Thank God Rush is Fine
It’s going to be a happy new year after all. He couldn’t resist getting a dig in at health care reform citing the excellent care he received, no special treatment involved.
Happy New Year, everyone!
 |
Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, Softcover By Jack Deere |
 |
Wild at Heart By John Eldredge |
![74325: Kingdom Triangle: Recover the Christian Mind, Renovate the Soul, Restore the Spirit"s Power](http://ag.christianbook.com/g/tiny/7/74325.gif "74325: Kingdom Triangle: Recover the Christian Mind, Renovate the Soul, Restore the Spirit"s Power") |
Kingdom Triangle: Recover the Christian Mind, Renovate the Soul, Restore the Spirit's Power By J.P. Moreland |
It’s going to be a happy new year after all. He couldn’t resist getting a dig in at health care reform citing the excellent care he received, no special treatment involved.
Happy New Year, everyone!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Praise the Lord that he has preserved Rush to continue fighting for our rights!
The United States health care system is, by far, the best in the world. Hands down. No question about it. As long as you can afford health insurance. A patient that went to the emergency with the same symptoms as Rush would have had to wait in line, and once they were released would leave w/ a bill that may make them consider filing bankruptcy (angiogram tests alone cost about $7000.00). That is what needs to be changed. Con’s are trying to warp health care reform into something other that what it is: a solution to get every American health insurance so that they can get the same stellar treatment that Rush got. That’s it. Not an attempt to kill the elderly. Not an attempt to take away people’s current health insurance. Not an attempt at a government take-over of health care.
That being said, just to spite Ben, I prayed for a speedy recovery for ol’ Rush. And I’m glad he is okay. I need someone to get me riled up in the car on my way to work!
mamix0ye Reply:
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:20 PM
I too am glad that Rush will be alright. I would like to comment on Baxter’s statement above. If all the current administration was trying to do is ensure that all American’s have access to affordable insurance, then all they would need to do is make Medicare available to those without insurance who want it, and base their premiums on what they can afford. They could also address the issues surrounding Tort reform that would propose, among other things, procedural limits on the ability to file claims, and capping the awards of damages. Costs are not merely determined by the “uninsured”, they are determined based upon the extreme costs associated with medical malpractice lawsuits.
The current Administration (as well as the Democrat controlled congress) not not seeking to make these types of changes. They want to establish a system that will force (which impinges upon individual rights) all Americans to have insurance (even if some choose not to even though they may have the financial means to self insure). And if they do not, then they will be penalized with a fine. That is a violation of Constitutional freedom.
The government is using “force” in order to provide health insurance to all Americans. I believe individuals have a right to life and liberty and that physical aggression should be used only defensively. We should respect each other as rational beings by trying to achieve our goals through reason and persuasion rather than threats and coercion. That, and not a desire for “economic efficiency,” is the primary moral reason for opposing government intrusions into our lives: government is force, not reason.
Even if costs were lower, that would not ensure that all American’s would buy it. So, the government is going to mandate that all American’s own it or else… It has nothing to do with making healthcare affordable. It has everything to do with “control” and with remaining in “power”. Let’s just be honest about this.
Rev Nev Reply:
January 3rd, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Well said!
Baxter – You know what I think about the health care bill. There are good ideas about how to better the health insurance system. Unfortunately, none of them are included in this bill. You should at least consider the possibility that there is more happening here than a simple offer of health insurance to all.
It’s not about health care access. Anyone can get care if they need it at the emergency room. My brother-in-law had his appendix taken out with no insurance and paid a fraction of the cost. How about instead of reducing doctor’s rates through Medicare we give them incentive to treat a certain number of people per week (or month or some other arbitrary timeline) that can’t afford coverage. Let them write it off on their taxes. That won’t happen under the current leadership. Why? Because they want something else. What do you think it is? Or are you, who was so critical of every move W made really as unwilling as you seem to turn a critical eye toward BO?
RevNev – I told you when I was still working for Chuck that I was disgusted with what Obama was doing so far. I got really peeved when he said that he didn’t campaign for health care reform. You’d think that I’d be used to Presidents lying to us by now after the last 8 years, but I guess I’m not. I’m peeved that the public option that was promised in his campaign is nowhere to be found.
This is my problem with the private sector: they are supposed to insure the sick, but instead they compete to insure the well. And when the well becomes sick they fight tooth and nail to avoid covering their medical expenses. This new plan is asinine. I’m sure there are loop holes that will allow people who just plain can’t afford health care period to be exempt from its mandatory purchase, but then they will still be uninsured.
RevNev, what you said about giving doctors an incentive to cover a set amount of patients that can’t afford insurance in a set time sounds like a very reasonable idea. Did a conservative senator on the floor offer that as a solution? Because all I heard was “No. No. And no”.
As far as tort goes, if you are a doctor and you leave your rubber glove in me when you are done, you need to be sued. If someone comes to see you, and you after asking a few questions about their symptoms prescribe the patient with something that they are allergic to and they die, you should be sued. Medical malpractice should be taken extremely seriously for the fact that people can die. I don’t understand why there are people trying to Nerf the consequences of the offence.
Rev Nev Reply:
January 3rd, 2010 at 5:44 PM
Baxter – Several things: (1) Do you know how insurance works? A consumer purchases insurance to avoid loss if they get sick. The insurance company collects the consumer’s premium betting that they won’t get sick. When you have a large enough group of non-sick premium payers you can afford to pay out on those who actually do get sick. But the idea is-as with all businesses-is to actually make money. So the insurance industry is not trying to insure the sick. Nor should they. Nor are they doing as well as you think.
(2) How would you know what Senate Republicans were for? The Dems shut them out at every opportunity. If you want real change, vote against the Dems in 2010.
(3) The problem with medical malpractice insurance rates is not legitimate cases, it’s frivolous cases and disproportionate payouts rewarded by juries.
Ben Reply:
January 3rd, 2010 at 6:09 PM
I used to work for a health insurance company (Humana). I’ll never forget (at least I hope I don’t!) the meeting we attended when they were talking about trying to market to the huge portion of presently uninsured. You see, the argument given by most uninsured is that “we can’t afford it.” But the dilemma faced by Humana, and I presume the other companies, is that by “we can’t afford it,” studies had shown that the average uninsured meant that statement the way I mean it when my wife wants to buy a new shirt: “we can’t afford it.” What I mean by that is, “it would be nice to have, but we have our money allocated for other purposes, and to get the item we would have to make sacrifices in other areas.”
So Humana (and I presume other companies) were trying to market a product to convince these people to shift priorities to spend their money on insurance (as a product).
What I took away, aside from what I’ve already said, is that people want insurance, oh yes they do, but they don’t want to spend their money on it and make financial sacrifices in other areas.
But you see, RevNev, they are so focused on profit that even when they can actually afford to pay out, they fight it. They recheck your medical records and find something that at the time it wasn’t a big deal (in my case it was a heart murmur) and then drop you when you need them most. After you have been paying them for years and years, when you need them they fight you for it.
And I wasn’t being sarcastic; I really think that “giving doctors’ incentive” idea is a great idea. Now, as far as the demz blocking them whenever they could I disagree. This is the most bipartisan administration I have seen… TOO bipartisan, in my opinion. If that idea came out on the senate floor I find it hard to believe that anyone would ignore it completely. It is a genuinely good idea. I could be wrong though.
Rev Nev Reply:
January 3rd, 2010 at 7:36 PM
Check out this article from Big Government. Key point: “They may not have offered a full alternative (they did have a few good reforms such as allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines), but their main message was that the Democrats were going to make the current system worse.” The author discusses that some Republicans were willing to negotiate but those negotiations went nowhere. Why? Because the Democrat leadership was intent on no compromise. If you still think this administration is bi-partisan you haven’t been paying attention.
One of the unique things about being in my position is I am under government run health insurance. And not only are my experiences terrible, but so are the experiences of almost everyone I talk to who has a “real” health problem. In fact, I’m thinking of making my fortune selling a bumper sticker: “Military Medicine… It’ll Kill ‘Ya!”
Back to my point, every now and then I am able to get a referal to a civilian doctor. Every time I interact with a civilian doctor I ask what it is like dealing with the government insurance – and they hate it. Apparently the government is as slow as paying doctors as they were paying car dealers during the “Cash for Clunkers” program. But worse, every doctor I’ve talked to had multiple horror stories of it taking so long for the government “system” to do its thing that the patient ended up needing far more care, or in some cases, had reached the point where the situation had become terminal.
My own assistant found a lump in her breast… it took them 4 months to get her in for a mamogram. It turned out to be nothing, but what if! My mom was dead 7 months after she found her lump.
Once the government starts running or managing health care I predict that within 15 years we will see the life expectancy age begin to drop.
Ben Reply:
January 3rd, 2010 at 8:50 PM
Dear Reader – I want you to realize that the leftists literally do not care about the will of the people, they do not care about the good of the people, they care only about power. It is always and only about POWER. This is why true and verifiable story after story doesn’t faze them. This is why they conveniently ignore pages upon pages of complaints from within the military which operates with a government system. This is why they lie about the numbers of people who are uninsured. This is why they engage in spurious studies supposedly revealing how many people die “because of” a lack of insurance. This is why they engage in misleading attacks against the “evil” industry of “Big Healthcare.” This is why they engage in open bribery to pass their bills. I could go on and on and on.
As I said earlier, much to the dismay of a couple leftists, liberals only want power, and everything they do is geared towards engratiating the “lower classes” and “have nots” to them and so they’ll lie, cheat, and steal if need be to do so.