SwiftVets.com Forum Index SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Obamacare = Bad HMO

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Geedunk & Scuttlebutt
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jalexson
PO3


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 272
Location: Hutchinson, Kansas

PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:36 am    Post subject: Obamacare = Bad HMO Reply with quote

A group of bicyclists are riding across the country raising money to provide the latest NASA developed rehabilitative equipment called secure ambulation modules for military veterans injured in the current conflicts. My first reaction to seeing the story on a local tv station was "isn't that great". We have people wanting to devote time and energy to help injured veterans.
http://mobile.ksn.com/news/local/story/Trio-biking-across-country-to-help-injured/hyWwcQkzWUOCJkqNTCJ_Vw.cspx

http://ipp.gsfc.nasa.gov/SS-SAM.html

After thinking about it for a while, I wondered why veterans needed outside assistance to fund their medical care. Don't we have a president who claims he will correct deficiencies in health care?

So why doesn't President Barack Obama provide state of the art health care to federal employees who were "injured on the job?" Why did he at one point suggest requiring veterans pay for their own treatment for service connected injuries? Pressure from veterans forced him to back down.

Obama's failure to fully cover current federal employees health care costs and attempting to reduce the health coverage provided to former federal employees with on the job injuries indicates he isn't telling the truth when he says his proposal won't result in reduced health coverage.

I learned long ago to evaluate politicians according to what they do rather than what they say. Obama says his proposal will increase health care, but his actions indicate he wants to do the opposite.

I also learned that if something sounds too good to be true it probably is. I doubt that Obama's promises about health care are worth any more than Bernie Madoff's promises to make his clients richer.
_________________
"That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoe making and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poor house."
-- Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jalexson
PO3


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 272
Location: Hutchinson, Kansas

PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why should we believe statements about health care from the most secretive president since Richard Nixon? We have no way of knowing if presidents who keep significant secrets in some areas are telling the truth on other matters.

Barack Obama's continued refusal to release minor personal documents like his actual birth certificate, college records, etc. implies he is covering up important information that we should know about. Unless his critics are correct, none of the information should have any adverse affect other than possibly causing some embarrassment.

A president who feels he has to keep personal secrets is very likely to also keep secrets about his proposals including those involving health care. He shouldn't be surprised that many people suspect he has ulterior motives for some proposals and may be lying about their impact.

Obama has lied on other important issues. Last year he said there wouldn't be any new taxes for most of us. After being elected he proposed huge tax on carbon emissions that will affect all of us. The purpose of the tax is to allow the greedy financial interests who bought the White House for him to make billions trading "carbon credits".

I don't know if his critics are correct that the refusal to release his actual birth certificate is due to him being born outside the U.S., but there doesn't appear to be any other reason for him to keep the birth certificate secret. Does the birth certificate indicate Obama was born outside the U.S. or could it include information that might indicate that Obama is not the child mentioned on the certificate? Perhaps the real Barack Obama died shortly after birth and his mother in a humanitarian move adopted an African orphan to replace the baby she lost. She then used the U.S. certificate to make it appear her new child was born in the U.S.

Incidentally there is now a claim that someone has found a Kenyan birth registration indicating he was born in Kenya. As was the case with the document used to claim he was born in Hawaii, the other side suggests it is a forgery. And, like the Hawaiian document, it merely states that there is a birth certificate rather than being an actual birth certificate. Those who believe the document is valid suggest it may have been produced in connection with his mother's divorce case.
_________________
"That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoe making and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poor house."
-- Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jalexson
PO3


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 272
Location: Hutchinson, Kansas

PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

During the coming weeks we will be hearing about the nation's best health insurance program. It doesn't cover a wide variety of disorders, but it provides complete coverage for the type of disorders it covers -- the various forms of Muscular Dystrophy.

The Muscular Dystrophy Association provides assistance in the form of wheelchairs as well as medical treatment for those whose form of MD can be treated. The MDA doesn't require patients to have other insurance or make payments.

The MDA isn't the only charitable health organization. St. Jude's Hospital provides treatment to children without regard to ability to pay as do the Shriners' Hospitals.

Charitable hospitals once played a major role in American health care until administrators discovered they could make a profit by charging government and private insurance for health care. The organizations that once funded many of these hospitals gradually allowed the hospitals to become self supporting by charging patients and their insurance companies.

Churches and other charitable organizations need to play a greater role in providing health care to those who find it too expensive. I don't expect Democrats to support this approach because they want to make the federal government bigger even though the federal government doesn't do anything particularly well. It even has trouble running the post office or fighting wars in spite of the fact it has handled both functions since before the current constitution was adopted.

I doubt that the Ferengi Republicans like Rush Limbaugh will be interested in encouraging charitable organizations, but perhaps the religious Republicans might.

Incidentally, I emailed some suggestions on health care to the Obama administration earlier this year when it requested input. I originally wrote it in 1992 and expanded it during the Clinton administration, with occasionally mailings to politicians. It's a work in progress that I haven't done much with for several years. I really need to go back through it and do a better job of making the various parts fit together, but with the politicians we have now, I don't think it's worth the time.

http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1592261
_________________
"That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoe making and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poor house."
-- Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Me#1You#10
Site Admin


Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503

PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The purpose of the tax is to allow the greedy financial interests who bought the White House for him to make billions trading "carbon credits".


While true, I think, perhaps, it goes much deeper...and is much, much more insidious and threatening.

What they're about is institutionalizing the new "religion" of environmentalism...both culturally (which is very near a done deal) and now, legislatively. The "greens", worshiping at the altar of Gaia, now want to be "compensated" accordingly and supported by an attendant bureaucratic monster that must and will be nurtured and fed by an already oppressed American taxpayer and his hard-earned dollars. Those are the "millions of new jobs" the leftists are touting...and most aren't even shy about referring to them as "green jobs".

If you think the ill-effects of an out-of-control, institutionalized religion are bad now (see Paul Rodriguez and the current plight of his farmer peers in California for the most recent insanity), wait till "cap and trade" becomes the law of the land...and don't hold your breath waiting for the ACLU to commence litigation on this particular union of "church" and state.

I don't know if this malevolent juggernaut is stoppable but, if so, the only viable option (at least as I see it) is some type of movement for a national referendum on the imposition of term limits for federal legislators. If we don't take wake up soon and take the "career" out of "career politician", our noble experiment in democracy is headed for the historical archives.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Geedunk & Scuttlebutt All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group