Why Neither Democrats Nor Republicans Will Ever Remove Obamacare…

Staying focused on the Bigger Issues being skipped by Presidential candidates.

Doctor ObamaObamacare was never about providing more coverage or lowering the cost of said coverage.  Obamacare was constructed in 2009/2010 for one reason and one reason only, to shift the cost of healthcare away from the private sector and into the hands of government.

The cost of union healthcare coverage was rising at an unsustainable rate.  Union contracts were historically negotiated with exceptionally generous terms for Health Care Insurance plans and healthcare benefits as a whole.

In the short-term these contracts were great, however in the longer term these contracts were unsustainable.

Enter SEIU President Andy Stern, the 2009/2010 most frequent visitor to the White House.  Stern, as head of the Service Employees International Union, was in a desperate situation – the pension and retirement benefits of his unionized workers was beyond the scope of receipts to keep pace.

As a direct consequence in 2007/2008 the removal of Healthcare coverage liability was a top priority for the financial viability of the SEIU and AFL-CIO (Richard Trumka).  To get the liability removed it was imperative the Democrat candidate, Barack Obama, reached the White House.  Hence, the quid-pro-quo.

AndyStern_obama_Burger_Nicholas SEIURichard+Trumka-550x375

Andy Stern and Richard Trumka using their union members as affiliates and foot soldiers for the organizational goals of Obama For America (OFA).   Once they achieved success, the repayment for their efforts would be a healthcare bill, Obamacare, regardless of consequences.   Obamacare was the primary objective in the first two years.  They succeeded.

On the opposite side of the aisle, stood Republicans.  They too had skin in the healthcare game and they too had financial overlords who wanted the costs of healthcare coverage removed from private corporations.

Led by Tom Donohue, President of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the flip side of the business coin also stood to benefit from seeing the cost of health insurance coverage removed from the cost of goods sold, or services rendered.

As a direct consequence almost all opposition to Obamacare boiled down to the details, not the larger question of takeover (fundamental change) itself.   The stock valuations of the largest corporations stood to gain from the cost of health insurance being removed, or at least diminished, from the cost of their products and services.

The U.S. was the only large Western nation whose overall healthcare was a direct result of funding almost entirely from within the private sector.  In all other industrialized nations the delivery of healthcare flows from the government, provided via taxation upon the citizenry.

Doctor Inspecting MammogramIf the cost of healthcare could be removed from the cost of goods and services then profits would necessarily increase.  The fees, or funding mechanism, to make this fundamental shift in cost inherently became the “details” within the larger objective.

Democrats supporting Obamacare to rid themselves of burdensome union pension benefit costs.  Republicans supporting Obamacare to rid corporations of burdensome benefit costs which were eating away at their bottom line.

What followed in 2009 and 2010 was the argument over “how” and “how much”, you know, those details we were told needed to be passed in order to see what was in them.  No-one, except the impacted citizenry, ever argued the case “why”.

The “why” was always sold as to increase coverage for the 32 million “uninsured”; or to “lower the cost of providing coverage” overall.  The “why” was always the point of obfuscation inherent in the accompanying worry.

[You’ll note we’re six years down the road and the number of “uninsured” is still the same, and costs continuing to  increase.]

“If you like your plan, you can keep your plan”.  “If you like your Doctor, you can keep your doctor”.  Both statements to keep from digging down into the why.   However, the larger goal was always about shifting the cost from inside the nation’s private economic activity into a consequential place outside the production value equation.

In other words, “directly into your pocket”.

When you begin to remind yourself why this took place, you begin to look at the presidential candidate’s solutions a little differently.

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton both just want to finish off the program, to a complete single payer government funded system.   The GOP side arguing -against the tide- to reinsert Healthcare back into the private economy.   However, the financial backers for the various GOP candidates all have a vested interest in seeing the overall structure of healthcare kept off the financial profit and loss statements of the entities they represent.

We are too far down the path created by Obamacare, ie. “the exchanges“, to ever see employer provided health coverage again in all but the smallest of privately owned companies.

The only argument that remains viable within almost all of the conversation is who controls the actual delivery of the healthcare; private providers or fully immersed government entities,….

…..the bureaucracy.

How Obamacare really works


This entry was posted in Bernie Sanders, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Election 2016, media bias, Notorious Liars, Obamacare, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

155 Responses to Why Neither Democrats Nor Republicans Will Ever Remove Obamacare…

  1. herdofpugs says:

    I don’t appreciate being lied to and I dislike cons. Both were used generously to pass this nightmare. Forcing unpopular laws onto the American people via lies and deceit should be illegal right?

    Liked by 8 people

    • Martin says:

      It is. It’s unconstitutional.

      Liked by 9 people

      • Howie says:

        Nope. Not until ruled so by judicial review or repeal by congress. This is the part nobody gets. Unconstitutional laws rules and regulations are legally binding upon the people until repealed or reviewed by SCOTUS. See Marbury v Madison. But the president has the ultimate emergency power….The Pardon.

        Liked by 3 people

        • That is not correct. The Constitution grants SCOTUS no authority to determine the Constitutionality of federal laws. Our Founders expected us – the People – to be enlightened and knowledgeable enough to recognize, for ourselves, violations of the Constitution. We are not dependent upon the federal government to declare their own actions unconstitutional. The states have their own authority to refuse to cooperate with unconstitutional federal actions.

          Anything which violates the Constitution is invalid and is not legally binding. The states/People do not need to wait for SCOTUS or Congress to specifically say so.

          SCOTUS does not have the authority to grant itself, or any part of the federal government, new powers.

          Liked by 8 people

        • Mike says:

          actually the citizenry via the 2nd amendment types have the ultimate say…

          I notice a lot of people stocking up on “wordpower”/

          Liked by 3 people

        • imprimipotest says:

          You raise some good points. They bring to mind some related issues.

          William F. Ducker argued (“The President’s Power to Power: A Constitutional History,” in The William and Mary Law Review 18 [1977]), that the Constitution seems to limit Presidential pardons to offences against the United States as such, and not to offences against specific states.

          The original intent of permitting pardon to be incorporated by the Framer was because law in that era was dominated by mandatory and often severe penalties for lesser crimes, including death.

          Today, however, the criminal justice system of the United States is steeped in flexibility.
          At each step in the process, arrest, prosecution, and sentencing, discretion exists. And many Presidents have, arguably, violated the original intent of this discretionary power.

          Apart from that issue, Judicial Review, as history has shown, is not infallible. Even Chief Justice Marshall’s rationale in Marbury v. Madison to justify supremacy of Judicial Review cannot mean that such is absolute. Not only would such a claim not seem to be found in the Constitution itself, but it would imply that the Judiciary is supreme in an unqualified manner over the Legislative, which is the principal agency to make law be what it is.

          Liked by 2 people

          • imprimipotest says:

            Sorry, but I overlooked a mistake when I keyed in that title. It should be “The President’s Power to Pardon: A Constitutional History.”


      • OneWingedShark says:

        It’s why I think we should “play viciously” — not ‘dirty’ as in rule-breaking, but with the ruthlessness of wanting to win.

        For instance, if I could, I’d challenge the ACA (ObamaCare) constitutionality using Roe v. Wade – forcing them to choose between socalized healthcare and infantacide. (Roe determined that the reason state laws against abortion were invalid was because they violated a constitutional right to privacy of medical records between doctor and patient… the same medical records the ACA demands the government access.)

        Liked by 7 people

      • Bull Durham says:

        That Constitution you referred to was shredded by Roberts/Cruz. Twice.

        Liked by 4 people

        • senda72 says:

          I am unsure as to the validity of this explanation for Robert’s decision, but find it interesting: This link notes possible illegal adoption of Robert’s two children as potential for blackmail.

          Was Chief Justice John Roberts Blackmailed To Support ObamaCare?

          “It is now quite evident that the two Children were from Ireland. Even wikipedia references these adoptions at the time of Roberts’ confirmation, and indicates that the children were of Irish birth.

          However Irish law 1) prohibits the adoption of Children to non-residents, and 2) also does not permit private adoptions, but rather has all adoptions go through a public agency.

          Evidently Roberts arranged for this adoption through some sort of trafficking agency, that got the children out of Ireland and into that Latin American country, from which they were adopted, thereby circumventing two Irish laws — entirely illegal, but perhaps quasi-legitimized by the birth mothers (two) transporting the children out of Ireland.”

          Read more here:

          Liked by 4 people

          • WSB says:

            Story has been out for awhile. This sounds so similar to Obama’s tactics in Chicago, I would not be surprised. The NSA can come in handy. I often wonder if that’s why Republican leaders bend over for Obama. Same tactics.

            Liked by 2 people

      • So is Social security


    • hocuspocus13 says:

      My neighbor has Obamacare he has to drive 75 miles one way for a Dr

      Liked by 2 people

  2. The Boss says:

    The graphic reminds me of a standard Trump line: What if there were bullets flying in the opposite direction?

    Liked by 9 people

  3. Mketch says:

    So, how does Trump’s plan fit this scheme forced upon the citizens who are always left behind?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Katherine McCoun says:

      Read Mr. Trump’s specifics on this issue here:

      Also, because Mr. Trump is Not beholden to Big Pacs, Special Interests, Big Donors, the MSM, or the Uni Party Insiders in DC we can believe and trust that he will act on the behalf of US Citizen’s best interest on additional health care system issues as they arise.
      Mr. Trump is only beholden to the US Citizens who are voting him into office. He will represent we the people on each issue and solution and get us the best deal possible each time!

      Liked by 9 people

    • Greg says:

      Trump’s plan would put the control into the State’s hands and the People’s hands…and out of the government’s hands…you know, back the way the Constitution says such things should be handled.

      Unfortunately, Trump’s plan just makes him more of a target for the GOPe.

      So it goes…

      Liked by 4 people

    • Sentient says:

      Obamacare is a “cluster”, but it’s still mostly about who pays for medical care and how it gets paid. The bigger, underlying issues are why it costs so much in the first place and how do we ever know what anything costs.

      Currently, you can undergo a procedure (say, appendectomy – in & out in about 18 hours) and be sent a bill for $12,000. Your deductible is $5,900 – which you pay- and your insurance company “pays” the remainder. Only it didn’t really cost $12,000, it probably cost about $6,000. So you pay $5,900 and the insurance company pays $100 – and you’re supposed to be happy about it. Bullet point #5 from Trump https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform would address this issue. It would BAN FAKE BILLS.

      The other major screw job is that pharmaceutical companies can charge you $100 for a pill that they sell outside of the US for $5. They justify this because of the cost of R&D, but they let Germans or Canadians pay only the incremental cost of the pill (plus modest profit). Then they prohibit you from bringing in the same pill from Canada for $5. Americans are subsidizing the cost of pharma R&D for the entire world. Trump’s bullet point #7 would end this disparity by allowing re-importation – based on the simple concept that if you buy something you own it – and can re-sell it. So that same pill’s cost in the US would drop to $10 and rise in other countries to $10.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Sentient says:

        Karl Denninger – an original Tea Party founder backs Trump. He’s written a couple of important posts on this issue – including one today:


        The fact that Trump is the ONLY candidate addressing the corruption in healthcare (and the only one who ever will) is as big a reason why he should be elected as his other main reasons (build the Wall, NO to TPP, stop funding Sunni jihadis, stop stupid neocon wars in the Middle East, stop confronting Russia at every opportunity for no good reason, etc.).

        Liked by 7 people

      • Serpentor says:

        Of course, then we get to hear about how “socialized medicine” works so wonderfully abroad, but the Bernie Sanders types never point out that the USA subsidizes health care, research, development, and medical training for the entire world.

        We subsidize the world and are going broke. It’s time for the other countries to “pay their fair share”.

        Liked by 4 people

      • WSB says:

        Has anyone assessed the advertising $$$$ that have crept into the market since the pharmaceutical ad ban was lifted? A PET PEEVE of mine.

        I could strangle the TV every time I am advised to call my doctor in case death as a side effect. Can’t make it up!

        Liked by 5 people

        • Perhaps you health would improve if you stopped if you stopped watching!

          Liked by 2 people

        • Martin says:

          I’m fully convinced that there is a triumvirate of corruption there. Big Pharm enjoys preferential treatment by the FDA, letting not-ready-for-primetime drugs into the market, often with side effects more damaging than the illness they’re allegedly designed to treat – makework for the plaintiff’s bar. Sued? They don’t care. ACA/Medicare/Medicaid pays whatever they ask. Trump has mentioned the no-bid deal they’ve got, many times.

          How often have you seen a drug ad, followed by an ambulance-chaser trolling for class-action ad immediately after, for the same drug? Too many, to be coincidental.

          Liked by 3 people

      • rashamon says:

        As I posted last week, my investigation for the cost of certain procedures at major hospitals around the country produced only one who showed that medical center had given any thought to the real-cost-plus-a-percentage=retail price in case they were asked to quote on such a procedure. The rest had not the foggiest or chose to muddle the issue so as to hide why they charged $20 for a package of tissues or $30 per aspirin.

        The Big Pharma issue is simple laziness and much as you suggest. Billions are wasted for various reasons, but the simple truth is we could bring down costs IF the consumer was given more information, more choices and a competitive market.

        It WILL take a leader independent of all the thousands of lobbyists who live in those big houses around D.C. with fancy cars and house accounts at fancy restaurants to make such changes. Trump is quite familiar with all those palms that come out when a deal is being made. He’s in a good position to slap them down.

        Liked by 4 people

        • parallax says:

          We will not get a handle on healthcare costs for a number of reasons one of which is the lack of transparency in the healthcare marketplace. It is effectively impossible to price shop healthcare.


  4. bigE says:

    It’s crashing all on it’s own it doesn’t need any ones help bye bye!! Insurers are falling out one after another not to mention how many doctors have quit and are opening small offices and excepting cash now ! Too much paper work and bureocracy

    Liked by 3 people

    • Sentient says:

      Insurance companies are quitting the Obamacare exchanges, but that only affects 15 million people or so. The other 300 million of us (OK 200 million after subtracting those on Medicare, Medicaid, VA, etc) are being hurt by the indirect costs of Obamacare – all of the taxes that were imposed to pay for the subsidies. And none of the underlying cost drivers were addressed. In fact, they were augmented by the fact that it’s illegal to not buy insurance – no matter how expensive. The subsidies don’t do anything for families with AGI’s > $94,000. A self-employed couple making $95,000 joint income can easily have an annual insurance premium of $20,000 or more that hardly covers anything (huge deductibles) and ISN’T EVEN TAX DEDUCTIBLE. Trump’s plan even addresses this by making premiums tax-deductible to individuals, not just to companies as a business expense. Trump’s is great all-around. It’s one last-ditch attempt to make private insurance work before we throw in the towel and go to Single Payer.

      Liked by 4 people

  5. Howie says:

    Finally the truth.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. jedimastertrump says:

    Obamacare is a rip off.

    Designed to make the Insurance companies lots of money.

    Your premiums skyrocket.

    Your copays skyrocket.

    Your out of pocket Skyrockets so you can’t even use it.

    Yet you pay monthly.

    They get Richer…You get Sicker.

    It’s a scam to steal more money out of your pocket while eliminating your options to choose plans that make sense.

    Liked by 16 people

    • Martin says:


      Liked by 3 people

    • Greg says:

      I don’t really think Obama and his buddies had any intention of lining the ins. co’s pockets…that’s just an unintended byproduct. No…all those things you mention are designed to make people agree to the promise of increased government-paid health care.


      • jedimastertrump says:

        erm…the insurance companies and drug companies and medical supply companies wrote obamacare.

        Did you actually think that congressmen and senators wrote it? THEY DIDN’T EVEN READ IT BEFORE VOTING ON IT.

        Special interests pay off the politicians.
        Special interests then provide the “expert Staff” to the politicians to write the bills.
        Politicians then vote based on what the special interests tell them.

        Later we find out what was in it.

        Liked by 6 people

      • WSB says:

        It was to take over the economy. Marx and Alinsky.

        Liked by 3 people

  7. bertdilbert says:

    This was not the only union payback. One of Obama’s first executive order was forced unionization on construction projects over 25 million. Obama’s excuse was contractors would not know where to find workers or what to pay them. This forced unions down the throat of right to work states. Companies now had to sign a work agreement with the unions. Hence Trumpka love affair with Obama.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Jennie says:

      It was astounding to watch that whole Trumpka thing, visits to White House, etc, with nary a peep out of republican pols and certainly not the media. Goodness gracious!

      Liked by 3 people

  8. margo says:

    Trump repeats at every rally I’ve watched (haven’t missed even one) O-ba–care will be repealed and replaced with better way. Don’t you believe him? I do! He will do what he says he will do. I am physically unable to look at that jerk, listen to him, or even write his stupid unAmerican name (We don’t even know his real name.)

    Liked by 5 people

    • Sentient says:

      I’m all for repealing 95% of Obamacare, but the bigger issues are OUTLAWING FAKE BILLS and ALLOWING drug reimportation (without which Americans will continue to subsidize the drug costs of the entire world). Trump is proposing these two big changes, but not stressing them. The problem for Trump is that these are complicated to explain and threatening the medical monopolies so openly will make the corporatists oppose him even more than they do now. The biggest company in my state is United Health Care.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Daniel says:

      A president cannot repeal a law. He will have to convince congress to do that. He can do things which force the issue as executive in charge of the IRS and administration of Obamacare which is extremely flexible. Some aspects of Trump’s plan will not require a full repeal to get things enacted anyway. But to repeal a law is something the congress must do.


      • Sentient says:

        We’re aware. I don’t think Trump will hesitate to shut down the government for months at a time if that’s what it takes to get the legislation that’s needed. That goes for repealing or hugely amending Obamacare and it goes for the enacting the huge enabling legislation it’ll take to build the Wall. Just remember this when we get a lengthy “government shutdown” and don’t none of us start bellyaching about minor inconveniences like a park being closed or your Social Security check being delayed. We’ve got a country to save here.

        Liked by 8 people

        • Daniel says:

          I’m all for a massive government shutdown. This is especially true if it were in the name of balancing a budget. “sorry, we can’t afford to operate this way.” That would just be awesome and a practice I would hope President Trump exercises at least 3 to 4 times each year if not more. How much money could be saved if a bunch of government buildings had their power consumption reduced or stopped for a period of time? Probably enormous. And what’s more, the true cost of operating big government versus what value would ACTUALLY be lost would be exposed and then people would stop being frightened of the sky falling all of the time.

          Liked by 5 people

        • platypus says:

          Your social security check (and all other regular recurring fed checks) will not be delayed. All of those “entitlement” payments are made out of the incoming receipts (tax money) stream. The money is always ‘set aside’ for distribution on a certain day. It’s all computer controlled and has no way to be shut down. Seriously, it has no off switch.

          Liked by 2 people

  9. margo says:

    The name I’m referring to is the one beginning with O, Not T.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Mike says:

    They are still hiding the true price tag of O policies.

    The fundamental medical problems still remain as technology controls on choices, regulatory burden, and price fixing. We go overseas for cancer treatments at 99% discount and work better e.g. in the US, die in 1-2 miserable yrs vs 6 good years, going strong. At 99% discount.

    Dump the FDA, it’s killing you (and almost us).

    Liked by 5 people

  11. zephyrbreeze says:

    I always ask my friends who want universal single payer healthcare:

    What do you do if they tell you the next appointment is in 6 months? Then what?

    Same with free college for everyone:

    What do you do when they tell you all the colleges and universities are full and there is a 3-6 year wait for acceptance? Who are you going to complain to? The government?

    Liked by 4 people

    • Jayne says:

      Right now, my PCP that used to take me days to see is at 6 weeks out for a standard appointment and our immediate care needs are through urgent cares.

      Liked by 1 person

      • folma says:

        The corporation I have worked for for 15 years just sent us a notice that they prefer us to use “minute clinics” instead of our PCP if at all possible. The minute clinics are headed by NP’s(nurse practitioners.), not doctors.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Jayne says:

          We call them urgent cares around here and I think that’s the goal, too. One of ours is only NPs and last year a couple of times we were at the ER we only saw PAs and never an MD.

          Insurance company also pushes doing the teledoc program or skype for seeing a doctor.


      • kathyca says:

        My doc just went “concierge.” Everything stays the same insurance, copay, cost of treatment wise, but I pay an extra ~$400/quarter and he limits his practice to a certain number of patients. I don’t recall the exact number, but it was pretty small. The focus is on preventive and very personalized care, plus same day or next day appts. guaranteed. I don’t need all that extra attention right now. But I got in so I have it when I will need it. And, in the meantime, it’s nice to know I won’t have to wait for an appointment when I do need one two or three times a year.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Katie says:

      I do the same. There’s no “2nd opinion” when the govt. says “no”.

      Liked by 2 people

      • herdofpugs says:

        “In a capitalist healthcare system, a dead patient is a revenue loss. In the National Healthcare System a dead patient is a cost-savings.”

        Liked by 1 person

  12. AK49 says:

    Thanks, again, SD. Going to copy, paste, and send this to some of my more ‘open-minded’ left-leaning friends.

    Trump ’16!!!

    Liked by 3 people

  13. starfcker says:

    When insurance becomes mandatory, it is, in fact, a tax. Roberts was correct. But he should have pulled the plug

    Liked by 1 person

  14. socabill says:

    This ALL could have been avoided DECADES ago with just two simple measures:

    a) by allowing interstate commerce of insurance and

    b) mandating tort reform (loser pays, like in England, would have been a good start)

    This entire nightmare would have never have been had. I’ve been pounding this drum for years and been ignored or ridiculed. Someone here tell me how I’m wrong.

    Liked by 5 people

    • TheLastDemocrat says:


      But the health insurance premium issue is still around in the several states that have enacted tort reform.

      Tort reform is a false issue behind which physicians hide as they charge whatever they can get away with, in cahoots with the insurance company – as long as you the individual premium payer do not really feel the shock abruptly, you are an unwitting accomplice.


    • Daniel says:

      Not really. The over-committed unions and others would have still demanded it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • rashamon says:

      Add to that, putting healthcare costs including insurance in the hands of the consumer and let them deduct the entire cost on their return. The small business owner, which is the engine that make our country thrive and grow, should not be required to manage its employees healthcare just because our government made bad decisions about wage increases 75 years ago. The auto industry had bigger departments managing human resources than people building cars. And we ask why that industry failed?

      These wage-control decisions that allowed big companies to add company-deductible perks instead of boosting wages totally distorted the marketplace for healthcare services by inserting the insurer between the provider and the consumer. Bad policy. Big bucks were wasted on all the middlemen that developed without improving the outcomes for the patients.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sentient says:

      Those are necessary but not nearly sufficient. The bigger issues are ENDING FAKE BILLS (without which we have no price discovery) and allowing drug reimportation (or mandating that pharmaceutical companies sell their products for the same price everywhere).

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mike says:

      No, the problems are deeper in medicine: price fixing caused by the FDA (can’t get many cheap generic drugs and supplies at all or 100x-10,000x higher), technology stunting because of medical interference, and railroading (“we can only treat your illness with these $50,000 infusions 1-2x times a month “standard of care”; us: found a 2 cent pill but they still laugh at us 6 yrs later)

      Liked by 1 person

  15. Sporty says:

    Eat vegan no oil and don’t worry about Doctors

    Liked by 2 people

  16. I seems as if every day we are seeing where we have been screwed over in a different way by a very corrupt group of politicians who we used to think were some honest people.
    I used to think Alex Jones was a nutcase. Now every day it appears he has been more and more right all along.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Daniel says:

      Alex Jones is STILL a nutcase. He mixes a LOT of fact and fiction together. I remember he was selling gold because of the failing economy. I was banned from there after I made the case:

      1) He’s accepting US currency to sell gold… why? If US currency is worthless..?
      2) Without a generally accepted standard/system by which we can use gold as currency when the economy fails, gold will be pretty useless.

      Now I can only read the articles and cannot post there any longer.

      His huckster-style of constantly selling snake oil is intolerable. And his constant claims that HE has realized what is going on when he steals his ‘insights’ from others are also intolerable. He’s a huckster before anything else.


    • adoubledot says:

      Me to, but I’m starting to listen to him regularly now (bye, Rush). I like his guest reporters better though because his voice grates on me at times. My son turned me on to his site and we’re both pulling for Trump. He just got a bottle of Anthroplex and I’m anxious to see how it works for him.


    • kadar2012 says:

      Everything with a grain of salt.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. herdofpugs says:

    Affirmative action, for me, has made it almost impossible to trust anyone other than a white male in the medical profession.. I have no way of knowing if they achieved their position rightfully or through political magic tricks. The husband and I are already in search of such a doctor who will take cash payments for services rendered.
    Obamacare will be used against certain demographics just as the IRS and DOJ has been.
    Obamacare is a clearing house for the unwanted. imho.

    Liked by 1 person

    • WSB says:

      Nothing like seeing a Bombay diploma on the wall, huh!

      Liked by 1 person

    • kallibella says:

      I went to see a new doctor couple of weeks ago who is outside of network from all insurance companies. He doesn’t take Medicare. Cash only. Patient deals with insurance company. I’m glad I didn’t have a serious or urgent health issue, because I had to wait 4 months to see him as a new patient. He is swamped. Lots of new patients seeking independent doctors. Plus he practices “Functional Medicine.”

      He said he has been in practice for close to 30 years and decided to get out of the typical medical practice to get away from the changes forced on the profession by obamacare. He said he wanted to practice medicine as opposed to dealing with insurance companies.

      I’ve heard radio ads about a Christian plan called Medishare and it is obamacare compliant, I think mandate-wise because the patient is technically insured. I think that more and more people would go that way until obamacare is repealed. I think that most people could opt out from typical employer-provider plans and use the cash to shop for programs like this.

      In Canada and the UK there are doctors who have their private practice and are not part of the socialized system.

      Liked by 1 person

    • DEGinTN says:

      herdofpugs, love you name.


  18. ssupsky says:

    My stance on the Obamacare is that in theory it would be a good system to be able to have everyone insured and taken care of. We know that is not the actual reason for the horrendous bill though.

    Sadly, to have care for everyone, at this stage in the game would be impossible as it currently stands. To have the government run any kind of plan would be a disaster. Since we cannot have a good solid plan that would be of benefit to everyone, we have no plan at all.

    Good. Bad. Who knows? The fact that the plan that was presented was a farce, a falsehood, is immaterial. The plan was never for healthcare as Sundance pointed out.

    While I agree with what Sundance has said the plan was for, I think that there was another reason for it as well.

    Right now, those that do not have the plan are being taxed. Every year that will increase until such time as a plan is acquired. Why is this? Why the push to get people on a healthcare plan? What Sundance pointed out before, while well and good, does not seem to account for this incessant push (unless I missed something somewhere).

    I think another reason for the plan, the push to have people sign up for it, is so that an accounting of individuals can be done. A census if you will, but it goes beyond that. Notice how everyone is encouraged to sign up for it, even illegals? Why have that done?

    No, I think it is a nefarious roster of all citizens and non-citizens in the U.S. for the purpose of finding enemies of the state so to speak.

    Perhaps I’m just off my rocker. i am sure you good folks here will let me know.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Daniel says:

      No, actually, it’s not. Government regulation and insurance companies have resulted in the ridiculous cost of medical services in so many ways. It’s the only technology industry which never gets cheaper over time. (Sure, patent-free generic medications are cheaper but good luck getting a doctor to prescribe that meaning you can’t be allowed to buy it.)

      I encourage you to watch this to better understand that’s wrong with the medical and health insurance industries:

      Liked by 2 people

      • ssupsky says:

        Daniel, please understand that I was not actually speaking about the system that we have in place now or any system that can be put into place. I an not negligent in the desires of corrupt humans to usurp their fellow humans.
        For something like that to work, it would be only be by the non-compensatory system of goodwill.


      • My son-in-law is a naturalized American citizen born and raised in France. When our government was going through the Obamacare voting here he said “write everyone and tell them not to do it.” He had many first-hand horror stories of the French socialist medical system and what his family went through when he was growing up. He was very dismayed when our Congress then our very silly Supreme Court passed Obamacare.


      • Mike says:

        Great video on free market for cash only surgery centers v govt-insurance monster.


    • Mist'ears Mom says:

      Not only are you not off your rocker but along with signing up for your obummer plan you have to provide them with income and tax information before and after that is much more invasive than a simple tax filing used to be. That’s the pisser for middle to lower income folks receiving subsidies…guessing at income and getting an affordable premium with a huge subsidy. Then you basically get a 1099 from the government adding those subsidies “you didn’t need before or want in the first place” as extra income. Now you get to pay taxes on it if your ‘new-after subsidy’ income is too high.
      Before I simply bought insurance for a plan I could afford wrote some off and it was none of the governments business what my income was, now it’s all tied together and they are a huge part of it. Nasty stuff this.
      Insurance premiums should not be tied to income. Period.
      Years ago I worked for a 3rd party administrator. We administered the health insurance plans for Erisa Plans or self funded insurance. Large companies/school districts etc. self funded their insurance and paid for re-insurance for catastrophic claims that they bought from the insurance carriers. The rate for re-insurance is low as it only kicks in when the claims costs reach a certain threshold ( a sum that cannot be paid from reserved funds)They designed their own plans and covered what they wanted, Claims were paid for by the companies and the employees insurance payments. The incentive to stay healthy and keep costs low was stressed a swell as cost sharing in medical savings accounts.
      I am not sure why the states couldn’t work with the insurance companies and do the same for its residents.
      It isn’t as simply as getting rid of “fake” bills. All insurance companies have contracted rates for using their “facilities/networks/pharmacies” where the costs are negotiated & discounted to the insurance payers and in turn also discounted to the end user. You pay your deductible of a lower cost procedure/visit etc and co-insurance % of a lower cost. Contracted costs benefit both as it drives business and keeps costs affordable. If there is no contracted rates or fee schedule them the providers would bill at what was UCR, usual, reasonable costs i.e. average of area costs.
      This insurance mess can be fixed but it will need a complete overhaul, with cut backs and sacrifices made by all. The sense of health insurance as a right to be provided by the government to everyone is a myth that needs to be smashed. People need to participate is their health choices that affect their health care needs and costs.


  19. Jett Black says:

    Thanks again to SD for laying it all out so what seemed incomprehensibly awful becomes entirely understandable criminality and greed. If Christie becomes AG, he’s going to have so much corruption to prosecute!

    What needs to happen is natural selection needs to be allowed to work again. If people aren’t motivated and smart enough to feed, house, clothe, and keep themselves healthy, we need to accept the fact that they need to be filtered out of the gene pool and allow it to happen. If we’d taken that “natural” “organic” approach to foreign aid, as well, there’d be a whole lot less refugees and less pressure generally on resources in Latin America, Africa, and the GME.


    • louche9 says:

      Republicanism being hijacked in part by this Libertarian “let them die in the streets” philosophy is some of the reason why I’m an Independent, masquerading as a Rep just long enough to vote for Trump. In college, I taught life skills to retarded people. It is perfectly logical that the most expedient, cost-effective method of dealing with them is to take them out and shoot them – welcome to Nazi Germany. Vets who come home from the Middle East missing limbs or brain damaged are no longer at full capacity health-wise, either. Is caring for them an inefficient waste of resources? People who were productive for years, only to be unceremoniously shown the door and replaced with H1B visa holders are not in danger of losing their homes because the “aren’t motivated and smart enough” to house themselves. I agree that there are plenty of people who make relentless bad choices, but you’re painting with a very broad brush.

      Liked by 2 people

  20. Manfred says:

    From the article: “Obamacare was constructed in 2009/2010 for one reason and one reason only, to shift the cost of healthcare away from the private sector and into the hands of government.” Actually, the money changing hands was secondary. The primary goal was to put control of the health/medical industry in the hands of the same folks who have been growing poverty with their war on it. As Milton Friedman said, if you want more of something, subsidize; if you want less of something, tax it.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Curry Worsham says:

    Charles Evers: “I don’t think all of us should be Democrats. What have they done for us?”


    Liked by 4 people

  22. And they call Mr Trump a con man?

    Liked by 3 people

  23. yy4u says:

    Here’s my health care plan. Not fleshed out — just the top of my head

    Like DJT, I don’t want people “dying in the street”. Or going without health care either. Therefore, there should be a government system which any American is entitled to. It’s base line. It’s socialized medicine. It’s long waits for non emergencies, long waits for elective surgeries, long waits for everything but the basics. Hospitalized go on wards of 10-12 beds, easier for the nurses. No private rooms and baths. Nobody goes without. (Illegals get treatment and upon discharge a free bus ticket back to country of origin).

    Those who want better coverage can pay privately. Like it was in the old days.

    Tort reform. Those on gov. health cannot sue no matter what. Everyone else loser pays.

    Health providers get one year free education per one year working in the nationalized system. Four years of med school = four years in the VA and or Gov system. Specialists at the end of their specialty training.
    Nurses, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, xray techs, etc. it applies to all. Free education means payback in the system.

    Liked by 1 person

    • commies will always do the commie way

      Heath is not a right under any written document in the current, past or future .

      Liked by 1 person

      • Religious organizations and other charities use to care for people and did a much better job than the government. They did this by asking for donations not by taking the money from people by force. (IRS). We might try going back to that type of care for the indigent. Americans are very giving people, we like to help if asked, not forced. No one is saying anyone needs to die int he streets.


  24. Of some note:

    The Democrats and Republicans are the ones who bankrupted the U S A.

    They have nothing to say any longer of import.

    They will be lucky to get out of these crimes with all their skin intact.

    The MSM, msm and now the new blog media were and still are the protection shield for these crimes.

    We are the judges, the juries, the witness’s and we will be the executioners.

    Like That, in Spades.


  25. burnett044 says:

    What has killed more people than any thing on earth???
    Governments ,thats what...
    as a Vet and being in the V.A. system..I can tell ya ..you do not want any part of a government run health care ....take a trip to your local VA hospital and hang out a while..speak to some Vets...
    ll get the picture

    Liked by 2 people

  26. IMO says:

    Know the TRUTH about the Government Health Care Bill H.R.3200 – Key Points

    Obamacare – The Crown Jewel of Socialism – Socialist/Communist Healthcare


  27. Pinkie says:

    “Obamacare was constructed in 2009/2010 for one reason and one reason only, to shift the cost of healthcare away from the private sector and into the hands of government.”

    If that is the case, then why are businesses with 50 or more employees required to provide employer based health insurance?

    Perhaps Sundance is making a “Camel’s nose under the tent” argument but otherwise I don’t see it.


  28. TheLastDemocrat says:

    I don’t believe that big business wanted to be free of the cost of health care. The pre-tax-dollar arrangement, and volume-discount, means they can give me what I want for a much lower price than I could get for myself, enticing me to favor the benefit as part of my compensation package, in lieu of wage dollars….and for each perceived $1,000 I receive, the company pays a fair portion less. Directly, if you are taxed at 20% of your income, then you get a perceived $1,000 boon and it costs the employer $800.

    That is not counting the few additional boons that large employers enjoy. 1. They can use volume-discount buyer power. 2. They can premium-share with you. 3. They can efficiently host “benefits” personnel to be efficient. 4. They can afford utilization-review strategies (various means of having “pre-approval” of health care). 5. They can survive with unfilled employee positions better than small employers because they can flex their greater staff to pick up the slack, enabling them to wait and shop around for the “best” employees” – who are those who are both qualified for the job AND have a low projected health care cost profile.

    So, I argue that big business has favored, and continues to favor, employer-sponsored health insurance.


    • CheetoGuido says:

      I was a Benefits Analyst for large and $$ corporations who are self insured and I assure you they do not want to provide employees coverage. The idea for years is how to shift employees off of their coverage to their Spouse’s plan, hence the Spouse fee added to employees who cover their spouse on their plan. If the employee can prove their spouse does not have access to another plan the additional fee is removed. Every year there are meetings on what is the best way to shift employee families off of our coverage (i.e. spousal surcharge increasing every year). Monthly strategy meetings on how to shift cost to employees or making them “partners” in the cost of healthcare – i.e. Urgent Care center copays of $30 but Emergency Room visits over $200, phone nurses, anything to get employees to not go to a hospital. The benefit costs are looked at very closely by Management and if the company is foreign owned it makes even less sense to Management as to why they are paying for employee’s healthcare. I definitely heard some crazy remarks from our Canadian partners.

      Liked by 1 person

      • kenramsey says:

        My wife is an HR person for a large corp. I have been telling her ever since Obamacare came around that her days were numbered. She’s a low-level benefits person on the health care spread. I’m pretty sure that upper management will axe her whole team in time. The numbers favor the end of employer sponsored health insurance, so it will happen over time unless Obamacare is scrapped or significantly overhauled.

        This won’t tomorrow, it will be a slow process. Right now the majority of people are getting health care plans from their employers so they have only a dim idea of the structural changes Obamacare has wrought. Take that employer sponsorship away and they won’t recognize the place. It is simply a staggering tax that is increasingly hard to escape. In my state every single plan on the exchange is horrid. Very expensive, with sky high deductibles — it’s like paying through the nose to have NO insurance unless you’re chronically ill. Family of four = $20k per year for nothing “unless you get hit by a bus”. Funny how the libs used to attack those “catastrophic” plans and say they were like having no plan at all. Then they made them ALL catastrophic.

        Liked by 1 person

  29. yadent says:

    With healthcare spending being one of the largest expenditures in the private and public sectors, the forces that will attempt to prevent a Trump presidency have only just begun their assault. The money with and the power that comes with control of that important component of society is far greater than most anyone realizes. Trump as POTUS threatens that money & power not just in the US but a large part of the world as well.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Sundance posted an article yesterday, “Ted Cruz Campaigning Tomorrow In Mississippi With Extremist Bryan “Arrest All The Gays” Fischer…” Then last night we are told ly’an Ted cancelled the rally because he wasn’t feeling well. There’s no doubt Cruz received a tremendous amount of backlash for including this religious nutter at his rally, which was the REAL reason Cruz cancelled.

    The article mentioned above has several links of audio from Fischer. In this particular video linked below shows Fischer advocates for a mandate that everyone attend church and tax those who don’t, he uses Obamacare as an example of how it would work.


  31. TheLastDemocrat says:

    Is health care a “right?”

    I don’t care.

    However, you conservatives need to come up with something more real-world than “health care is not a right.”

    It is inhumane to have all of this health care capability and allow someone to suffer from acute or chronic health problems.

    Can the “health care system” be more efficient? Sure. There is a lot of capacity there.

    But consider a person earning a modest wage, then eventually having an expensive chronic condition. I believe we need to “distribute the wealth” to provide this care because we are humane.

    So, tell me what we do besides allow people to die in the streets. Seriously. what do you do with the modest-wage-earner who ages and has never been able to pay ahead in their productive years – their 20s – 60s – for the health care they will need in their 60s-80s.

    In my mind, there are three avenues of solution. First, we make each person put money aside in their productive youth to cover those later costs. Second, we do something similar: we shift money from productive people at one point in time to the those with health care need – in the same time frame (wealth distribution). Third, families somehow cover not just their kids up to the age of 25, but cover family members when the health care is needed: ages 60s to 80s.

    I am listening. Throw some real-world humane ideas out there, or simply declare you are for people dying in the street.


    • yadent says:

      Reduce the cost of healthcare via: 1) Allow for the re-importation of pharmaceuticals and medical devices back into the US at world prices 2) Price transparency where ALL medical providers MUST list costs of services and procedures. These two items alone could/would reduce healthcare costs by upwards of 80%. See: http://surgerycenterok.com/ Combine that cost savings with simple, inexpensive catastrophic health insurance and the majority of individuals can then afford to ‘live’. Religious affiliated hospitals/health centers could then go back to what they were originally founded on—-charitable medicine for those truly destitute. Oh, BTW healthcare can NEVER be a ‘true right’ when the receiving of that ‘right’ is based on the ‘granted privilege’ of someone else bestowing it. ALL healthcare providers in the US must possess a LICENSE to provide any healthcare, with a license being a state granted privilege for said activity.


    • lorac says:

      I was thankful to hear that Trump doesn’t want people dying on the street, that he has a heart. We’re talking about uninsured patients. But we already have the solution to that, even pre-O’Care. Emergency rooms are required to treat, even just for a cold, anyone who walks in to the ED. This includes illegals. And if the condition is serious, the person with no insurance will be admitted into the hospital and treated.

      But this really(being admitted) just refers to emergent conditions. You may have been in a car crash and have bones to set, and wounds to be treated, and maybe a transfusion for blood lost. But once you are stablized and no longer need emergent help, you are sent out to receive the rest of your care as an outpatient (as is true with everyone). It is difficult to find free outpatient care, although there are county medical clinics. But if you need a specialist, the clinic will refer you to one… but the specialist wants money, which the person doesn’t have.

      If you are a poor, unfunded dialysis pt, you automatically get insurance, and can have your dialysis treatment 3x/week at an outpatient dialysis clinic (because without that dialysis and the insurance to get it, you will die).. But if you’re illegal or unfunded, your only choice is the ED. You will be given your dialysis that day and discharged. Rinse and repeat.

      I think the question is, what happened to the incredible amount of money spent on Obamacare. Most uninsured are still not signed up. And I know that hospitals put a great deal of time starting the process for patients, but patients must turn in further documents requested by the county after discharge. Many, many patients do not follow through. I think they’re just people who live for the moment (personality issue, drugs, alcohol, overwhelmed by even the most basic things in life, whatever).

      We have raised a large part of a generation that lives day to day, who never learned to put effort into things, who have no conception of making plans (steps) leading to a higher goal. They figure what they need will just materialize (remember, their goals aren’t too high).

      Personally, I think the biggest answer is getting people back to work, and the job provides healthcare. For many people, this will solve the problem. But for many of this generation, they don’t want the job. They are entitled to freebies. So I think a longer range goal, which I hope will be part of the Trump plans, is to instill in people what used to come naturally to Americans – a pride in self, a desire to be the best they can be, a desire to be self-sufficient to the best extent they can, recognizing education as a gift and a future (whether academic or in skilled trades) and dedicating themselves to that learning opportunity to better themselves….

      We really need to bring our culture back, be the kind of people who came here and formed a new country, the first one built on a set of principles, not on dictators or monarchies. I think those men and women who came here were of a special stock, and they spawned generations of innovators, hard workers, etc. And I’ve never heard that any of them called themselves “English Americans” or “Irish Americans” or “Scottish Americans”. They became Americans, period.

      And hopefully Trump’s plans to cut out waste, fraud, and abuse will be a big part of this.

      Liked by 2 people

  32. lorac says:

    If that is the case, then why are businesses with 50 or more employees required to provide employer based health insurance?

    Pinkie, aren’t those the businesses that are now making people part-time so employer insurance isn’t required, so they have to turn to Obamacare? Or do I have that wrong?

    Liked by 1 person

  33. kadar2012 says:

    Obamacare is a revision of Romneycare which is a revision of 1993 Hillarycare.


  34. irvingtwosmokes says:

    Trump’s Medical Plan, By The Numbers


  35. trapper says:

    It is 21st Century American fascism: collectivized expenses and privatized profit, and both parties are in on it as Sundance points out. The only plan that would break the cycle is Mr. Trump’s, which is probably why he is getting such fierce blowback form all sides, including the faux conservative/free marketers, who are anything but conservative or free market. With a President Trump the evil game ends.


  36. Scott S says:

    I think it’s very important in this entire discussion to not confuse health care with health insurance. They are two different things entirely. Providing people health insurance does absolutely nothing to address their actual health care needs.

    Is health care a right? Maybe, maybe not. But health insurance certainly isn’t. We can provide health care to those who truly need it without getting involved in health insurance at all. Which proves the point of this article even further.

    Liked by 3 people

    • TheLastDemocrat says:

      I don’t see this, Scott. This sounds like single-payer, and as far as I can tell single payer = government-run healthcare. No insurance companies, no competition – just a big, open pot of money held by the government, rather than by the insurance companies, ready to be grabbed by any physician clever enough to trump up “medically necessary” charges with unwitting patients.


      • Scott S says:

        I didn’t mean to imply the elimination of insurance at all. I meant that we can leave the entire private insurance arrangements completely untouched and simply address providing health care to those who are truly without. And in a way that’s way better than the current Medicaid scheme.

        If the “problem” was the 30 million uninsured, the solution wasn’t to screw up insurance for everyone, the solution is to get them health care, not crummy insurance.

        Liked by 1 person

  37. Frankly Ben says:

    Sundance removes the frustration of not knowing what drove the behavior of the Republicans in their complete lack of interest in undoing the Obamacare disaster.

    Now that frustration is replaced by a deep desire to see these despicable lying slimeballs forever excommunicated from the halls of Congress.

    Some have mentioned that Trump, as President, is still only one person and that only Congress can pass laws. That is true, but believe you me, the day he is sworn in as President, you’re going to see a crusade the likes of which we have never seen or imagined be loosed on this festering cesspool of corruption and deviousness.

    President Trump will use his bully pulpit to the absolute limit – and then some – to whip these disgusting rats into action. I am sure he would be more than happy to camp out in Kentucky for a while to initiate a recall election to get that ugly pig of a man, McConnell, out of the Senate.

    I hope against hope that lyin’ Ryan is primaried or generalled out of Congress.

    The Nation has had it. Many millions of us who in good faith have graciously imbued our representatives with trust in their honesty and integrity have not only been betrayed with contemptible arrogance and dishonesty – but flagrantly so!

    The sheer level of their corruption, deceit, cowardice and fraud, duplicity, chicanery and deception is so far beyond the pale that we can scarcely believe what we are witnessing. It is truly astounding to see how low these prevaricators have debased themselves and for what – 30 pieces of silver?

    Can money really be that corrupting? Or is it more than that? is it the power, the prestige, the trappings of being at the seat of power and post-Congress riches and position yet to come that has allowed their collective sense of decency, character, fair play and integrity to completely slip away, dissolving into dust, swept out of their lives with the wind? Or perhaps was it never ever there?

    Misguided Democrats (pardon the redundancy) will continue to do what they do – engage in the ugliest demagoguery without constraint – it’s just how they roll. Democrats are the most self-absorbed, self-rightous bigots who are seemingly incapable of self control or honest reflection. They’re not just right – no, they’re wrapped in a thick blanket of moral superiority disdaining anyone who disagrees with them as either hopelessly stupid or corrupt or both.

    We expected more, much more, from Republicans. In a deep sense, it is far more discouraging and enraging to see how our Republican representatives have not only abandoned facetiously stated principals, who then treat us, their real benefactors, with the utmost contempt and disregard. These selfish fools really do believe that the great masses of us – the vaunted base – are the most clueless mass of sheep, as stupid as we are cowardly.

    We must elect The Donald. He is not only our best hope, but he’s perhaps our only hope to turn this tide of corruption around. We all know he’s no saint. His faults, inconsistencies and intemperances are obvious. But beneath it all, he is a basically good and decent man – and one whose love for this great country bleeds through every pore and one who is beyond outraged at the depths of depravity, rot and moral turpitude to which its political leadership has sunk.

    His campaign slogan is not a Madison Avenue jingle. I doubt he paid a dime to a marketing firm. No, he speaks from the heart and we get it, we hear him and he hears us and together we will prevail, we will elect him along with new Congressional representatives to right this ship, sweep out thisdecaying morass and with our steadfast, unyielding support, he will


    Liked by 2 people

  38. jeans2nd says:

    This seems relevant. The Cincinnati VA. “Nearly three dozen whistleblowers have come forward saying the VA Medical Center in Cincinnati is in a state of disorder. They say veterans are not getting the care they need in the backyard of Secretary of Veterans Affairs Bob McDonald, the former chief executive of Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble Co.”

    The future of your healthcare under government control. I sure hope Ohioans read this before they vote on 15 March.
    “Exclusive: Whistleblowers cite disorder at VA hospital Special investigation: Dereliction of Duty” http://www.wcpo.com/longform/34-doctors-nurses-at-cincinnati-va-alarmed-by-cost-cutting-quality-of-care

    And then there is the Carl B. Stokes VA hospital in Cleveland. Now, there’s a story for ya.


  39. William says:

    Obama has caused the termination of my health insurance which I had before that POS Obama became President. Now I am trying to find a non obamacare insurance policy that will not force me to chose between food and health insurance.


  40. KBR says:

    There is another thing that drove the Obamacare other than the healthcare/insurance money.
    That other thing is power, and not only pursestring power.

    For a long time the 2nd amendment has been under attack. Recently there has been a lot of talk about limiting guns from anybody who has “psychological problems.”

    And while that sounds perfectly reasonable, defining “psychological problems” is where the slope gets very slippery. We have become a nation of “psychological babies.” For every little worry, pop a pill. Your doctor will fork over an Rx for Prozac and its many sisters at the drop of a hat.

    Here’s a personal story to illustrate:

    One day I was all ready to go to my doctor for a recheck after recovering from bronchitis. I stepped out on my deck to see the cardinals who had been feeding their hatchlings on my rose arbor nearby.

    I had watched them build, watched them bring twig after twig. I felt like their protector, for I had placed the arbor, planted and nurtured the roses, trained them up. At last the rose was full and lush a perfect place for a nest.

    But the birds were screeching and diving toward the nest! There a large crow sat eating their babies alive. Nothing they could do! I took a broom and tried to shoo the crow but the arbor was too tall, and the crow was not willing to leave. All I accomplished was scaring away the cardinals.

    I admit I teared-up a bit. I left for my doc appt.& by the time I got there, five minutes later, I was tear-free, but apparently my sadness was still there on my face. The doc asked me about why I seemed sad. I told her the story. Her response was “There is no reason for you to be sad about that: it’s the cycle of life. I’m writing you a prescription for Prozac.”

    I did not take it. That was a stupid reason to prescribe the drug. I was not “in a depression” I was sad for the birds. It was, I think, a very reasonable temporary sadness, and one I got over pretty soon. Cycle of life includes ups and downs, they are normal and natural.

    The statistics on numbers of Prozac Rx’s alone are astounding. Look it up. Then remember that many other similar drugs are also prescribed for every minor sad. Not to mention every minor or temporary “nervous” situation. Almost nobody who loses a spouse or child isn’t given sedatives. Nearly everyone who has experienced a trauma gets them too. Any record, ever, and even for only a while…no gun.

    So if “psychological problems” becomes the criteria for whether the 2nd amendment applies to a person, it will mean ending HIPPA so that legislators can look at medical records to see who has ever had an Rx for “psyche meds.”

    Obamacare is the backdoor to the power to effectively end the 2nd amendment.
    And because the meme “psyche problems” SOUNDS so reasonable, they plan to do it with our blessings.


    • TrumpFanGirl says:

      There are multiple NON-psych on or off label reasons for ‘psych drugs’ to be prescribed: chronic pain, migraines, menopause/hot flashes, insomnia, smoking cessation, eating disorders, Tourettes, fibromyalgia…. Slippery slope, indeed.


  41. rashamon says:

    A neighbor purchased a catastrophic policy, then found a physician for routine care who takes cash through this website. So far, so good after a year. You may want to find your practice first, then find out what they think is the appropriate insurance to supplement what they can provide.



  42. avi says:

    can we force mexico to pay for the care of illegals?


  43. skolek says:

    Obamacare may be advantageous for large corporations.But is is a killer for small and medium size businesses.


  44. Otis says:

    Hey Guys, I got a question, Just today, my wife went to a doctor (bone guy). She waited 3 hours and, then was called back. Along the way the nurse stopped her and told her they needed to take her fingerprints. Has anyone ever heard of this? She said it flabbergasted her and she didn’t know what to do. I told her she should have left.


  45. Centinel2012 says:

    Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:

    You are always the one that pays either directly to the doctor or indirectly with taxes. When you add government to the mix costs have to go up as you have added a middle man and worse the middle man of government is the least productive member of the process so costs have to be more with anything the government is involved in. There is no way that this is not true.


  46. rsanchez1990 says:

    This is why after President Trump we need to clean house in the House and Senate. Continue the Tea Party revolution, elect more people who are not bought and paid and who can enact common sense conservative legislation that works for the American people


  47. Reblogged this on The way I see things … and commented:

    “We are too far down the path created by Obamacare, ie. “the exchanges“, to ever see employer provided health coverage again in all but the smallest of privately owned companies.

    The only argument that remains viable within almost all of the conversation is who controls the actual delivery of the healthcare; private providers or fully immersed government entities,….”


  48. Pingback: More Single Payer Downsides | The Arts Mechanical

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s