00 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 13, 2009, 07:21:23 PM
"progress" doesn't necessarily mean things get better.

It beats the opposite, "congres".  :p

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:23:55 PM

Quote from: Richter on August 13, 2009, 07:23:00 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 13, 2009, 07:21:23 PM
"progress" doesn't necessarily mean things get better.

It beats the opposite, "congres".  :p

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

I was just thinking that!!

Quote from: LMNO on August 13, 2009, 07:24:31 PM

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:23:55 PM

Quote from: Richter on August 13, 2009, 07:23:00 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 13, 2009, 07:21:23 PM
"progress" doesn't necessarily mean things get better.

It beats the opposite, "congres".  :p

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

I was just thinking that!!

Misspelled and everything?

Quote from: LMNO on August 13, 2009, 07:24:31 PM

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:23:55 PM

Quote from: Richter on August 13, 2009, 07:23:00 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 13, 2009, 07:21:23 PM
"progress" doesn't necessarily mean things get better.

It beats the opposite, "congres".  :p

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

I was just thinking that!!

Misspelled and everything?

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:08:20 PM
See. Protesting does make a difference. Now, let's find something worth protesting so we can make progress.

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:08:20 PM
See. Protesting does make a difference. Now, let's find something worth protesting so we can make progress.

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2009, 03:06:16 AM
I would agree, except most of the shouting I've heard and read are the MORONIC LIES that are the talking points of the wackjob right. If they were frustrated and INFORMED, even if conservative, I'd agree with you. But it's mostly, if not entirely, fearmongering-- or the result of fearmongering.

Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 14, 2009, 04:27:44 AM

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:08:20 PM
See. Protesting does make a difference. Now, let's find something worth protesting so we can make progress.

Only when the protests get news coverage.  When the protests are completely ignored they appear to do nothing.

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:23:25 PM
Whatever, let's protest to make things better, then. C'mon, let's do it.

Quote from: Richter on August 14, 2009, 02:43:27 PM

Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 14, 2009, 04:27:44 AM

Quote from: Dimo1138 on August 13, 2009, 07:08:20 PM
See. Protesting does make a difference. Now, let's find something worth protesting so we can make progress.

Only when the protests get news coverage.  When the protests are completely ignored they appear to do nothing.

So you make sure your protesting actions get covered.
Welcome to terrorism.

QuoteWASHINGTON (AP) -- Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system.

Facing mounting opposition to the overhaul, administration officials left open the chance for a compromise with Republicans that would include health insurance cooperatives instead of a government-run plan. Such a concession probably would enrage Obama's liberal supporters but could deliver a much-needed victory on a top domestic priority opposed by GOP lawmakers.

Officials from both political parties reached across the aisle in an effort to find compromises on proposals they left behind when they returned to their districts for an August recess. Obama had wanted the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured, but didn't include it as one of his core principles of reform.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that government alternative to private health insurance is ''not the essential element'' of the administration's health care overhaul. The White House would be open to co-ops, she said, a sign that Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory.

Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own.

With $3 billion to $4 billion in initial support from the government, the co-ops would operate under a national structure with state affiliates, but independent of the government. They would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.

''I think there will be a competitor to private insurers,'' Sebelius said. ''That's really the essential part, is you don't turn over the whole new marketplace to private insurance companies and trust them to do the right thing.''

Obama's spokesman refused to say a public option was a make-or-break choice.

''What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market,'' White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Sunday.

A day before, Obama appeared to hedge his bets.

''All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform,'' Obama said at a town hall meeting in Grand Junction, Colo. ''This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it.''

It's hardly the same rhetoric Obama employed during a constant, personal campaign for legislation.

''I am pleased by the progress we're making on health care reform and still believe, as I've said before, that one of the best ways to bring down costs, provide more choices and assure quality is a public option that will force the insurance companies to compete and keep them honest,'' Obama said in July.

Lawmakers have discussed the co-op model for months although the Democratic leadership and the White House have said they prefer a government-run option.

Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, called the argument for a government-run public plan little more than a ''wasted effort.'' He added there are enough votes in the Senate for a cooperative plan.

''It's not government-run and government-controlled,'' he said. ''It's membership-run and membership-controlled. But it does provide a nonprofit competitor for the for-profit insurance companies, and that's why it has appeal on both sides.''

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said Obama's team is making a political calculation and embracing the co-op alternative as ''a step away from the government takeover of the health care system'' that the GOP has pummeled.

''I don't know if it will do everything people want, but we ought to look at it. I think it's a far cry from the original proposals,'' he said.

Republicans say a public option would have unfair advantages that would drive private insurers out of business. Critics say co-ops would not be genuine public options for health insurance.

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, said it would be difficult to pass any legislation through the Democratic-controlled Congress without the promised public plan.

''We'll have the same number of people uninsured,'' she said. ''If the insurance companies wanted to insure these people now, they'd be insured.''

Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., said the Democrats' option would force individuals from their private plans to a government-run plan as some employers may choose not to provide health insurance.

''Tens of millions of individuals would be moved from their personal, private insurance to the government-run program. We simply don't think that's acceptable,'' he said.

A shift to a cooperative plan would certainly give some cover to fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats who are hardly cheering for the government-run plan.

''The reality is that it takes 60 percent to get this done in the Senate. It's probably going to have to be bipartisan in the Senate, which I think it should be,'' said Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., who added that the proposals still need changes before he can support them.

Obama, writing in Sunday's New York Times, said political maneuvers should be excluded from the debate.

''In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain,'' he wrote. ''But for all the scare tactics out there, what's truly scary -- truly risky -- is the prospect of doing nothing.''

Congress' proposals, however, seemed likely to strike end-of-life counseling sessions. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has called the session ''death panels,'' a label that has drawn rebuke from her fellow Republicans as well as Democrats.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, declined to criticize Palin's comments and said Obama wants to create a government-run panel to advise what types of care would be available to citizens.

''In all honesty, I don't want a bunch of nameless, faceless bureaucrats setting health care for my aged citizens in Utah,'' Hatch said.

Sebelius said the end-of-life proposal was likely to be dropped from the final bill.

''We wanted to make sure doctors were reimbursed for that very important consultation if family members chose to make it, and instead it's been turned into this scare tactic and probably will be off the table,'' she said.

Sebelius spoke on CNN's ''State of the Union'' and ABC's ''This Week.'' Gibbs appeared on CBS' ''Face the Nation.'' Conrad and Shelby appeared on ''Fox News Sunday.'' Johnson, Price and Ross spoke with ''State of the Union.'' Hatch was interviewed on ''This Week.''

Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 14, 2009, 04:10:45 AM
Good thing we have a representative government that isn't easily sway by the mob mentality, right guys?

Right??


:horrormirth:

Quote from: Rumwolf on August 17, 2009, 10:57:19 AM
I seem to have misplaced my balls be a politician.
                           \
(http://luv2hateu.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/who-is-barack-obama.jpg)

QuoteAll the noise from the right about Obama being a not-so-crypto-socialist or communist or Marxist has had its desired effect: Obama now seems willing to drop the public option from his health care reform package. But everyone who always saw Obama for what he is—a dogged centrist who knows how to game the system—already knew that the public option would likely be off the table during the initial rounds of reform. Thoughtful folks knews that Obama would play politics—that he would float a plan far more ambitious than he could push through Congress—that his concessions would be scripted from the start, consisting of provisions that he knew to be untenable in the present political climate but which, after becoming familiar through repetition, would sound less extreme the next time they became fodder for public discussion.

Such are the dictates of his technocratic fancy.

What makes the conservative response to his policies particularly dumbfounding is that he's flashed his incrementalist credentials numerous times—most saliently in his treatment of the GLBT issues—and yet conservatives respond like he's always playing for the whole pot when, in fact, all his talk of high stakes is intended to distract them from the fact that he's penny-anteing them into poorhouse. In short, conservatives are giddy because they've "prevented" him from winning as big as he talks even though he's the only one leaving the table with anything in his wallet.

Tempted as I am to expand on all the apt metaphors here—deaths accomplished by a thousand cuts that produce ghosts who proudly crow about not being beheaded, or defeated generals bragging about transitory victories in a long war—but as conservatives have provided me (and Obama) with better material, I can cut to the chase. Consider what the conservative movement currently considers a win:


Conservatives lie about the existence of "death panels."
Liberals cave to public outcry and eliminate "death panels" that never existed from an inchoate version of the Senate's health care reform package.
Conservatives declare victory.

I remember playing similar games as a child. I would:

Pretend there were Imperial Storm Troopers in my closet, who I would
Defeat by dint of Force and flashlight, before
Declaring victory over the gathering forces of darkness.

The difference being, of course, that because there were no actual Storm Troopers in my closet, my imaginary victory entailed nobody else's actual defeat; whereas those who boast of victory over imaginary "death panels" have, in fact, suffered both tactical and rhetorical losses. Any provision short of a "death panel" that crops up in future iterations of health care reform will fail to rouse the ire of the conservative base to the boil it's at now. 

QuoteRep. Ted Poe to hold health care town hall at funeral home.

Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) has announced that he "will hold a health care town hall at Brookside Funeral Home on Saturday, Aug. 22 at 10 a.m." The awkward venue selection would seem to suggest that Poe may be interested in furthering the right-wing's false "death panels" talking point. Late last month, before Congress recessed for August, Poe delivered a speech on the House floor arguing that "when government runs health care, senior citizens are sometimes refused treatment because of their age." He continued his fear-mongering:

Government-run health care lets bureaucrats decide who receives rationed care and who doesn't, who lives and who just dies.

Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 17, 2009, 07:01:27 PM

Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 14, 2009, 04:10:45 AM
Good thing we have a representative government that isn't easily sway by the mob mentality, right guys?

Right??


:lulz:

QuoteGiven hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority's cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks.

Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans' purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month's Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair.

QuoteStill so clueless about with whom they grapple. Bleating like a beaten baby seal: 'Where's the rational dialogue?' Beyond pathetic. Claire Mccaskill Exhibit no. 1. Pure mewling.

We're not going to repeat for the 10,239th time what the Movement is up to, etc., Weimar, yada, yada, yada. Go read Digby or Greenwald for the 'shock.' We can't be bothered to write it anymore. If a governing majority is determined to yank defeat from the jaws of recent victory, be our guest.

Still depressing. America's future still steered by the cynical, self-dealing, manipulative class. Their vessel? Poorly educated, white, easily scared and angered, Baby-Jesus-loving mobs with some racism sprinkled in. The same Plutocrats who prospered under the Warlord floating on a sea of venom, hatred and irrationality making steady progress for the Port of Status Quo.

We've spent too many hours with people who helped set up 'Fox Nation' and communicate with Ailes, Norquist, Newt et al. Their utter disdain for any moral consequences of their political activity is bottomless: especially when overlooking Right Wing moral hypocrisy. Expediency doesn't even begin to scratch the surface. But they know what all the Democrats (netroots aside) don't — you only need to pretend to believe in democracy to *gain* power. An energized minority can overawe the sheople. Be the wedge for the Dictatorship Of The Entitled to govern. Nazis. Guns. Lynching. 'Deal With It!' as the angry internal Fox memos say.

All these Neo-Upper-West-Siders (in spirit if not fact) Starbuckians now on MSNBC crying foul. They wimper and plead for calm discourse over another frappuccino, preferably in NPR tones. They gasp and careen into run on sentences blurting the discovery that lobbying groups are involved! Yeah, for real. Get out !

Democratic consultants tut tut about how these 'crazy' tactics ignore pluralism and politics of the middle. What's the point of supporting the willfully dim? Recall – it took the greatest economic collapse since the Depression to seal the deal last November even with Katrina, Iraq, etc., etc.

...

The very estimable Frank Rich wonders if we're getting 'punk'd'. DOH. See the spectral-looking founder of Politico, Jim VanderHei, equivocate, lamenting that all the town hall shouting and violence makes it hard to see definitively how much *might* be coordinated or a real grass roots phenomenon. He's worse than a battered spouse – he seemingly yearns for the Warlord's boot of fear and punitive control. Laurence O'Donnell then ponders the percentage of 'astro turfing' or 'a genuine uprising' (think about the flinch in those words). But then O'Donnell thinks everything is a sham unless it occurs in the Senate Finance Committee. Did you know by any chance he once ran Committee staff?

Well, we did get Obama out 12 days into August. Should we do cartwheels because Obama had one town hall today? With a gun toting wing nut carrying a sign calling for bloodshed in the audience?

....

Note to Dems, before you get stomped on (again) like hapless chinchillas, go rent 'Terminator':

QuoteKyle Reese: Listen, and understand. That terminator Ring Wing Movement is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

Tattoo *THAT* on your foreheads you idiots.

Quote from: Cain on August 19, 2009, 04:39:52 PM
Game, set and match to the forces of pure irrationality and bile, every single time.

Quote from: LMNO on August 19, 2009, 07:56:15 PM
This was fun: I just heard a Republican pundit say that we don't need a Public Option... all we need is "more regulation of the health care industry."   :eek:

Quote from: LMNO on August 19, 2009, 07:56:15 PM
This was fun: I just heard a Republican pundit say that we don't need a Public Option... all we need is "more regulation of the health care industry."   :eek:

Quote from: That One Guy on August 20, 2009, 02:46:30 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 19, 2009, 07:56:15 PM
This was fun: I just heard a Republican pundit say that we don't need a Public Option... all we need is "more regulation of the health care industry."   :eek:

A Republican ... arguing FOR increased governmental regulation ...

I ... I just, well ... that's ...

:asplode:

Quote"When you ask me that question, I'm going to revert to my ethnic heritage and ask you a question: On what planet do you spend most of your time?" Frank asked.

"You stand there with a picture of the president defaced to look like Hitler and compare the effort to increase health care to the Nazis," he said, adding such behavior demonstrated the strength of First Amendment guarantees of what he called "contemptible" free speech.

"Trying to have a conversation with you would be like trying to argue with a dining room table," Frank said to the woman. "I have no interest in doing it."

Quote from: JenneYou know, if the Obama Administration is going to back down on universal health care, then I'm out of this discussion entirely.  I fought hard to win support for this president while he was running, but he's bending to the Republican wave of trash all too easily.  These people crowing loudly at the town hall meetings aren't really mad about universal health care--they are mad because they are sick and tired of being sick and tired. They won't vote him or Democrats out of office for sticking to their guns and actually getting them affordable health care through the government.

But they will continue to question and be dismayed, as Indpendents and Democrats that are pro-Obama's plans so far are beginning to be, if promises that were made in the campaign fall flat to the floor through a little opposition.  The Bush Administration was able to push through an unpopular war with relative ease through its own opposition...and that has destroyed millions of lives and continues to do so.  Why can't the Obama Administration pass one health care bill that will save millions?  Don't give in to the pressure.  Don't give in to the trash and the refuse that the punditry have been so far very surprisingly yet disgustingly effective in destroying what momentum had been gained in the campaign for this effort.

Quote from: Jenne on August 20, 2009, 10:34:50 PM
And I'm sorry if this is repost, but the Barney Frank response to the "Obama = Hilter" strawman is hilarious:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYlZiWK2Iy8

"on what planet do you spend most of your time"

"it is a tribute to the 1st Amendment that this kind of bile and nonsense is so freely propogated"

"trying to argue with you is like arguing with a dining room table"

:mittens: to Frank, though he definitely is not interested in the engagement, I have to say, THANK YOU SIR FOR VOICING MY OPINION

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 02:21:08 PM
So, with the death of Ted "Health Care" Kennedy, do you think the bill has a better chance of passing "in his honor," or does it fail even harder because he can't leverage his political power anymore?

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 02:38:01 PM
Yeah.  Perhaps for the best.  I don't think he'd want his legacy to be, "and in his honor, we have passed a healthcare bill that was compromised to a point that nothing changed, no one was helped, and the status quo was maintained pharmacy companies made out like fucking BANDITS."

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 02:21:08 PM
So, with the death of Ted "Health Care" Kennedy, do you think the bill has a better chance of passing "in his honor," or does it fail even harder because he can't leverage his political power anymore?

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 26, 2009, 02:55:24 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 02:21:08 PM
So, with the death of Ted "Health Care" Kennedy, do you think the bill has a better chance of passing "in his honor," or does it fail even harder because he can't leverage his political power anymore?

All of a sudden, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins have become even more powerful in the Senate.  They are going to be wined and dined like no tomorrow.  In the end, I think it will all depend on how much they fear being roasted by the rest of their party should they sign on to support whatever the final bill looks like.  I can see Snowe, maybe, supporting a Public Option, but it would be a pretty weak one I think.  I don't think Collins would go for it, she's a bit more Conservative than Snowe.  But she might go for the co-op idea. 

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 03:08:59 PM
I am veering further and further into the Cain camp of "Heath Care should not be a capitalist market good."

At least I think that's one of his stances.  Apologies if I fucked up the point/nuances.


Anyway, it's the idea that it costs money to treat injured people, so if you want to make money of the heath care industry, it makes sense to charge high insurance rates and then deny as much coverage as you can... "Higher costs, fewer patients".

That doesn't make sense as it goes against the point of health care, so it shouldn't be treated as a capitalist market.

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 03:30:29 PM
Thats pretty much my stance, although I believe the French system is a mixed public and private one, and not only is it the best in the world in terms of treatment, its also covers 99.9% of French citizens.  That would probably be easier to sell in the USA, with its partial market approach.

I'm not really dogmatic about it, I'm "whatever works well, covers as many people as possible and doesn't bankrupt the state".  Well, the last one isn't a massive concern.  The NHS works well, but so do a few other models, including the Canadian and German ones.

Quote from: Cainad on August 26, 2009, 04:16:51 PM
The French system might be good, even great, but for too many Americans the fact that it's French means it's ruined forever.

Quote from: Cainad on August 26, 2009, 04:16:51 PM
The French system might be good, even great, but for too many Americans the fact that it's French means it's ruined forever.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 04:34:46 PM
The argument they use is funny.

"RATIONING!  LONG LINES!"

But why would that be?  Oh, yes...because they'd have to wait in line with poor people.  Because their life is worth more, because they have a few bucks, we should lock poor people out of health care.

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

QuoteAcross all accident and emergency services, 97.5 per cent of patients spent four hours or less from arrival to admission, transfer or discharge, compared with 98.6 per cent in the previous quarter.

In major A&E departments, performance was slightly poorer - at 96.4 per cent, compared with 98.1 per cent in the previous quarter.

There was no change in performance compared with the same period last year, when the figures were 97.4 per cent for all services and 96.3 per cent for major A&E departments.

The Department of Health's "operational standard" is that 98 per cent of patients should spend four hours or less from arrival at A&E to admission, transfer or discharge.

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

I've been in a waiting room, before.  Once for up to half an hour, but nothing more.  The only time there could've been lines recently is with swine flu, and even then, the medical advice to stay at home and get someone else to pick up the drugs staved that off.  I suspect they are thinking of Soviet breadlines and applying them to Canadian and UK healthcare providers.

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:46:45 PM
Just checked the NHS figures.

QuoteAcross all accident and emergency services, 97.5 per cent of patients spent four hours or less from arrival to admission, transfer or discharge, compared with 98.6 per cent in the previous quarter.

In major A&E departments, performance was slightly poorer - at 96.4 per cent, compared with 98.1 per cent in the previous quarter.

There was no change in performance compared with the same period last year, when the figures were 97.4 per cent for all services and 96.3 per cent for major A&E departments.

The Department of Health's "operational standard" is that 98 per cent of patients should spend four hours or less from arrival at A&E to admission, transfer or discharge.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 04:34:46 PM
But why would that be?  Oh, yes...because they'd have to wait in line with poor people.  Because their life is worth more, because they have a few bucks, we should lock poor people out of health care.

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 05:34:24 PM
So, if I got this right, when they say "there will be long lines" they don't mean, "having an appointment at 2:00, and not seeing the doctor until 4:00," right?

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 05:39:29 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 05:34:24 PM
So, if I got this right, when they say "there will be long lines" they don't mean, "having an appointment at 2:00, and not seeing the doctor until 4:00," right?

That's different, and you hate America and kiss terrorists.

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 05:52:25 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 05:39:29 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2009, 05:34:24 PM
So, if I got this right, when they say "there will be long lines" they don't mean, "having an appointment at 2:00, and not seeing the doctor until 4:00," right?

That's different, and you hate America and kiss terrorists.

No no, that's ME!

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 04:47:00 PM

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

I've been in a waiting room, before.  Once for up to half an hour, but nothing more.  The only time there could've been lines recently is with swine flu, and even then, the medical advice to stay at home and get someone else to pick up the drugs staved that off.  I suspect they are thinking of Soviet breadlines and applying them to Canadian and UK healthcare providers.

The "waiting in line" for Canuck or UK medicine was debunked by Michael Moore (like him or leave him) in Sicko.

Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 26, 2009, 08:42:43 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 04:47:00 PM

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

I've been in a waiting room, before.  Once for up to half an hour, but nothing more.  The only time there could've been lines recently is with swine flu, and even then, the medical advice to stay at home and get someone else to pick up the drugs staved that off.  I suspect they are thinking of Soviet breadlines and applying them to Canadian and UK healthcare providers.

The "waiting in line" for Canuck or UK medicine was debunked by Michael Moore (like him or leave him) in Sicko.

The waiting in line thing in the UK comes in when you need specialists from the people I've talked to who have been in the system.  Not emergency rooms.  You get that in the US anyway though.

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 08:53:24 PM

Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 26, 2009, 08:42:43 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 04:47:00 PM

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

I've been in a waiting room, before.  Once for up to half an hour, but nothing more.  The only time there could've been lines recently is with swine flu, and even then, the medical advice to stay at home and get someone else to pick up the drugs staved that off.  I suspect they are thinking of Soviet breadlines and applying them to Canadian and UK healthcare providers.

The "waiting in line" for Canuck or UK medicine was debunked by Michael Moore (like him or leave him) in Sicko.

The waiting in line thing in the UK comes in when you need specialists from the people I've talked to who have been in the system.  Not emergency rooms.  You get that in the US anyway though.

We get it ALL in the US...even in the top fields at the top hospitals.  That's why I have to larf hysterically when Fux News badgers all and sundry about how we have "the best health care system in the world!"

Assholes.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 08:54:53 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 08:53:24 PM

Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 26, 2009, 08:42:43 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 04:47:00 PM

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

I've been in a waiting room, before.  Once for up to half an hour, but nothing more.  The only time there could've been lines recently is with swine flu, and even then, the medical advice to stay at home and get someone else to pick up the drugs staved that off.  I suspect they are thinking of Soviet breadlines and applying them to Canadian and UK healthcare providers.

The "waiting in line" for Canuck or UK medicine was debunked by Michael Moore (like him or leave him) in Sicko.

The waiting in line thing in the UK comes in when you need specialists from the people I've talked to who have been in the system.  Not emergency rooms.  You get that in the US anyway though.

We get it ALL in the US...even in the top fields at the top hospitals.  That's why I have to larf hysterically when Fux News badgers all and sundry about how we have "the best health care system in the world!"

Assholes.

Well, they weren't counting the 37 commie socialists above us, because they hate Baby Jesus and don't count.

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 08:59:32 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 08:54:53 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 08:53:24 PM

Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 26, 2009, 08:42:43 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 04:47:00 PM

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

I've been in a waiting room, before.  Once for up to half an hour, but nothing more.  The only time there could've been lines recently is with swine flu, and even then, the medical advice to stay at home and get someone else to pick up the drugs staved that off.  I suspect they are thinking of Soviet breadlines and applying them to Canadian and UK healthcare providers.

The "waiting in line" for Canuck or UK medicine was debunked by Michael Moore (like him or leave him) in Sicko.

The waiting in line thing in the UK comes in when you need specialists from the people I've talked to who have been in the system.  Not emergency rooms.  You get that in the US anyway though.

We get it ALL in the US...even in the top fields at the top hospitals.  That's why I have to larf hysterically when Fux News badgers all and sundry about how we have "the best health care system in the world!"

Assholes.

Well, they weren't counting the 37 commie socialists above us, because they hate Baby Jesus and don't count.

:x  I hate Fox News.  I really really really really really really do.  I can't even laugh at them much anymore.  I hate anyone who SOUNDS like Fox News. 

Fuck.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 09:05:49 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 08:59:32 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 26, 2009, 08:54:53 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 08:53:24 PM

Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 26, 2009, 08:42:43 PM

Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2009, 04:47:00 PM

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
I've never waited in a line.

I've been in a waiting room, before.  Once for up to half an hour, but nothing more.  The only time there could've been lines recently is with swine flu, and even then, the medical advice to stay at home and get someone else to pick up the drugs staved that off.  I suspect they are thinking of Soviet breadlines and applying them to Canadian and UK healthcare providers.

The "waiting in line" for Canuck or UK medicine was debunked by Michael Moore (like him or leave him) in Sicko.

The waiting in line thing in the UK comes in when you need specialists from the people I've talked to who have been in the system.  Not emergency rooms.  You get that in the US anyway though.

We get it ALL in the US...even in the top fields at the top hospitals.  That's why I have to larf hysterically when Fux News badgers all and sundry about how we have "the best health care system in the world!"

Assholes.

Well, they weren't counting the 37 commie socialists above us, because they hate Baby Jesus and don't count.

:x  I hate Fox News.  I really really really really really really do.  I can't even laugh at them much anymore.  I hate anyone who SOUNDS like Fox News. 

Fuck.

The teens ain't gonna be your decade.  Just saying.

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2009, 09:10:42 PM
Sad but true... idiots always turn to the loudmouthed idiots when they're scared about the future. And it doesn't get much louder, or more idiotic than FAUX News.

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2009, 04:52:55 PM
I bet Stalin is pissed he never thought of that.

"You mean all I need to do is nationalize the medical service, and they'll refuse to come out of snobbery?  Fuck, where did all those OGPU goons go...I knew I should have listened to Lenin about the capitalist classes selling us the rope we'd hang them with.  We'll save a bunch on bullets and graves, too."