moonbattery.gif


« A Barack Obama Halloween | Main | Morning Briefs: Stuff You've Probably Already Read Somewhere Else »


October 13, 2009

What They Said Will Never Happen Under ObamaCare Is Already Happening

Posted by Gregory of Yardale at October 13, 2009 3:54 AM

Proponents of ObamaCare promise that it will vastly increase the quantity and improve the quality of health care while adding 30,000,000 people to the system. And, it will cost less! And, there will be no rationing! (a.k.a. "Death Panels")

Anyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that these promises are a load of crap. It is absolutely impossible to provide more care for more people for less money, unless you have a herd of magic unicorns that crap Kruggerands. And it better be a pretty damb big herd. Like, large enough to cover the Great Plains like the buffalo of olden times.

Anyway, ObamaCare was given a trial run in the state of Moonbatchusetts. A system of universal coverage was proposed by a Republican governor and enacted by a Democrat state legislature. Guess what? They're already rationing health care, and want to deny patients the right to choose any hospital they want for services.

You can’t reap these savings without limiting patients’ choices in some way,’’ said Paul Levy, chief executive of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
A state commission (i.e. "DEATH PANEL") recommended in July that insurers largely scrap the current fee-for-service system - in which insurers pay doctors, hospitals, and other providers a negotiated fee for each procedure and visit - and instead pay providers a per-patient annual fee to cover all of the patient’s medical care.
This new system of “global payments’’ (i.e. "Rationing") would discourage overuse of expensive medical services, force providers to live within a budget, and improve coordination of care for patients, supporters argue..........

Mitt Romney has a brilliant business record, and his personal character is above reproach. But foisting this monstrosity of socialized health care onto the state of Massachusetts should permanently disqualify him from ever seeking the Presidency.

_ObamaCare.jpg

Comments

I always suspected that Mitt went along with this plan purposely in order to provide a case study of its failure, which he may even have anticipated would coincide with a big federal push for universal care. So, he's either a traitor to conservative ideals or incredibly prescient, cagey and strategic.

Posted by: brent at October 13, 2009 4:20 AM


Posted by: TED at October 13, 2009 4:31 AM


Posted by: SK at October 13, 2009 4:37 AM


Posted by: SK at October 13, 2009 4:41 AM


I always suspected that Mitt went along with this plan purposely in order to provide a case study of its failure, which he may even have anticipated would coincide with a big federal push for universal care.

Posted by: brent at October 13, 2009 4:20 AM

Er .. no offence dude, but I think you should lay off the gummint-provided drugs.

Posted by: mandible claw at October 13, 2009 4:42 AM


This is one reason I would never vote for Romney - unless he admitted that RomneyCare was the most boneheaded plan since HillaryCare and begged the people for forgiveness.

Posted by: Bad Robot at October 13, 2009 4:56 AM


I think you have to temper Romney's actions with the political realities of Massachusetts. It's a liberal state, and the public demanded a public healthcare system. Given that reality, he did the best he could with the options he had.

Being a conservative governor in a Moonbat state is going to force you to make certain concessions if you want to keep the job.

Posted by: Rob Banks at October 13, 2009 5:03 AM


Oh how I wish the failure of the Massachusetts program would shake some sense into the single payer crowd, but I'm not optimistic. After all, there is evidence galore from all over the world how socialized medicine is always and everywhere an unmitigated disaster, and yet socialized medicine proponents continue to charge headlong into it. It truly is lemming-like behavior and it makes me despair for the future of humanity.

Posted by: Judith M. at October 13, 2009 5:12 AM


Judith, I'm optimistic about the future of humanity in the long run. But I increasingly think we're going to have to have some huge catastrophe to chlorinate the gene pool before that can happen.

Posted by: V the K at October 13, 2009 5:16 AM


Mandible Claw, I don't think Brent's comment is all that "out there." Stranger things than that are happening right under our noses.

Posted by: Karin at October 13, 2009 5:45 AM


Being a conservative governor in a Moonbat state is going to force you to make certain concessions if you want to keep the job.

Exactly, which is why I will never vote for him.

I do not vote for political weasels whose policy making is based on concerns over their own re-election, followed by rationalization of those problems with two bit spin.

Mitt didn't just sign the bill because it was necessary to save residents from something even more liberal - he was singing the praises of it all along.

Sorry, Mitt, you lost my trust. You sold out the people of Massachusetts on such a key issue of personal freedom, and you didn't even have the decency to admit that what you were doing was strategic, not out of conviction (assuming you aren't a Big Government pol still in the closet).

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at October 13, 2009 7:06 AM


By the way, if you still don't believe that Romney is a snake, look at his disdain for the Second Amendment. Romney supported the AWB and the Brady Bill, and opposes shall issue concealed carry.

This man is no friend of freedom.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at October 13, 2009 7:12 AM


Mitt Romney has a brilliant business record, and his personal character is above reproach. But foisting this monstrosity of socialized health care onto the state of Massachusetts should permanently disqualify him from ever seeking the Presidency.

Can you spell contradiction?
A person cannot have "personal character above reproach" while "foisting" any big government, socialistic plan upon taxpayers. Romney is a wealthy elitist who can in no way identify with the people who shoulder the burden of being taxed and regulated to death in this country.

Posted by: Rudy at October 13, 2009 7:36 AM


As long as it's the single-payer moonbats who are hurt when universal coverage rations their access to healthcare, I'm good.

Posted by: Nunya at October 13, 2009 8:09 AM


I voted for Mitt in the Illinois primary last year then he dropped out of the race. I hope he stays away in 2012. I have a feeling Palin is going to kick some ass in a few years. Maybe the Gov of minn.

Please just not some old tired east coast rino republicans,,,Please!

Posted by: Bob at October 13, 2009 8:13 AM


"Judith, I'm optimistic about the future of humanity in the long run. But I increasingly think we're going to have to have some huge catastrophe to chlorinate the gene pool before that can happen."

I hope you're right, V the K. The gene pool IS looking pretty green and slimy, though.

Posted by: Judith M. at October 13, 2009 9:23 AM


To Bob, regarding "Maybe the Governor of Minnesota".

A Warning to All: Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota IS a Rino. His methods of dealing with a socialist legislature is to give them only 75% of what they want. Does he veto bills? Sure, but then he gives up his victories by compromising with the socialists AFTER he's beaten them. What a moron. AND he's an AGW koolaid drinking freak. He does talk a good game, but it is just talk. I could go on about our governor, but I'll leave it at this; He is EXACTLY what's wrong with the GOP of today.

Posted by: Bear at October 13, 2009 9:55 AM


How about a different perspective?

Consumer Reports Poll

“So much attention is being paid to the politics of the health debate that we’re losing sight of the problems that consumers face every day. The high cost of health care impacts all of us. Our organization focuses on what’s in the best interest of consumers. We just want solutions for better health care. Doing nothing about health care is not a solution.”

51% of Americans have been confronted with tough health choices in the past year.

The most common responses were putting off a doctor visit because of cost (28%), not being unable to afford medical bills or medication (25%), and putting off a medical procedure because of cost (22%).

Posted by: Maxwell's Silver Hammer at October 13, 2009 10:08 AM


So, we will be better off with the government delaying doctor visits because of rationing, taxing the healthy to pay for the unhealthy, and delaying procedures because of rationing.

Posted by: V the K at October 13, 2009 10:44 AM


Exactly, V. Everything the leftists complain about our current health care system would be worse under government health care. What's the bloody point?

Show me a plan that actually is based on sound economic principles, does not ration care, and that protects individual freedoms, and I'll be all ears.

Posted by: Judith M. at October 13, 2009 2:43 PM


"Mitt Romney has a brilliant business record, and his personal character is above reproach. But foisting this monstrosity of socialized health care onto the state of Massachusetts should permanently disqualify him from ever seeking the Presidency." Amen to that.

Posted by: DavidD at October 14, 2009 6:56 PM


puquvm tclxgugetloq, [url=http://wchutnnojbko.com/]wchutnnojbko[/url], [link=http://fczmignqzmea.com/]fczmignqzmea[/link], http://xgsdrhrhnjme.com/

Posted by: fygsfzmklmp at October 25, 2009 3:52 AM


Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)