Posted on 09/30/2009 2:21:13 PM PDT by kristinn
Plus, he’s a goofy-looking mofo
Ironically, Garrison Keillor’s health care plan, to withhold medical care from anyone who opposes socialized medicine, is identical to what Grayson accuses the republicans of wanting.
Somebody que the video of Obozo telling a woman that she should give her elderly mother painkillers rather than the expensive medical treatment.
I am sick and tired of hearing that the "Republicans have no plan!"
NOW would be an opportune time to lay out the conservative plan for the public to see what a "Comon Sense" solution to the so called healthcare problem would look like!
Show the public that we do not have to introduce Socialist Government as the ONLY solution to providing healthcare for the 20 million people that don't have or don't want it.
Besides, the whole idea of socialized medicine is unconstitutional anyways! Not to mention the introduction of an entire governmental overhaul to a socialist government!
So once again a congressman calls Republicans “nazis” on the floor and there is no censure.
Nancy Pelosi needs to resign.
www.faxzero.com and www.getfreefax.com. Both services allow 2 FREE faxes per day or 4 in total.
Fax and call. Do their DC offices and in-state. Google their name and write down ALL the phone numbers and faxes.
No crying or hand wringing. Tell friends, neighbors, family members etc.
For decades, Ted Kennedy opposed rolling over medical savings accounts from year to year.
Now that he’s dead, maybe there can be some advancement of that.
But that's less than half of the 98,000 who die in hospitals every year due to medical mistakes that have mostly been caused by GOVERNMENT malpractice.
He needs to apologize for his hair. Dumb Ass
If we did want people to die that would only create more Democrat voters.
A bogus conclusion from a bogus study:
This study used data from the Third National Health and Nutritional Examination Study (NHANES III) which used single time interviews, physical exams, and lab tests to collect data on a representative sample of Americans from 1988 to 1994 with follow up to 2000. Woolhandler’s team limited their analysis to people aged 17 to 64 who did not qualify for public assistance with health insurance coverage. Follow up of the initial evaluations from 1988 to 2000 showed that 3.1% of the original participants had died and when broken down by initial insurance status, 3% of those who were insured at the time of data collections had died compared to 3.3% of those who were uninsured. This calculated out to a hazards ratio of 1.4 for the uninsured (i.e. the uninsured were 40% more likely to die than the insured).
But there are significant limitations to this study. The authors admit that the initial NHANES III data evaluated insurance status only from a single point in time and there is no data on how long those initially uninsured people were without insurance or whether they were insured at the time of death. This is more than a significant limitation. I was unable to find a mean time of follow up from the initial NHANES III data and the follow up data collection but the initial study ran from 1988 to 1994 with follow up to 2000 which means that follow up was anywhere up to 11 years. A lot could have changed in that time. Uninsured status was associated with younger age, unemployment, lower income, lower education level, smoking, regular alcohol use, and low rates of regular exercise. Yet, these same variables lead to increased long term health risks and higher mortality rates! At best, the results suggest that people in this study who were initially without health insurance were less likely to change their health risks than an identical population who did have health insurance.
[...]
Ironically, this same study listed unemployment status as having the same hazards ratio of 1.4 as being uninsured but I don’t hear liberals calling for a massive government program to ensure universal employment at a cost of $100s of billions!
about 2 and a half million people die each year in the US. That means that 2,456,000 people die who have insurance I guess. Maybe we should just outlaw insurance.
Exactly.
Which raises the question, what is an acceptable number of deaths per year by Mr. Grayson’s/Democrat’s criteria? What is the number?
Have they been asked this yet?
Doesn’t Congress have free mental health care in their elite’s only health care package and why hasn’t Grayson taken advantage of it?
Who’s his opponent? I want to contribute to that person.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.