Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Does this sound like a death panel?

     

    Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius rebuffed an appeal from Rep. Lou Barletta on behalf of a girl who needs a lung transplant but can’t get one because of a federal regulation that prevents her from qualifying for a transplant.

    “Please, suspend the rules until we look at this policy,” Barletta, a Pennsylvania Republican, asked Sebelius during a House hearing Tuesday on behalf of Sarah Murnaghan, a 10-year-old girl who needs a lung transplant. She can’t qualify for an adult lung transplant until the age of 12, according to federal regulations, but Sebelius has the authority to waive that rule on her behalf. The pediatric lungs for which she currently qualifies aren’t available.

    “I would suggest, sir, that, again, this is an incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies,” Sebelius replied.

     

    So, the person running Obamacare, says "someone lives, someone dies".

    Simply amazing.

     

     



    You realize there aren't enough spare lungs to go around right?

     

     


    I admit I don't know all the facts about this story, but aren't the policies in place in order to prevent someone from having to decide who lives and who dies?  The policy creates an order in which a person would recieve a transplant. If exceptions are made then the policy becomes meaningless and then you will have a system where money and influence moves you to the top of the list. There are no winners here.



    WHY is the policy one of politics?

     

    This is wrong, and this is at the heart of Obamacare, government making these decisions, not doctors.

     



    Did you miss the part of the story where the federal government is staying out of this?  The GOP contingent from PA is trying to get the HHS Secretary to intervene.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Now, riddle me this, Batman:  Why would they go to the head of Obamacare to seek her to intervene?

     

    Sebelius can't be a bystander and a participant at the same time.  The government is invovled in your health care decisions.  this is proof.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    [QUOTE]It is the system that puts a politician in charge of a decision.  this is a death panel.

     


    Repeats the very lowest of the low.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Right.  Going to Sebelius, and Sebelius saying some live some die.

    You are so ideologically rigid that you fail to see the obvisous problem here.  Sebelius was doing her Ceasar impersonation at the Collesuim:  Thumbs up, you live, thumbs down, you die.  

    Expect more of this, not less, because progressives like you thought it would be a good idea for goverment to run health care.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    Skeeter: Literally every other poster here knows you are lying about the situation. Just shut up. You are literally useless.

     

    Here we go with the "lying" charge, which you throw up everytime you get caught in an uncomfortable place.

    Specifically:  What am I lying about?

    Answer me this:  Why did they go to Sebelius?  A courtesy call, or a recognition that Sebelius had the power to make the change?

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to tvoter's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

     

     

    And currently for most people, the insurance companies make the decisions, not doctors.

    Short of single-payer, that will not change with the ACA.

     

     

     

     

    I or anyone else can sue the insurance companies to rubble if, they make a mistake.

     



    Yeah, good luck with that.

     

    Policy language is a breed of very specific legalese...and designed to protect the insurer at all costs.

    You might have more luck suing the govt...except that plans will still be underwritten and administered by PRIVATE insurance companies.

    So again, that part doesn't really change.

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

     

     

    And currently for most people, the insurance companies make the decisions, not doctors.

    Short of single-payer, that will not change with the ACA.

     

     

     

     

    I or anyone else can sue the insurance companies to rubble if, they make a mistake.

     



    Yeah, good luck with that.

     

    Policy language is a breed of very specific legalese...and designed to protect the insurer at all costs.

    You might have more luck suing the govt...except that plans will still be underwritten and administered by PRIVATE insurance companies.

    So again, that part doesn't really change.

     

     



    "the insurance companies make the decisions"

    The insurance companies do not make the decisions, at least not how you are implying.  You are either covered, or oyu are not.  Or perhaps there are certain conditions thatneedto be met.  that is the extent of an insurance company making a "legal" decision.

    As we see in this case, government makes decisions that are untethered to stated coverage.  Either way you look at it, Sebelius refusing to add the girl to the list, or the judge forcing Sebelius to add her to the list, the deciison was not one of doctors, or insurance.  It was a decision made by GOVERNMENT.

    This is a bad road we are drving down.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.



    You have it backward, as usual.

    Sebelius had no authority to change the rule without the judge's order.

    This case shows nothing of the kind.

     

    But even a little cognitive dissonance would show you that more people who can't afford transplants will be able to get them once the ACA is implemented, because more people will be covered.

    At up to $500,000 per transplant, that's not nothing.

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    ERISA, passed long before Obamacare, makes it virtually impossible to sue an insurer for actions that affect your health care.


    If a doctor thinks you need a procedure, checks with the insurer, and the insurer refuses to pay for it, and you end up being seriously injured/dying as a result, the only recourse is:


    Pay for the procedure out of pocket, and sue the insurer. But you do not get damages for the injury their refusal caused. You can only win compensation for the cost of the procedure.

     
    If you don't or cannot pay for the procedure out of pocket, then you cannot sue even if the insurer was egregiously reckless in refusing to cover the procedure and you die as a result. Tough luck.


    Guess how many lawyers deal with this.....    

     

     

     

    You cannot sue to force them to cover the procedure, either. They have internal appeals processes, but....heh....       that's like a prisoner appealing a d-ticket to the prison's superintendent: Yeah right.



    And, a random act by government, of, say, demanding by executive order that all insurance policies provide free birht control.  That's not force by government?

    Try appealing that, or any other executive order by governemnt that either increases or diminishes your access to healthcare.  This is the part youu don't want people to understand:  The decisions about what coverage you have have already left the private sector and are in the hands of government, to be decided as they see fit.

    Bad road we are on.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    "the insurance companies make the decisions"

    The insurance companies do not make the decisions, at least not how you are implying.  You are either covered, or oyu are not.  Or perhaps there are certain conditions thatneedto be met.  that is the extent of an insurance company making a "legal" decision.

    As we see in this case, government makes decisions that are untethered to stated coverage.  Either way you look at it, Sebelius refusing to add the girl to the list, or the judge forcing Sebelius to add her to the list, the deciison was not one of doctors, or insurance.  It was a decision made by GOVERNMENT.

    This is a bad road we are drving down.



    I implied nothing except what I said.  

    If the insurance company says, 'you're not covered', and the govt steps in and says, 'you should really cover this', and they do...

    ...that is really the limit of govt's involvement in health insurance.  That's it.

    The ACA will mean that more adults and children get covered - at least partially - for things like transplants...which now only the rich can truly afford.

    The ACA actually puts more power in the hands of doctors and patients, not less.

     

     

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.

     



    You have it backward, as usual.

     

    Sebelius had no authority to change the rule without the judge's order.

    This case shows nothing of the kind.

     

    But even a little cognitive dissonance would show you that more people who can't afford transplants will be able to get them once the ACA is implemented, because more people will be covered.

    At up to $500,000 per transplant, that's not nothing.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure.  that's why they went to Sebelius first.

    Why should they go to Sebelius at all?  Why should Sebelius need a court order?

    Shouldn't the doctor's say so be good enough to get her on the list?

     

    You are so wrapped up in government controlling healthcare, you don't even see the absurdity of Sebelius being involved AT ALL, judge or not.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

     

    "the insurance companies make the decisions"

    The insurance companies do not make the decisions, at least not how you are implying.  You are either covered, or oyu are not.  Or perhaps there are certain conditions thatneedto be met.  that is the extent of an insurance company making a "legal" decision.

    As we see in this case, government makes decisions that are untethered to stated coverage.  Either way you look at it, Sebelius refusing to add the girl to the list, or the judge forcing Sebelius to add her to the list, the deciison was not one of doctors, or insurance.  It was a decision made by GOVERNMENT.

    This is a bad road we are drving down.

     

     



    I implied nothing except what I said.  

     

     

    If the insurance company says, 'you're not covered', and the govt steps in and says, 'you should really cover this', and they do...

    ...that is really the limit of govt's involvement in health insurance.  That's it.

    The ACA will mean that more adults and children get covered - at least partially - for things like transplants...which now only the rich can truly afford.

    The ACA actually puts more power in the hands of doctors and patients, not less.

     

     

     

     

     



    "If the insurance company says, 'you're not covered', and the govt steps in and says, 'you should really cover this', and they do..."

    This is not insurance, this is government mandated coverage.

    Look, you are either covered for the heart transplant or not.  If you are not, shame on you for cheaping it out on your health insureance.  But, then saying government needs to step in and force the insurance company to provide coverage you don't have, why, that's criminal.

    "The ACA actually puts more power in the hands of doctors and patients, not less."

    I can't beleive you can even write that lie.  Look at this case right in front of you.  What influence did the doctor have on this decision?  None.  Sebelius and the Judge wielded the power here.  That not opinon, that's fact.  Sorry that it is inconvient to your argument.

    Obamacare diminshes the power ofthe doctor, period.  What you are propagating is a bald-faced lie.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.

     

     



    You have it backward, as usual.

     

     

    Sebelius had no authority to change the rule without the judge's order.

    This case shows nothing of the kind.

     

    But even a little cognitive dissonance would show you that more people who can't afford transplants will be able to get them once the ACA is implemented, because more people will be covered.

    At up to $500,000 per transplant, that's not nothing.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure.  that's why they went to Sebelius first.

     

    Why should they go to Sebelius at all?  Why should Sebelius need a court order?

    Shouldn't the doctor's say so be good enough to get her on the list?

     

    You are so wrapped up in government controlling healthcare, you don't even see the absurdity of Sebelius being involved AT ALL, judge or not.

    [/QUOTE]

    And you clearly are too wrapped up in hatred to understand the rules which necessarily cover this area of healthcare.  Do some research to understand why you're a bit mixed up here.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.

     

     

     

     



    You have it backward, as usual.

     

     

     

     

    Sebelius had no authority to change the rule without the judge's order.

    This case shows nothing of the kind.

     

    But even a little cognitive dissonance would show you that more people who can't afford transplants will be able to get them once the ACA is implemented, because more people will be covered.

    At up to $500,000 per transplant, that's not nothing.

     

     

     

     

     



    Sure.  that's why they went to Sebelius first.

     

     

     

    Why should they go to Sebelius at all?  Why should Sebelius need a court order?

    Shouldn't the doctor's say so be good enough to get her on the list?

     

    You are so wrapped up in government controlling healthcare, you don't even see the absurdity of Sebelius being involved AT ALL, judge or not.

     

     



    And you clearly are too wrapped up in hatred to understand the rules which necessarily cover this area of healthcare.  Do some research to understand why you're a bit mixed up here.

     

     

     

     



    Matty, my dear friend.  Don't decend into charges of hate.  Just face the facts.  This is a canary in the coal mine for Obamacare.  It does none of the things you say or think.

     

     

    Here are the facts:

    *  The girl needed to be on the list.

    *  They asked Sebelius, as Sebelius is the keeper of the rules.

    *  Sebelius said "Some live, some die".  The rules are the rules.

    *  A judge overruled Sebelius.

    *  the girl is on the list.

    Tell me.  Where is the Doctor in this process flow?

    Where is the benevolence of caring government workers?

    Where is the personalized focus on individual needs?

    None of those things are part of the system.  It took a good lawyer and an honest judge to un-do the harm Obamacare was doing to this yourng girl.  How's that going to work when you or I need the same?

    Your inconvient truth is that you are fine with government making health care decisions for individuals, or, put more plainly, individuals be d@mned.  In fact, you prefer government over the insurance companies you hate, and the doctors you claim have authority but don't.  You probably don't trust doctors either.  

    You trust government.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.

     

     

     

     



    You have it backward, as usual.

     

     

     

     

    Sebelius had no authority to change the rule without the judge's order.

    This case shows nothing of the kind.

     

    But even a little cognitive dissonance would show you that more people who can't afford transplants will be able to get them once the ACA is implemented, because more people will be covered.

    At up to $500,000 per transplant, that's not nothing.

     

     

     

     

     



    Sure.  that's why they went to Sebelius first.

     

     

     

    Why should they go to Sebelius at all?  Why should Sebelius need a court order?

    Shouldn't the doctor's say so be good enough to get her on the list?

     

    You are so wrapped up in government controlling healthcare, you don't even see the absurdity of Sebelius being involved AT ALL, judge or not.

     

     



    And you clearly are too wrapped up in hatred to understand the rules which necessarily cover this area of healthcare.  Do some research to understand why you're a bit mixed up here.

     

     

     

     



    Matty, my dear friend.  Don't decend into charges of hate.  Just face the facts.  This is a canary in the coal mine for Obamacare.  It does none of the things you say or think.

     

     

    Here are the facts:

    *  The girl needed to be on the list.

    *  They asked Sebelius, as Sebelius is the keeper of the rules.

    *  Sebelius said "Some live, some die".  The rules are the rules.

    *  A judge overruled Sebelius.

    *  the girl is on the list.

    Tell me.  Where is the Doctor in this process flow?

    Where is the benevolence of caring government workers?

    Where is the personalized focus on individual needs?

    None of those things are part of the system.  It took a good lawyer and an honest judge to un-do the harm Obamacare was doing to this yourng girl.  How's that going to work when you or I need the same?

    Your inconvient truth is that you are fine with government making health care decisions for individuals, or, put more plainly, individuals be d@mned.  In fact, you prefer government over the insurance companies you hate, and the doctors you claim have authority but don't.  You probably don't trust doctors either.  

    You trust government.



    I'm not your friend.

    It's your hatred of anything in relation to the president (or your twisted view of progressive policy) that blinds you to the fact that govt-run medicare places restrictions on coverage and care just like private insurance companies do...and often the doctor can do nothing about it...short of ponying up the money or working pro bono.

    Nor do you see that the entire health care system makes these life-death decisions every day...and often based solely upon the bottom line.  You only care about this case because you think it makes the most significant health insurance reform in 45 years look bad.  Before, you complained about too many people getting care, and now you complain because you think one case makes your point??  Please...

    Count yourself among those americans who have no idea what the ACA does or the myriad problems it attempts to fix.  If the choice were yours, you would keep the status quo, and the lives of that girl and more like her would be even more at risk.  In the end, the ACA will end up saving more lives for less cost - to everyone's benefit.  Even yours.

     

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    And supposedly because of our "freedomz", unlike most other first-world nations, the question is inevitably:

    How much is that operation, and who is paying for it?

     

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    He just runs his mouth for a reaction.



    Exactly the same as EVERY poster on here!

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    He just runs his mouth for a reaction.

     



    Exactly the same as EVERY poster on here!

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not really....some of us actually enjoy having intelligent discussions about the issues of the day...in spite of all the background noise from those just here for a reaction. 

     

    I can only speak for myself...but I've already invested enough time in trying to convince skeeter to display a modicum of intellectual honesty in this thread. He is content simply repeating the anti obamacare, anti-government talking points. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.

     

     

     

     



    You have it backward, as usual.

     

     

     

     

    Sebelius had no authority to change the rule without the judge's order.

    This case shows nothing of the kind.

     

    But even a little cognitive dissonance would show you that more people who can't afford transplants will be able to get them once the ACA is implemented, because more people will be covered.

    At up to $500,000 per transplant, that's not nothing.

     

     

     

     

     



    Sure.  that's why they went to Sebelius first.

     

     

     

    Why should they go to Sebelius at all?  Why should Sebelius need a court order?

    Shouldn't the doctor's say so be good enough to get her on the list?

     

    You are so wrapped up in government controlling healthcare, you don't even see the absurdity of Sebelius being involved AT ALL, judge or not.

     

     



    And you clearly are too wrapped up in hatred to understand the rules which necessarily cover this area of healthcare.  Do some research to understand why you're a bit mixed up here.

     

     

     

     



    Matty, my dear friend.  Don't decend into charges of hate.  Just face the facts.  This is a canary in the coal mine for Obamacare.  It does none of the things you say or think.

     

     

    Here are the facts:

    *  The girl needed to be on the list.

    *  They asked Sebelius, as Sebelius is the keeper of the rules.

    *  Sebelius said "Some live, some die".  The rules are the rules.

    *  A judge overruled Sebelius.

    *  the girl is on the list.

    Tell me.  Where is the Doctor in this process flow?

    Where is the benevolence of caring government workers?

    Where is the personalized focus on individual needs?

    None of those things are part of the system.  It took a good lawyer and an honest judge to un-do the harm Obamacare was doing to this yourng girl.  How's that going to work when you or I need the same?

    Your inconvient truth is that you are fine with government making health care decisions for individuals, or, put more plainly, individuals be d@mned.  In fact, you prefer government over the insurance companies you hate, and the doctors you claim have authority but don't.  You probably don't trust doctors either.  

    You trust government.

     



    I'm not your friend.

     

    It's your hatred of anything in relation to the president (or your twisted view of progressive policy) that blinds you to the fact that govt-run medicare places restrictions on coverage and care just like private insurance companies do...and often the doctor can do nothing about it...short of ponying up the money or working pro bono.

    Nor do you see that the entire health care system makes these life-death decisions every day...and often based solely upon the bottom line.  You only care about this case because you think it makes the most significant health insurance reform in 45 years look bad.  Before, you complained about too many people getting care, and now you complain because you think one case makes your point??  Please...

    Count yourself among those americans who have no idea what the ACA does or the myriad problems it attempts to fix.  If the choice were yours, you would keep the status quo, and the lives of that girl and more like her would be even more at risk.  In the end, the ACA will end up saving more lives for less cost - to everyone's benefit.  Even yours.

     

    [/QUOTE]
     

    You failed to answer my questions, which were based on your claims, so I'll take that as admission that I am, once again, right on the facts. 

    You, on the other hand, ignore the piling evidence that OBamacare is a train wreck, as you claim things that are demonstrably wrong.


    Shown an example of how Obamacare has failed, you claim something even the government doesn't claim, that Obamacare will save money.

    Think about that, my friend.

     

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUb0C0iI_GE

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:




    Get me a soooda.  and, none of that stinkin root beer.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Do We Really Want Government Making These Decisions?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    "A federal judge on Wednesday ordered HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan to be moved to the adult lung transplant list, giving her a better chance of receiving a potentially life-saving transplant."


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/sarah-murnaghan-lung-transplant-ruling-kathleen-sebelius-92299.html#ixzz2VS0BNrm0

    Aparently, Sebelius is the final say in life or death issues, and it took a judge to make here act.

    What do we do when she goes off the reservation on something, like the IRS?  What do we do when those with an "R" on their voting roll needs a transplant?  Do they get moved down the list?  Does it take a judge or a politician to get you moved up or down a government managed list?

    WDYWN is trying to distract us into a personal attack.  What I am pointing out is that the government now has power of whether you live or die, as this case shows.

    Obamacare needs to be stopped.

     

     

     

     



    You have it backward, as usual.

     

     

     

     

    Sebelius had no authority to change the rule without the judge's order.

    This case shows nothing of the kind.

     

    But even a little cognitive dissonance would show you that more people who can't afford transplants will be able to get them once the ACA is implemented, because more people will be covered.

    At up to $500,000 per transplant, that's not nothing.

     

     

     

     

     



    Sure.  that's why they went to Sebelius first.

     

     

     

    Why should they go to Sebelius at all?  Why should Sebelius need a court order?

    Shouldn't the doctor's say so be good enough to get her on the list?

     

    You are so wrapped up in government controlling healthcare, you don't even see the absurdity of Sebelius being involved AT ALL, judge or not.

     

     



    And you clearly are too wrapped up in hatred to understand the rules which necessarily cover this area of healthcare.  Do some research to understand why you're a bit mixed up here.

     

     

     

     



    Matty, my dear friend.  Don't decend into charges of hate.  Just face the facts.  This is a canary in the coal mine for Obamacare.  It does none of the things you say or think.

     

     

    Here are the facts:

    *  The girl needed to be on the list.

    *  They asked Sebelius, as Sebelius is the keeper of the rules.

    *  Sebelius said "Some live, some die".  The rules are the rules.

    *  A judge overruled Sebelius.

    *  the girl is on the list.

    Tell me.  Where is the Doctor in this process flow?

    Where is the benevolence of caring government workers?

    Where is the personalized focus on individual needs?

    None of those things are part of the system.  It took a good lawyer and an honest judge to un-do the harm Obamacare was doing to this yourng girl.  How's that going to work when you or I need the same?

    Your inconvient truth is that you are fine with government making health care decisions for individuals, or, put more plainly, individuals be d@mned.  In fact, you prefer government over the insurance companies you hate, and the doctors you claim have authority but don't.  You probably don't trust doctors either.  

    You trust government.

     

     



    I'm not your friend.

     

     

    It's your hatred of anything in relation to the president (or your twisted view of progressive policy) that blinds you to the fact that govt-run medicare places restrictions on coverage and care just like private insurance companies do...and often the doctor can do nothing about it...short of ponying up the money or working pro bono.

    Nor do you see that the entire health care system makes these life-death decisions every day...and often based solely upon the bottom line.  You only care about this case because you think it makes the most significant health insurance reform in 45 years look bad.  Before, you complained about too many people getting care, and now you complain because you think one case makes your point??  Please...

    Count yourself among those americans who have no idea what the ACA does or the myriad problems it attempts to fix.  If the choice were yours, you would keep the status quo, and the lives of that girl and more like her would be even more at risk.  In the end, the ACA will end up saving more lives for less cost - to everyone's benefit.  Even yours.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]
     

     

    You failed to answer my questions, which were based on your claims, so I'll take that as admission that I am, once again, right on the facts. 

    No, you're still wrong (on most everything)...whether I answered your inane, irrelevant questions or not.

    You, on the other hand, ignore the piling evidence that OBamacare is a train wreck, as you claim things that are demonstrably wrong.

    And you ignore the fact that this case has NOTHING to do with Obamacare.  Period.  You only think it does, and once again, it's obscuring your judgment.

    If you want to argue about how organ donations are set up in this country, you can look to the existing laws and the many, many deficits in the existing (before the ACA) health care system that you want to return to.

    Think about that, my friend.

    And I'm still not your friend.

     

     [/QUOTE]

     

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share