 |
Leader Limbaugh: “Exercise Freaks” Are Driving Up Costs, Public Option Will Lead To Single Payer |
 |
Rush Limbaugh, who’s seen as the leader of the Republican party by most people in the country, thinks our health care crisis is caused by “exercise freaks” who’s broken bones and sprained ankles are stressing the health care system. Listen:
Rush also thinks we’re going to end up with single payer, contrary to the continued assertions of President Obama that you’ll always be able to keep the insurance you have if you like it:
There will be no private insurance once they get a public option. That’s the dirty little secret. There will be no competition. That’s the dirty little secret. What public — once a public option is in place, the insurance companies are not going to be able to compete. It’s — they’re not even going to try. The insurance companies are going to try to offload. Once there is a public option, you’re going to see the insurance companies get out of it and get on board the government plan for a whole host of reasons. The dirty little secret here is that the idea of a public option is to end up with a single payer and that’s the federal government.
It’s interesting to see how out of touch the leader of the Republican party is, blaming the health care crisis on “exercise freaks” and lying about the President’s plan. It’s also interesting to see what Rush isn’t doing here: Offering his solution to the health care crisis. It’s fitting that the leader of the Republican party also has no new ideas.
(also posted at the NOW! blog)
I don’t think I’d believe anyone on the subject of health or healthcare that looks and sounds like he’s going to kick the bucket any minute from a myocardial infarction!
.
Why change a winning formula? The few idiots who still listen to the Bloated One eat up any rubbish that comes out his mouth. The theme is always “Us Vs. Them.” In this case, it’s the fat & lazy versus the fit & active. If he keeps painting, there won’t be a corner big enough to hold him. Next it’ll be, “Non-oxycontin addicts are selling us out to the Sober-Socialists!!!”
.
Is anyone else in awe of the sheer irony of Rush Limbaugh denouncing “exercise freaks” as ruining healthcare, when he himself had a raging addiction to painkillers? Which I’m sure in no way was an abuse of any healthcare system.
Miocardial Infarction—aww, you’ve been watching too much House. No, seriously, I agree. Besides,the guy can’t even speak in coherent, organized sentences! He’s “out there” mentally!
Typical leftist garbage– Attack the messenger to divert attention from the real agenda of socializing medicine. Only one of you, Jason,tried to refute what Limbaugh said and even Jason couldn’t avoid slandering the messenger. The rest just mouth off with cheap degrading shots. It goes back to what I said in an earlier blog - tell a lie often enough and people start to believe it. Reminiscent of the Nazi Regime. Well anyway lets look at facts. Obama’s current plan is to offer a choice of either government or private insurance. Do you even feel a little trepidation that now you have the private sector trying to compete with the government and its unlimited resources, propensity for fraud, waste and abuse and survive? Please tell me just one government program that has been successful and met its cost projections. I’m not talking minor 10-15% overruns but hundreds of percent overruns. Canada is routinely pointed out as a model health care program. Yet its proponents neglect to tell you that at certain ages you are no longer eligible to receive lifesaving procedures such as dialysis etc, will not receive new and expensive life saving options for treatments of various diseases, just because they are to expensive. They also fail to tell you about 5,000 Canadians per month fleeing their health care to come here to receive immediate treatment without having to wait up to 6 months in Canada for treatment. If you feel comfortable with the government telling your doctor what,when and how he can treat you then socialized medicine is for you. We have by far the best medical system in the world– does it need adjustments– absolutely. Does it need scrapping? Absolutely not. Before you start bringing up examples like Sweden or whoever, just ask yourself the number of medical break throughs achieved under our capitalist concept vs socialized. Not even close. However, I think this is all going to be a mute point as we are fast approaching bankruptcy as a nation. If and when that happens its going to be very interesting what the result will be. We should be doing everything to get this deficit under control– not continuing with bailouts and government spending.
Seems like we go around in circles, mostly because you don’t listen. Who’s proposing a Canadian system of health care here? Point me to one quote or line from a proposal that would take away your right to CHOOSE a health plan or doctor.
Yes we do Jason. Alright if we’re not going to have a Canadian system answer my questions posed as fits whatever socialized plan you theing we’re going for. You can say we will have the power to keep out health care plan but that thought is unrealistic and you have to know it. Private industry can not compete (I’ve outline that above-answer it.)
What socialized plan is being proposed? As far as I’ve heard, nobody is talking about paying doctors or hospitals with government money. That’s the definition of socialized medicine. So you’re going to have to prove your straw man is a real argument before I’ll engage on the substance. I’ve seen no bill proposed that’s socialized medicine, period. Prove me wrong.
Raising taxes and using tax money to pay for insurance is socialized medicine. Thinking that private insurance can compete against a low cost public option is a fantasy. Government will then be dictating price to the hospitals, cutting back on treatment options etc. You can put any label you want on it but the actions are sociacialism. Just like the rest of the Obama plan for the economy. Remember if walks like a duck…… Here is an interesting article”
Even though the medical system as a whole will save money, extending coverage to all Americans will cost the Federal government money. Using our own estimates and those of respected economists such as Ken Thorpe and Jonathan Gruber, we estimate that the Obama health plan will require between $50 billion and $65 billion per year of new Federal funds when fully phased in. We give a range for the net cost because in a complex, $2 trillion health system, there is inevitably some uncertainty about cost and revenue implications of different elements. This $50 billion to $65 billion estimate is based on our most conservative estimate of efficiency savings. If efficiency savings turn out to be greater, then the federal cost would be lower.
According to estimates from the Urban/Brookings Tax Policy Center, $65 billion is roughly the amount of revenue that would be raised by restoring the top two personal income tax brackets and rates on dividends and capital gains to Clinton era levels, and retaining the estate tax with a $7 million exemption rather than repealing it.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/obamas-health-plan/
No, that’s not the definition of socialized medicine, but thanks for playing.
And where have you read that government will dictate prices to hospitals for everyone? Everything I read says that the public option may dictate prices, but hospitals won’t be forced to accept them if they don’t want.
The collapse is starting– You guys had a blog re what makes Cheney a National Security expert? What a stupid and inane comment and blog. Now I ask you what makes this total amateur, Obama, an expert in economic or foreign affairs? He%u2019s failing at every step. Here%u2019s an article that shows the coming economic collapse with his continued spending. Now even the Chinese are backing off on U.S. Bonds. Any of you smart enough to know what this means?
I agree that the health insurance industry will take a hit if the US manages to provide single payer health care to its’ citizens. But the focus should not be on the health of the insurance industry, it should be on the health of the American people. If socialized medicine is such a disaster why is the US the only industrialized nation that doesn’t provide it for its’ citizens? Why is the US the only nation that is struggling to reform its’ health care? Canadians and Danes and Austrians are not clamoring to change the system of health care they enjoy.
What makes you thing socialized medicine or socialized anything in the world is better? They have treatment issues in any country you can name– It’s the nature of the beast. Do you want the tax structure of those countries or are you a fan of Socialism?
What do you think Medicare does to Doctors and Hospitals? Dictates what they can charge–
Your ignorance on this topic is, once again, astounding. There is no law that says doctors or hospitals have toe take Medicare. Medicare decides on prices it is willing to pay, but doctors and hospitals can choose not to take Medicare if they don’t want to.
Jason. You call me ignorant! You are so blinded or so misinformed about your subject that you are scary. Just put it out there%u2014you can%u2019t make it on your own so you support a liberal agenda to milk off the hardworking to support your own lack of drive. You do the typical Liberal (Nazi) tactic of tell a lie big often enough that people will start to believe it. Why don%u2019t you read what the real experts (AMA) say, however, you choose to listen to amateur hour in the congress. You need a little reality in your life and to earn your own way instead of taking from others.
And we’ve validated Godwin’s law! Conversation over. I think that means I win!
If you are open minded enough and sufficiently versed in your subject read this and go to the link.
“WASHINGTON — It’s hard to know whether President Obama’s health care “reform” is naive, hypocritical or simply dishonest. Probably all three. The president keeps saying it’s imperative to control runaway health spending. He’s right. The trouble is that what’s being promoted as health care “reform” almost certainly won’t suppress spending and, quite probably, will do the opposite.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/06/15/wrong-way_health_ reform_96997.html
His name was Milton Friedman.
Though he passed away in 2006, in his prophetic book, Friedman showed how, facing massive deficits, the U.S. government would dramatically increase the money supply; why foreign countries would stop buying our debt; how the Fed would start buying our Treasury bills; and why this would call cause massive inflation.
He even predicted that our officials would claim inflation was no problem at all.
Amazingly all of this is coming to pass!
Make no mistake about it %u2014 the Obama administration is embracing massive inflationary deficit spending.
http://www.drudgereport.com/
The current proposal is to REQUIRE doctors and hospitals to accept the government insurance. This is unlike Medicare where 50% of the doctors opt out because of the low government reimbursement. Antoin is correct in saying private insurance will not be able to compete. Once that happens, the income of doctors and hospitals will be dictated by the government. Lower income for doctors means less people going into that profession. In turn you have a shortage of health care providers. If government wants to change the way the insurance companies do business, that%u2019s okay. The free enterprise system still lives. But I am totally against government provided health insurance.
Be aware that government is part of the problem that rates are so high. Insurance companies tried several different ways to hold down the cost. One was by forming closed provider networks to negotiate lower cost. The government came back with the Any Willing Provider law that drove up health insurance.
No, it’s not, or at least not any proposal I’ve seen. Can you provide a link to prove it?
Clear you don’t read previous posted links.
“Under a proposal favored by many Democrats, doctors who take Medicare patients would also have to participate in the new public plan. Democrats say that requirement is needed to make sure the public plan can go into business right away with a large network of doctors.
The medical association said it %u201Ccannot support any plan design that mandates physician participation.%u201D For one thing, it said, %u201Cmany physicians and providers may not have the capability to accept the influx of new patients that could result from such a mandate.%u201D
%u201CIn addition,%u201D the A.M.A. said, %u201Cfederal programs traditionally have never required physician or other provider participation, but rather such participation has been on a voluntary basis.%u201D
Under a proposal favored by many Democrats, doctors who take Medicare patients would also have to participate in the new public plan. Democrats say that requirement is needed to make sure the public plan can go into business right away with a large network of doctors.
The medical association said it %u201Ccannot support any plan design that mandates physician participation.%u201D For one thing, it said, %u201Cmany physicians and providers may not have the capability to accept the influx of new patients that could result from such a mandate.%u201D
%u201CIn addition,%u201D the A.M.A. said, %u201Cfederal programs traditionally have never required physician or other provider participation, but rather such participation has been on a voluntary basis.%u201D
Under a proposal favored by many Democrats, doctors who take Medicare patients would also have to participate in the new public plan. Democrats say that requirement is needed to make sure the public plan can go into business right away with a large network of doctors.
The medical association said it %u201Ccannot support any plan design that mandates physician participation.%u201D For one thing, it said, %u201Cmany physicians and providers may not have the capability to accept the influx of new patients that could result from such a mandate.%u201D
%u201CIn addition,%u201D the A.M.A. said, %u201Cfederal programs traditionally have never required physician or other provider participation, but rather such participation has been on a voluntary basis.%u201D
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/us/politics/11health.html
Again, point to these proposals. Show me the quote from the Member of Congress. Just because the NY Times said “under a proposal favored by Democrats” doesn’t actually mean that proposal exists. Who is proposing this? I’d personally say they’d be wrong to propose this. No reason to force docs to do anything.
Don’t you find it suspicious that you can’t point to a proposal. It’s a trust me it will work!
Oh, the ignorance. Ask and you shall receive!
The Baucus White Paper: http://finance.senate.gov/healthreform2009/finalwhitepaper.pdf
The Schumer principles: http://www.theseminal.com/2009/05/05/senator-schumers-health-care-comp romise-dont-freak-out/
Obama’s principles: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Letter-from-President-Obama -to-Chairmen-Edward-M-Kennedy-and-Max-Baucus/
What more do you need to quit your blathering?
Jason– Are you for real or just ignorant. Did you listen to Obama’s speech at the AMA? I guess that means nothing to you. You are either gullible or just plain disingenuous. Stop your blathering and get educated on the issue
I work on this 7 days a week, it’s my job, and I’m the one who should get educated? I know cos, I shouldn’t feed the conservatards, but this one is so easy to embarrass!
.
Please don’t feed the conservatard trolls.
.
Once again Obama favors campaign contributors over commen sense and reform. One of the major costs in medical today are the amount of tewsts Doctors order to keep from getting sued.
“Not long ago, doctors’ decisions were rarely questioned. Now they are being blamed for a big part of the wasteful spending in the nation’s $2.5 trillion health care system. Studies have shown that as much as 30 cents of the U.S. health care dollar may be going for tests and procedures that are of little or no value to patients.” http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98RBO9G0&show_article=1.
Just think– tort reform could save as much as 30% of medical costs but his allegiance to the trial lawyers will prevent the sorely needed tort reform. Hope and change– where is it?
Hey, give Rush a break. For one thing, he’s not being a hypocrite; obviously he’s doing his part to help hold health costs down by making sure that he doesn’t lift a finger, unless it’s clutching a fork. For another thing, his critics here are all assuming that he hasn’t seen some study that establishes that in fact it is fitness maniacs who are responsible for high health costs. Now I ask you: do you believe that someone as respected and as responsible as Rush Limbaugh would make accusations against an entire group of people if he were not sure that the facts were on his side?
Way to go Rush Limbaugh. You successfully succeeded on making yourself look ignorantly pathetic.
What an ignorant pathetic comment Brett. You don’t see Limbaugh lining up for a public handout. Is that what’s bothering you?