Obama

[kingk0ng]

I think American couldn't have went wrong with Donald Trump. I mean the guy has went in and out of bankruptcy on three different occasions. Financially, there's no one, IMO, that could do better than him. I mean the guy is a financial genius and millionaire because of it. I think Trump would have been a great selection.

 

[carpee]

This thread is strong with conservatives.

fiscal conservative, yes.

social issues shouldn't even be debated by the federal govt.

progressive presidents have been calamities.
not to mention, liberals these days fail to realize their "democratic" party is now aligned with the European socialists....which has never worked, they all spend into oblivion.

 

[youngandfree]

i still don't understand how obama has such a high approval rating... its pretty sickening

It resembles the 43% of the population that pay no income tax.

 

[ax1]

It resembles the 43% of the population that pay no income tax.

There shouldnt be income tax, its ownership of the people by the goverment. Its not what a free society is supposed to be, man should own the fruits of his own laborm income tax is a form of slavery.

Obama supports income tax laws which is why I dont understand why anybody who already ditch income tax would vote for him as he has been expanding the IRS with the health care bill.

 

[powerman2000]

I'm just bummed the choice comes down to Obama and Romney. I'm not exactly eager to give the Republicans another shot. After all a lot of what's made Obama bad is continuing already horrible policies from Bush 2. Romney has never been small government and he's talking a different tune now, but he's a typical "conservative." Run on small government and legislate like government has all the answers. He hasn't exactly been out talking about ending the failed drug war, rolling back the Patriot Act, decreasing the defense budget, dialing back the police state or anything that makes me think "freedom." Some of the biggest government acts of the past 30 years have come from "conservatives." I don't even know what that word means anymore.

Seems a lot of people want to vote against Obama and I certainly get that, but do people actually think Mitt's going to be much better? Based on what exactly? It may be the coup of the century that a man who basically originated Obamacare gets voted in to replace it. And here's betting all those things conservatives used to be for (many of Obamacare's ideas were championed by previous conservatives) that said no way when it was Obama change their tune when it's Romney. It's going to be win win for the status quo no matter who comes out on top.

To say I am cautiously optimistic about Romney is an understatement, but there's no way he can be worse than Obama.

 

[Geoforce]

To say I am cautiously optimistic about Romney is an understatement, but there's no way he can be worse than Obama.

Perhaps. But 4 years from now will it be "he/she" can't be worse than Romney? The two party system dominated by corporate interests is killing us. It's laughable to me that people see a huge difference between left and right. George W. Bush and Obama have been almost clones and Romney isn't exactly out saying he will change much. Oh he's barking, but specifics are light. Anyone can say they are going to cut government, cut the deficit (if you remember both GWB AND Obama said it), but when push comes to shove Obama didn't, Bush 2 and 1 didn't, Reagan didn't, etc.

 

[kingk0ng]

Perhaps. But 4 years from now will it be "he/she" can't be worse than Romney? The two party system dominated by corporate interests is killing us. It's laughable to me that people see a huge difference between left and right. George W. Bush and Obama have been almost clones and Romney isn't exactly out saying he will change much. Oh he's barking, but specifics are light. Anyone can say they are going to cut government, cut the deficit (if you remember both GWB AND Obama said it), but when push comes to shove Obama didn't, Bush 2 and 1 didn't, Reagan didn't, etc.

Have you ever seen Massachusetts unemployment % since the Romney administration began? It declined. Have you seen the unemployment rate for the US since Obama got in office? Above 8%. Obama has spent more than all the other Presidents combined. I, for one, have a lot of confidence in Mitt Romney and I think he would make a great President, but powerman2000 is completely correct. Even if Romney isn't a phenomenal President, anyone just about would be better than who we have now.

 

[youngandfree]

The problem for those that don't want Obama, yet feel Romney is no different, is there is no one else when in the game. Im sure Gary Johnson would be great for the job, but he doesn't have a chance in bell of winning. Period, end of story. Folks say the best we can hope for is taking the Senate in order to slow sown Obama. But the problem is there is already gridlock and nothing getting done in Congress now. Obama has made Congress irrelevant already by using his czars to make regulations to do everything he wants. Look at the EPA destroying energy companies, even after a court ruled the moratorium on drilling was illegal. So the rolled back the moratorium, yet the EPA refuses to grant new permits through regulation.

So its about more than just Romney signing Romneycare. The difference was as be has said, states' rights vs federal over reaching. The states have the right to do what they want. Look at California. $16B in the hole, yet Brown is full steam ahead just like Obama. If you live there, you deserve it. Romney has said all along that the federal government mandating he healthcare issue is unconstitutional. But he states can do it if the people vote for it.
Even if Romney is a big government guy, he is still nothing like Obama. Obama is way behind just big government. Obama is leaking national security details to the NY times. He has thrown allies under the bus in order to please dictators. He has compromised our security by giving secrets to Russia about missile defense. Hell he was recorder telling Medvedev that after his election he will be able to be more flexible. He is he'll bent on remaking America in his socialist image. At least Romney loves what America is about and what it stands for.

If you don't want Obama again, don't waste your vote and our country by voting for someone that can't win.
The purpose of the primaries is to get your guy on the ticket into the big dance. Just like March Madness, there is only 2 teams in the finals. You can't cheer foe a team that didn't make it. As far as I am concerned, Johnson being in the ticket has as much chance as Rosanne Barr does running for the green party.

 

[youngandfree]

Invalid Link Removed

 

[powerman2000]

Perhaps. But 4 years from now will it be "he/she" can't be worse than Romney?

That remains to be seen.

 

[powerman2000]

Have you ever seen Massachusetts unemployment % since the Romney administration began? It declined. Have you seen the unemployment rate for the US since Obama got in office? Above 8%. Obama has spent more than all the other Presidents combined. I, for one, have a lot of confidence in Mitt Romney and I think he would make a great President, but powerman2000 is completely correct. Even if Romney isn't a phenomenal President, anyone just about would be better than who we have now.

I would have rather had Hillary Clinton over Obama.

 

[kingk0ng]

I think Mitt Romney will do a fantastic job. Look at Massachusetts unemployment rate during the Romney administration. The fact that he is for natural resources alone means a few things - more jobs, lower electricity prices, lower fuel costs.

 

[sprintstar01]

If only Colin Powell would run for president....

 

[powerman2000]

I think Mitt Romney will do a fantastic job. Look at Massachusetts unemployment rate during the Romney administration. The fact that he is for natural resources alone means a few things - more jobs, lower electricity prices, lower fuel costs.

I believe he's capable, but will he do IT?

Whereas Obama is completely incapable.

 

[kingk0ng]

I believe he's capable, but will he do IT?

Whereas Obama is completely incapable.

We can only judge his performance on what he has done, because only God knows what he will do. Either way, I agree with what you said earlier, anyone is better than Obama in the meantime.

 

[carpee]

I think Romney could help the economy in the meantime...

however the new world order/one world govt and currency is inevitable.

 

[powerman2000]

I think Romney could help the economy in the meantime...

however the new world order/one world govt and currency is inevitable.

Not with a strong US president. Obama is the one who wants to give up our sovereign power to the nations.

 

[kokobeware2]

i still don't understand how obama has such a high approval rating... its pretty sickening

I'm not racist individual whatsoever, however I feel some African Americans are on welfare and Obama is helping them out substantially. Even if you are no on welfare and just am low income, you get to go to college for free where I am already 33k deep in loans. And finally, other AA will vote for him because they are the same race. I think I heard somewhere AA, Hispanics and Mexicans now take up over half the population

 

[carpee]

Not with a strong US president. Obama is the one who wants to give up our sovereign power to the nations.

the last strong US president to call out secret societies and the NWO was JFK...

so yes, it's a matter of time

 

[specmike]

. I would prefer not to vote however that doesn't help me at all. Plus, the new healthcare policy scares me since I'm a nurse

Not to derail but could you expand on this some? I'm very curious to see what people inside the healthcare system think The President's Healthcare.....whatchamacallit. ObamaCare for lack of a better term. If you don't want to post that's fine or take it to PMs if you want.

Thanks.

 

[specmike]

I think Romney could help the economy in the meantime...

however the new world order/one world govt and currency is inevitable.

That whole Euro experiment is a flop so mebbe someone will learn a lesson from it. The big dog that is carrying everyone (Germany) is getting sick and tired of it. And, Germany like the US, has a big and growing illegal immigrant problem.

 

[kingk0ng]

I'm not racist individual whatsoever, however I feel some African Americans are on welfare and Obama is helping them out substantially. Even if you are no on welfare and just am low income, you get to go to college for free where I am already 33k deep in loans. And finally, other AA will vote for him because they are the same race. I think I heard somewhere AA, Hispanics and Mexicans now take up over half the population

He is all for illegal aliens. If someone crosses the US border illegally they get a job, drivers license, food stamps, health care, housing, childrens benefits, education and a tax free business for 7 years.

There a lot of hard-working citizens that do not have health insurance, but if someone crosses the border and get hurt, they automatically get free healthcare. If the hard-working, tax-paying citizen gets hurt, he has to get his credit destroyed with hospital bills.

This is what gets me upset. A person can come here illegally and get all the opportunity in the world, but there's no forgiveness for our citizens. Let me use two different examples.

My cousin didn't do too well in school. He graduated with a less than 2.0 GPA. He's a smart kid, but he didn't take it seriously and was always "spoiled" as a kid. He got in college and flunked out. His GPA in college was actually less than a 1.0, but fast forward to today 5 years later. He had been working in the gas field and got laid off and really hates his job and he now has a family, he's been trying to get in a nursing program now that he has matured and straightened his life up and NOBODY will even consider him. I thought America was the land of opportunity, and because this kid didn't take school seriously 6 years ago there's no way he can now make a success out of himself or turn his life around? He is trying to better himself, and at only 23 years old they are telling him it's too late? All because of all those years ago his GPA was bad. He was never suspended, never expelled, never missed class, never done drugs, never even been arrested. He's a great kid and very respectful, but all because of some mistakes he made in school years ago, he has almost no hope at a good future? That's bull****, in my opinion.

Lets look at option #2. Everyday there are people being arrested for crimes they didn't commit. Everyday there are people spending time in prison, over something they were framed and didn't do. With the way police force can be payed off these days, money can pretty much buy you anything when it comes to the US law. There are men with families being sentenced to prison, and getting out with felonies on their records over something they didn't even do and guess what? When he's out, he pretty much has no future. Nobody is ever going to give this man a chance because they automatically assume he is trouble.

I don't think it's ever too late to turn your life around, but America does. America will give jobs, benefits and education to people that has never paid into the federal government, but people that make 1 wrong move in their lives are doomed forever. I've been working with my young cousin and teaching him things about the human body and he's learning so quick. I think he would make a great healthcare professional. He wants to become an RN like me. He can now name me every major muscle and bone in the human body and name their function and the degree of movement they can make, as well as what plane those movements are performed in.

To beat it all, his parents are willing to pay for his education out of pocket without a dime of financial aid. I also said I would help him with his schooling. He has a wife and a little girl relying on him at home, but colleges won't even consider him into their nursing program. He's tried community colleges, LPN programs at vocational schools, and all because of mistakes he made nearly a decade ago, this kid will be deprived of a future.

I think things like this should be paid more attention to by the world, but unfortunately, it isn't.

 

[carpee]

That whole Euro experiment is a flop so mebbe someone will learn a lesson from it. The big dog that is carrying everyone (Germany) is getting sick and tired of it. And, Germany like the US, has a big and growing illegal immigrant problem.

you're still thinking in terms of sovereign nations though.

it's all made to collapse.

most of the elite have openly said they have to get rid of nations and establish a one world OPEN SOCIETY...and a one world currency.

 

[kingk0ng]

Not to derail but could you expand on this some? I'm very curious to see what people inside the healthcare system think The President's Healthcare.....whatchamacallit. ObamaCare for lack of a better term. If you don't want to post that's fine or take it to PMs if you want.

Thanks.

I'm also a nurse. ObamaCare is basically a death sentence for the elderly. Medicaid will no longer pay for things like dialysis, which is needed for patients with kidney failure, which basically means if your kidneys fail and you're not rich, Obama is sentencing you to death. In a short paragraph, it's just basically Obamas way of saying "if you don't have the money, you're out of time".

 

[southpaw23]

I think Mitt Romney will do a fantastic job. Look at Massachusetts unemployment rate during the Romney administration. The fact that he is for natural resources alone means a few things - more jobs, lower electricity prices, lower fuel costs.

Invalid Link Removed (perspective)

 

[southpaw23]

I'm also a nurse. ObamaCare is basically a death sentence for the elderly. Medicaid will no longer pay for things like dialysis, which is needed for patients with kidney failure, which basically means if your kidneys fail and you're not rich, Obama is sentencing you to death. In a short paragraph, it's just basically Obamas way of saying "if you don't have the money, you're out of time".

Specifically, which part of his healthcare bill speaks to the statement above?

 

[kingk0ng]

Invalid Link Removed (perspective)

Of course, another persuasively written liberal article.

If you ask me, all that article says is that Romney did more in 1 month than Obama has done in the 4 years he's been President.

 

[southpaw23]

Of course, another persuasively written liberal article.

If you ask me, all that article says is that Romney did more in 1 month than Obama has done in the 4 years he's been President.

You're right. It's one huge conspiracy. Washington Post is in on it.

 

[kingk0ng]

You're right. It's one huge conspiracy. Washington Post is in on it.

Of course there's no conspiracy, there just managed to be tons of dead people vote for Obama in 2008.

 

[southpaw23]

Of course there's no conspiracy, there just managed to be tons of dead people vote for Obama in 2008.

Right

By the way, you saw what I asked you above? Provide a response to that if you can. "Specifically, which part of his healthcare bill speaks to the statement above?"

 

[kingk0ng]

Right

By the way, you saw what I asked you above? Provide a response to that if you can. "Specifically, which part of his healthcare bill speaks to the statement above?"

Oh boy, I'll enjoy this one. I live nowhere from this.

"I had one of the most troubling, most disturbing conversations ever with Dr. Suzanne Allen, head of emergency services at the Johnson City Medical Center in Tennessee. We were discussing the "future" and I asked her had she seen an affects of Obama Care in her work?

"Oh, yes. We are seeing cutbacks throughout the services we provide. For example, we are now having to deal with patients who would normally receive dialysis can no longer be accepted. In the past, there was always automatic approval under M edicare for anyone who needed dialysis -- not anymore." So, what will be their outcome? "They will die soon without dialysis," she stated.

What about other services? She indicated as of 2013 (after the election), no one over 75 will be given major medical procedures unless approved by locally administered Ethics Panels. These Panels will determine whether a patient receives medical treatment or not. W hile details on specific operating procedures and schedules, Dr. Allen points out that most life-threatening emergencies do not occur during normal hospital business hours, and if there are emergencies that depend to be resolve within minutes or just few hours, the likely hood of getting these Panels approval in time to save a life are going to be very challenging and difficult, if not impossible she said.

This applies to major operations such as receiving stents, bypass surgery, kidney operations, or treating for an aneurysm that would be normally covered under M edicare today. In other words, if you needed a life-saving operation, M edicare will not provide coverage anymore after 2013 if you are 75 or over. W hen in 2013? " W e haven't been given a specific date -- could be in January or July….but it's after the election."

 

[southpaw23]

Oh boy, I'll enjoy this one. I live nowhere from this.

"I had one of the most troubling, most disturbing conversations ever with Dr. Suzanne Allen, head of emergency services at the Johnson City Medical Center in Tennessee. We were discussing the "future" and I asked her had she seen an affects of Obama Care in her work?

"Oh, yes. We are seeing cutbacks throughout the services we provide. For example, we are now having to deal with patients who would normally receive dialysis can no longer be accepted. In the past, there was always automatic approval under M edicare for anyone who needed dialysis -- not anymore." So, what will be their outcome? "They will die soon without dialysis," she stated.

What about other services? She indicated as of 2013 (after the election), no one over 75 will be given major medical procedures unless approved by locally administered Ethics Panels. These Panels will determine whether a patient receives medical treatment or not. W hile details on specific operating procedures and schedules, Dr. Allen points out that most life-threatening emergencies do not occur during normal hospital business hours, and if there are emergencies that depend to be resolve within minutes or just few hours, the likely hood of getting these Panels approval in time to save a life are going to be very challenging and difficult, if not impossible she said.

This applies to major operations such as receiving stents, bypass surgery, kidney operations, or treating for an aneurysm that would be normally covered under M edicare today. In other words, if you needed a life-saving operation, M edicare will not provide coverage anymore after 2013 if you are 75 or over. W hen in 2013? " W e haven't been given a specific date -- could be in January or July….but it's after the election."

I'm asking you to tie those statements, to a specific part of the bill? Are you just referencing a "conversation" you had, or copy pasted an exchange from what source? Again, specifically what part of the bill addresses those concerns expressed in the statements above?

 

[kingk0ng]

I'm asking you to tie those statements, to a specific part of the bill? Are you just referencing a "conversation" you had, or copy pasted an exchange from what source? Again, specifically what part of the bill speaks addresses those concerns expressed in the statements above?

Invalid Link Removed

Have a read at that.

This was highlighted in the link.

 Under the new Obama health plan, your physician is required to enter all information for each patient, including all treatments, into a government electronic database. Doctors are then instructed on what the government deems to be cost effective and appropriate care. This is true for EVERYONE, even if you have private insurance. Doctors must comply with the regulations imposed by Obamacare or face government penalty. There will be no privacy of your medical concerns between you and your doctor, since the government will monitor all medical interactions.

 How will you be able to trust that your doctor's recommendations for your health treatments are the same as they would have been if your doctor were not compelled by law to provide only the treatments that the government deems "cost effective and appropriate?"

"Obamacare allows the government complete access to all your private records, including banking records, and gives them authority to provide this information to third parties at the discretion of the HHS Secretary. This is allowed in the name of "helping you" by making sure you know of all the programs for which you might be eligible. The government claims they need access to all of your private information in order to "help determine your eligibility for additional programs."

 Obamacare provisions are largely exempted from Chapter 35 of Title 44 U.S. Code, which is privacy law. Why do they need exemption from privacy law? See Section 3021, 124 Stat. 394.

 Obamacare provisions are largely exempted from judicial review, and therefore, no legal recourse for disagreement. Why do they need to block Americans from bringing lawsuits on these provisions? See Section 3021, 124 Stat. 394.
SEC. 3021. HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ENROLLMENT STANDARDS AND PROTOCOLS.

(a) In General- (1) STANDARDS AND PROTOCOLS- Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this title, the Secretary, in consultation with the HIT Policy Committee and the HIT Standards Committee, shall develop interoperable and secure standards and protocols that facilitate enrollment of individuals in Federal and State health and human services programs, as determined by the Secretary.

(2) METHODS- The Secretary shall facilitate enrollment in such programs through methods determined appropriate by the Secretary, which shall include providing individuals and third parties authorized by such individuals and their designees notification of eligibility and verification of eligibility required under such programs.

(b) Content- The standards and protocols for electronic enrollment in the Federal and State programs described in subsection (a) shall allow for the following: (1) Electronic matching against existing Federal and State data, including vital records, employment history, enrollment systems, tax records, and other data determined appropriate.

 

[powerman2000]

the last strong US president to call out secret societies and the NWO was JFK...

so yes, it's a matter of time

Perhaps, but it won't happen in your life time.

 

[southpaw23]

Invalid Link Removed

Have a read at that.

This was highlighted in the link.

 Under the new Obama health plan, your physician is required to enter all information for each patient, including all treatments, into a government electronic database. Doctors are then instructed on what the government deems to be cost effective and appropriate care. This is true for EVERYONE, even if you have private insurance. Doctors must comply with the regulations imposed by Obamacare or face government penalty. There will be no privacy of your medical concerns between you and your doctor, since the government will monitor all medical interactions.

 How will you be able to trust that your doctor's recommendations for your health treatments are the same as they would have been if your doctor were not compelled by law to provide only the treatments that the government deems "cost effective and appropriate?"

"Obamacare allows the government complete access to all your private records, including banking records, and gives them authority to provide this information to third parties at the discretion of the HHS Secretary. This is allowed in the name of "helping you" by making sure you know of all the programs for which you might be eligible. The government claims they need access to all of your private information in order to "help determine your eligibility for additional programs."

 Obamacare provisions are largely exempted from Chapter 35 of Title 44 U.S. Code, which is privacy law. Why do they need exemption from privacy law? See Section 3021, 124 Stat. 394.

 Obamacare provisions are largely exempted from judicial review, and therefore, no legal recourse for disagreement. Why do they need to block Americans from bringing lawsuits on these provisions? See Section 3021, 124 Stat. 394.
SEC. 3021. HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ENROLLMENT STANDARDS AND PROTOCOLS.

(a) In General- (1) STANDARDS AND PROTOCOLS- Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this title, the Secretary, in consultation with the HIT Policy Committee and the HIT Standards Committee, shall develop interoperable and secure standards and protocols that facilitate enrollment of individuals in Federal and State health and human services programs, as determined by the Secretary.

(2) METHODS- The Secretary shall facilitate enrollment in such programs through methods determined appropriate by the Secretary, which shall include providing individuals and third parties authorized by such individuals and their designees notification of eligibility and verification of eligibility required under such programs.

(b) Content- The standards and protocols for electronic enrollment in the Federal and State programs described in subsection (a) shall allow for the following: (1) Electronic matching against existing Federal and State data, including vital records, employment history, enrollment systems, tax records, and other data determined appropriate.

Yeah...except this is the actual provision. You just posted a link highlighting conservative talking points.


SEC. 10336. GAO STUDY AND REPORT ON MEDICARE BENEFICIARY ACCESS TO HIGH-QUALITY DIALYSIS SERVICES.
Per the official summary, section 10336 “Directs the Comptroller General to study and report to Congress on the impact on Medicare beneficiary access to high-quality dialysis services of including specified oral drugs furnished to them for the treatment of end-stage renal disease in the related bundled prospective payment system.”
It is well worth the time to peruse the complete detailed text of this PPACA section.
(a) STUDY—(1) IN GENERAL—The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the impact on Medicare beneficiary access to high-quality dialysis services of including specified oral drugs that are furnished to such beneficiaries for the treatment of end-stage renal disease in the bundled prospective payment system under section 1881(b)(14) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395rr(b)(14)) (pursuant to the proposed rule published by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Federal Register on September 29, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 49922 et seq.)). Such study shall include an analysis of—(A) the ability of providers of services and renal dialysis facilities to furnish specified oral drugs or arrange for the provision of such drugs; (B) the ability of providers of services and renal dialysis facilities to comply, if necessary, with applicable State laws (such as State pharmacy licensure requirements) in order to furnish specified oral drugs; (C) whether appropriate quality measures exist to safeguard care for Medicare beneficiaries being furnished specified oral drugs by providers of services and renal dialysis facilities; and (D) other areas determined appropriate by the Comptroller General.
(2) SPECIFIED ORAL DRUG DEFINED.—For purposes of paragraph (1), the term ‘‘specified oral drug’’ means a drug or biological for which there is no injectable equivalent (or other non-oral form of administration). (b) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress a report containing the results of the study conducted under subsection (a), together with recommendations for such legislation and administrative action as the Comptroller General determines appropriate. [Emphasis Added]

 

[kingk0ng]

Get all 1017 pages here: Invalid Link Removed

There is also, at the bottom of page 59, verbiage for automatic electronic transfer of funds:

21 ‘‘(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in
22 order to allow automated reconciliation with the
23 related health care payment and remittance ad
24 vice;

Class II Devices would be RFID chips.

Page 58 & 59 says they can access your bank accounts and take your money.

Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age.

Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to
attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years.

Specifically stated that this bill will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system, and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick 'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future.

Page 107 discusses how reconstructive surgery for abnormal tissue caused by trauma or deformities are approved and it won't cover cosmetic surgery for improved appearance of normal tissues.

"The current so-called health care bill in the House of Representatives, on the other hand, is a health care rationing bill. The section on cancer hospitals sets that tone pretty well. Rationing and limiting care is the agenda. On page 425, the bill states that the government will mandate so-called advance-care planning, including instructing and consulting in regard to living wills and durable powers of attorney.

On page 427, the federal government requires a program for orders for the end of life. On page 429, the government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order, and on page 430, the government will specify your level of treatment. The way the bill reads now, almost all decisions will be reviewed by the federal government. These are just a few of my concerns. In summary, I think I know what George Washington would have thought of the bill."

The state is not required to cover dialysis treatments under Medicaid, but Williamson said cuts to the $4.5 million that the state spends on those services would be unrealistic because they would be tantamount to a death sentence for those patients. “I know exactly what happens if you don’t dialysize people,” Williamson said. “They’re dead in two weeks.”

The point I am trying to make is Obamacare says that dilaysis is no longer covered by medicaid. Another thing I said is the government must "approve" of what treatments we can have. Doctors are being required to place every amount of information on patients in a system for the government to review and the Doctors can only do what the government allows, so our lives are officially in the governments hands.

9 Subtitle C—National Medical
10 Device Registry
11 SEC. 2521. NATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICE REGISTRY.
12 (a) REGISTRY.—
13 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 519 of the Federal
14 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360i) is
15 amended—
16 (A) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub17
section (h); and
18 ( by inserting after subsection (f) the
19 following:
20 ‘‘National Medical Device Registry
21 ‘‘(g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national med22
ical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the
23 ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and
24 outcomes data on each device that—
25 ‘‘(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; and
VerDate Nov 24 2008 01:43 Jul 15, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 01000 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:BILLSH3200.IH H3200 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
1001
•HR 3200 IH
1 ‘‘( is—
2 ‘‘(i) a class III device; or
3 ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable,
4 life-supporting, or life-sustaining.
5 ‘‘(2) In developing the registry, the Secretary shall,
6 in consultation with the Commissioner of Food and Drugs,
7 the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
8 Services, the head of the Office of the National Coordi9
nator for Health Information Technology, and the Sec10
retary of Veterans Affairs, determine the best methods
11 for—
12 ‘‘(A) including in the registry, in a manner con13
sistent with subsection (f), appropriate information
14 to identify each device described in paragraph (1) by
15 type, model, and serial number or other unique iden16
tifier;
17 ‘‘( validating methods for analyzing patient
18 safety and outcomes data from multiple sources and
19 for linking such data with the information included
20 in the registry as described in subparagraph (A), in21
cluding, to the extent feasible, use of—
22 ‘‘(i) data provided to the Secretary under
23 other provisions of this chapter; and
24 ‘‘(ii) information from public and private
25 sources identified under paragraph (3);
VerDate Nov 24 2008 01:43 Jul 15, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 01001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:BILLSH3200.IH H3200 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
1002
•HR 3200 IH
1 ‘‘(C) integrating the activities described in this
2 subsection with—
3 ‘‘(i) activities under paragraph (3) of sec4
tion 505(k) (relating to active postmarket risk
5 identification);
6 ‘‘(ii) activities under paragraph (4) of sec7
tion 505(k) (relating to advanced analysis of
8 drug safety data); and
9 ‘‘(iii) other postmarket device SURVEILLANCE
10 activities of the Secretary authorized by this
11 chapter;

You have to read this very carefully, understand the broad range of applications and know how the government has manipulated legislative language in other laws passed. The third line from the bottom in my above cut/paste is of most concern. What this is open to is any form of surveillance the government...it's THEIR "health care" plan...decides to implement and it doesn't have to have a thing to do with health.

 

[specmike]

I have a bit of experience investigating socialized health care in 3 countries outside the US; Germany, Canada, and Australia. I had neck surgery in Germany, see the avatar for more details.

One common theme I have found is that countries with socialized health care is that they are constantly losing many promising and/or established high quality health care professionals. Esp surgeons. It seems that doctors don't want to go to school for a minimum of 11 years, then do their residencies, then do whatever else you have to get a practice going, to work for government wages. It's not hard to conclude that this is a possibility for the US.

I have not seen a good explanation for how we'll avoid this yet. Anybody got one?

 

[carpee]

I have a bit of experience investigating socialized health care in 3 countries outside the US; Germany, Canada, and Australia. I had neck surgery in Germany, see the avatar for more details.

One common theme I have found is that countries with socialized health care is that they are constantly losing many promising and/or established high quality health care professionals. Esp surgeons. It seems that doctors don't want to go to school for a minimum of 11 years, then do their residencies, then do whatever else you have to get a practice going, to work for government wages. It's not hard to conclude that this is a possibility for the US.

I have not seen a good explanation for how we'll avoid this yet. Anybody got one?

supreme court shoots the whole thing down and people pull their heads out of their asses?

 

[specmike]

supreme court shoots the whole thing down and people pull their heads out of their asses?

We can only hope but I am not holding my breath.

Guess why this guy did not do my neck surgery?

Invalid Link Removed

 

[powerman2000]

The latest Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of Likely Voters shows Romney with 47 percent of the vote to Obama’s 44 percent. Five percent prefer some other candidate, and 4 percent are undecided.


​

 

[ax1]

The latest Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of Likely Voters shows Romney with 47 percent of the vote to Obama’s 44 percent. Five percent prefer some other candidate, and 4 percent are undecided.


​

Reality is the same person is getting 91% of all the votes.

The election is already over as usual.

 

[ax1]

The latest Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of Likely Voters shows Romney with 47 percent of the vote to Obama’s 44 percent. Five percent prefer some other candidate, and 4 percent are undecided.


​

Reality is the same person is getting 91% of all the votes.

The election is already over as usual.

 

[powerman2000]

Reality is the same person is getting 91% of all the votes.

The election is already over as usual.

So you're saying Romney and Obama are the same?

 

[Geoforce]

So you're saying Romney and Obama are the same?

I'd say they are pretty much the same on what matters. Did Obama discontinue what Bush did? Did he overturn the Patriot Act? Did he stop the failed drug war? Did he end the wars immediately and dial back the gigantic defense budget? Did he reform taxes?

Now, where will Mitt differ from Obama on the big stuff? He hasn't mentioned doing anything about the stuff I mentioned. Will he replace Obamacare? If he does it will likely be with something that is basically the exact same thing. Keep in mind his health care plan and Obama's were basically the exact same, and Obamacare was inspired by Mitt. Republicans and Democrats are the exact same thing. Both want to control your life, they just do it in slightly different ways. On the big stuff Romney hasn't even came out and said he will differ from Obama. Not that you could believe him anyways, he's a guy who's flip flopped more than trained seals. He will give lip service to a lot in the election like all politicians do, but when push comes to shove he won't change much. The entrenched big money interests control both parties and that's all that matters.

I can see people being excited that Obama's on the way out, but I can't see them being excited that Romney's the one to replace him.

 

[powerman2000]

I'd say they are pretty much the same on what matters. Did Obama discontinue what Bush did? Did he overturn the Patriot Act? Did he stop the failed drug war? Did he end the wars immediately and dial back the gigantic defense budget? Did he reform taxes?

Now, where will Mitt differ from Obama on the big stuff? He hasn't mentioned doing anything about the stuff I mentioned. Will he replace Obamacare? If he does it will likely be with something that is basically the exact same thing. Keep in mind his health care plan and Obama's were basically the exact same, and Obamacare was inspired by Mitt. Republicans and Democrats are the exact same thing. Both want to control your life, they just do it in slightly different ways. On the big stuff Romney hasn't even came out and said he will differ from Obama. Not that you could believe him anyways, he's a guy who's flip flopped more than trained seals. He will give lip service to a lot in the election like all politicians do, but when push comes to shove he won't change much. The entrenched big money interests control both parties and that's all that matters.

I can see people being excited that Obama's on the way out, but I can't see them being excited that Romney's the one to replace him.

Actions speak louder than words, but right now, Romney's words are vastly different than Obama's words.

 

[ax1]

So you're saying Romney and Obama are the same?

Yes, Obama is George Bush's 3rd term, and either Obama or Romney will be Bush's 4th.

There will be no difference other than what you see in regards to the acting on TV.

Both are pro-war bloody murderers, pro-police state anti-constitutional globalist frauds. All the power and policy will all continue to be leveraged by global corporate powers, global banks and continue to be transferred to global governance.

 

[powerman2000]

Yes, Obama is George Bush's 3rd term, and either Obama or Romney will be Bush's 4th.

There will be no difference other than what you see in regards to the acting on TV.

Both are pro-war bloody murderers, pro-police state anti-constitutional globalist frauds. All the power and policy will all continue to be leveraged by global corporate powers, global banks and continue to be transferred to global governance.

Wow Strong Pessimism.

 

[Geoforce]

Actions speak louder than words, but right now, Romney's words are vastly different than Obama's words.

Lol at putting stock in a politicians words. You remember Obama talking about slashing the deficit? Ending the wars immediately? Shutting down Guantanamo? Etc. times a million. Romney has already proven you can't trust what he says. He did multiple things in his term as governor he said he wouldn't do, raised taxes, etc. Complete flip flops on abortion, minimum wage, mandates, stem cell research, the list goes on. All of our Republican presidents in the past 30 years have ran on smaller government and lowering the deficit. How many of them did this? (spoiler alert; 0.)

Anyone can say anything and of course Romney is going to paint with words a different picture than Obama. It's popular on the right currently to oppose anything Obama says or does. It's just the way they are attacking him. When it comes down to specifics it's pretty sparse, and don't be shocked when Mitt doesn't do hardly anything he runs on. After all very few Presidents do.

It's looking increasingly likely that Mitt will win, and I can't wait for the day Obama is out....but let's not kid ourselves and think Romney is going to ride in on one of his billion cars as a small government champion. He has never been small government in regards to his actions, and if you think he's changed just because he had to move so far to the right to secure the nomination you're one heck of a believer.

 

[powerman2000]

Lol at putting stock in a politicians words.

I did not put any stock in anyone's words. Which is why I said what I said about actions.

But the fact right now is that their words, empty or not, are very opposed.

 

[ax1]

Wow Strong Pessimism.

Yes, but can you say Im wrong?