(Lake Lanier Specific)
149 messages
Updated 2/24/2023 6:27:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
83,915 messages
Updated 9/7/2024 7:52:09 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,200 messages
Updated 8/23/2024 12:20:47 PM
(Lake Lanier Specific)
3 messages
Updated 7/28/2021 3:19:01 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,171 messages
Updated 6/27/2024 7:05:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
Name: |
architect
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 11:51:39 AM (updated 3/4/2012 11:56:18 AM)
|
From one of the few remaining reasonable conservatives, George Will, on "This Week" today while discussing the recent comments by the one who is more representative of today's "conservatives".
"Speaker Boehner says Rush Limbaugh's words were 'inappropriate'...when you use your salad fork to eat your entre, that's inappropriate, Limbaugh was beyond inappropriate."
"The Republicans (based on their non-response to Limbaugh) have shown they are afraid of Rush. They want to bomb Iran, but they are afraid of Rush Limbaugh."
I hope many of you in your head and heart agree, but suspect in your gut you will not.
|
Name: |
au67
-
|
|
Subject: |
Sandra Fluke's quote
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 1:28:55 PM
|
"Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during
law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy. One told us of how embarrassed and powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter, learning for the first time that contraception wasn’t covered,and had to walk away because she couldn’t afford it. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception. Just last week, a married female student told me she had to stop using contraception because she couldn’t afford it any longer. Women employed in low wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face
the same choice."
My comment: At $1.00 per condom and a three year stint in law school, her figure of $3,000 works out to about 2.74 sexual encounters every day for the three years. Because of this, 40% of the female students are struggling financially and want someone else to pay for their fun. Maybe they should consider having less sex or what about having their male partners assume a bit of responsibility. Oh, I forgot...it's the government's responsibility.
And by the way, exactly what part of Sandra Fluke's (or for that matter, any female's) sex life or her insurance does Rush Limbaugh control?
|
Name: |
au67
-
|
|
Subject: |
Who killed the Volt?
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 4:04:27 PM
|
I did notice where Limbaugh had almost single-handily killed the Chevy Volt! Who knows, he may ultimately kill sexual dalliances. Will and Boehner will really have their thongs in a wad then.
|
Name: |
au67
-
|
|
Subject: |
Who killed the Volt?
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 4:05:35 PM
|
Here's link if you are interested.
URL:
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
Sandra Fluke's quote
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 4:32:58 PM
|
Come on!
Contraceptives should be available thru any medical insurance plan that
covers medications…it’s a critical health issue that effects huge
numbers women (and men!). Providing access to those contraceptives is
far less expensive (or damaging) than an unwanted pregnancy or an abortion. Also, i don’t see how making birth control
available thru health insurance falls on the back of ‘we the tax-payers’. …that’s
just wrong.
The cost of those meds is not even noticeable to
insurance companies….health insurers would gladly pay a few cents per pill
rather than be obligated to expensive prenatal care, childbirth and maternity
costs. Fewer pregnancies in a
benefit group translates into lower premiums for the employers
and employees, as well as enhancing their bottom line. This is a public health issue and doesn’t compromise
anyone’s rights …. you don’t have to use birth control unless you choose to…..
it benefits insurance corporations,
employers, lowers health care costs, and
ultimately helps everyone. Birth control should be as available under
insurance plans just as penicillin and flu shots.
How could you not want this?
The subtext here is the Conservative agenda
regarding abortion that creeps toward a warped moral agenda about extramarital
sex. Silly. Opposing birth control while attempting to
criminalize abortion means iNCREASiNG the number of young women who become
accidentally pregnant and puts them in a huge dilemma….forcing them to have
children they don’t want & can’t care for.
Why would you want to do this?
Limbaugh’s slurs are reprehensible. This was not some welfare mother he has
complained about in the past, she’s a
law student at one of the most prestigious schools in the country. An
accidental pregnancy could end her legal career & completely alter her ability
to control the outcomes of her life. Her comments were spot-on and far more
thoughtful than her detractors.
You can be a talk show host if you are a felon, but you
can’t become a lawyer. Forging
prescriptions or obtaining narcotics without a Rx is a felony. is Limbaugh a junkie or anti-social degenerate
for getting busted using illegal oxycontin?
Some
icon of virtue this is….. really…. just
a showman pandering to the base instincts of his audience.
|
Name: |
au67
-
|
|
Subject: |
Rush's Statement
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 4:54:51 PM
|
A Statement from Rush
March 03, 2012
"For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices."
|
Name: |
4691
-
|
|
Subject: |
Sandra Fluke's quote
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 5:13:48 PM
|
Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer and a very good one for the demographic he appeals to just as Bill Maher is for the progressives. Both push the limits for ratings. The issues covered are relevant and their comments initiate conversation. I don't think serious conservatives look to Rush or similar persons for their marching orders.
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
Sandra Fluke's quote
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 5:44:15 PM
|
copperline - It could not of been stated any better or more succinctly. Thank You~
Unfortunately, the Republican Party is going to take a major hit on this one. It appears their leadership does not have the fortitude to stand up and be counted on what is right (no pun intended).
|
Name: |
au67
-
|
|
Subject: |
Link cut and paste
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 6:14:34 PM
|
http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/03/02/436898/gm-the-chevy-volt-has-become-a-political-punching-bag/?mobile=nc
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
Sandra Fluke's quote
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 7:23:56 PM
|
Copperline,
Your assertion is faulty - she has just told you that it costs her $3K/year, and she is law student who is honing her debate skills. The only way that their price becomes negligible to an insurance company would be by overcharging for other services, and pretty soon we have another $90,000 toilet seat (see US Government)
Contraceptives aren't free.
Neither is RoundUp for your garden, spaying and neutering for your pets, or oil changes for your car.
Using contraceptives will assist in maintenance of the norm, and overall health when used appropriately, just as the other measures listed are effective in their applications. But the very use of these products could be viewed as un-natural :)
The issue is the idea of the government forcing private companies to perform at it's whim, and every tumor (or fetus) grows from a single cell................
What is wrong with an individual paying individually for the things she (or he) wants?
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
Sandra Fluke's quote
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 7:41:04 PM
|
Copperline, excellent, well stated comments. Exactly right.
|
Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
Subject: |
Great News
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 8:00:06 PM
|
The guys is sick. Here is a 60 year conservative, married 4 times, no kids, with a current wife who is 25 years younger. A true example of family values.
Seven advertisers have pulled their ads from Limbaugh's talk show. The seven advertisers that have pulled ads are mortgage lender Quicken Loans, mattress retailers Sleep Train and Sleep , software maker Citrix Systems, online data backup service provider Carbonite, online legal document services company LegalZoom and ProFlowers.
And he is your spokesman.
|
Name: |
Casey
-
|
|
Subject: |
Great News
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 8:57:55 PM
|
I wonder if Rush takes Viagra. If so, I'll bet it's covered by his insurance. Hmmm....
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Got the hots for Rush?
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 9:40:30 PM
|
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 9:52:35 PM
|
from the administrations requirement that employees of religious organizations, and students at religious schools, religions that stand against unnatural means of birth control must now provide unnatural birth control in their medical plans. I can't recall seeing anything from the anti Catholic posters here when it was disclosed, after we read the law to find out what was in it, that Muslims are exempt from oblamacare because their religion forbids buying insurance. Anybody? Anyone? Thats exactly what I thought.
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Great News
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 10:00:19 PM
|
It's kind of funny that Carbonite didn't pull their ads from Ed Schultz Show when he called Laura Ingraham a s l u t. But, that would put David Friend, Carbonite CEO in an awkward position as he is listed as a major contributor to zerO's perpetual campaigns.
|
Name: |
architect
-
|
|
Subject: |
Great News
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 11:19:25 PM (updated 3/4/2012 11:34:14 PM)
|
It is sad that the hyper-partisanship of today has put public discourse in the cess pool where it now resides. Bill Maher has said outrageous things about Michelle Bachman. Keith Olberman regularly referred to Sarah Palin as an idiot, Glenn Beck has said outrageous things about Obama, Rush, Boortz, Hannity, Beck and at least a dozen extreme right gabbers say disgusting things about Obama on a daily basis. So what. All of these comments are about people in the public eye. The comments about them are downright nasty, but they are people who expect it by being where they are. They understand the reality of "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen". They are fair game even if unfairly targeted. But these jerks go over the top when they make such dastardly comments about a private citizen using her first amendment rights, people who are not public figures or the innocent friends or family of people in the public arena. These "entertainers", as Santorum describes Rush, may have every right to say the things they say, but having the constitutional right to do something doesn't make it ethically right to do it.
Great post copperline!
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/4/2012 11:32:29 PM (updated 3/4/2012 11:41:05 PM)
|
What is meant by unnaatural means of birth control? I don't think anything requires a person to use birth control. So there goes any religious belief argument. Let them do as they choose or in accordance with their specific religious beliefs as long as it does not interfer with other's rights to choose. It is not like years ago where some minority women had their tubes tied without even knowing it.
I would think anything described as unnatural might also apply to cancer treatments and other medical healh care needs.
Somehow this stinks of the anti-abortion side using an unnnatural approach to attacking abortion rights.
You are right and the discussion has sort of shifted from Limp-bomb's statements. The sick-o even wants to watch the X-Rated videos.
|
Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 5:45:52 AM
|
Sad that this becomes one of the "major" issues facing our country. Of course Rush stepped over the line, but so have manyliberal talk radio (what is left of them). But the media just ignores those.
There are plenty of insurance policies that cover contraceptives .. why is this a congressional issue? What dem dragged her to capital hill for this political statement. Why not drag someone with a real health issue that is not covered?
How is she paying for her schooling? There is no way the cost is $3,000 year for contraceptives. Does she ever spend money on partying? Maybe she needs to learn to budget (like the government) and decide what she enjoys more and spend the money on that.
Why is it that anyone that can not afford something is now expecting the government and other tax payers to pay for it. Is this the entitlement mentality that Obama created?
How about this ... if the government pays for your contraceptives, then you are forever denied any government welfare for children you can not afford either. Maybe that will stop the baby factories to maximize welfare payments.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 6:10:51 AM
|
Feb,
You stumbled on it.
Let it be everyone's choice. Just don't make someone else pay for it.
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 7:00:53 AM
|
Copperline addressed the issue, and as i stated then i agree with his or her position. Prescription birth control measures are addressed in a helth care plan just as my alllergy medication is covered.
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 7:32:00 AM
|
You have been reading Hounds shrill rants comparing "free birth control" for all versus a woman's right to vote. The issue has been distorted, purposely. The Catholic Church advocates against birth control. The administration issued an edict requiring them to provide artificial birth control in health care policies offered to their employees, and students. People see this as an infringement on their constitutionally guaranteed religious rights. It is not about access to the pill. Most with walking around sense knows how and where to get them, and then there is always our taxpayer funded planned parenthood. It is not about abortion. Even Sandra Fluke is smart enough to find one if she needs it. Its not about Rush's habits, past or current. It's not even about whether we use birth control in defiance of the Church's teachings. It is not about party, D or R. It is about this administration illegally requiring the Church to ignore a principal, and provide birth control. If you, and the others, are unable, or unwilling to see this, well.... Feb, what was the basis of your service? Did it include defending the US Constitution, and its amendments?
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 8:29:52 AM
|
You recall that Shultz was suspended? And other "liberal" commentators have been fired for their comments.
Do you recall that Don Imus was fired for his racially tinged comments about the girls basketball team? And Howard Stern was fired for his multiple tasteless comments, prompting his move to Sirius/XM Radio?
There is a long history of commentators of every stripe and persuasion getting fired for tasteless and disgusting commentary.
|
Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 8:39:08 AM
|
The sad part is that we are even having the discussion with all the problems facing this country. The entitlement mentality makes me sick ... and that government should step in in fix this crap.
We need less government, not a government that decides who gets contraceptives and should they force someone else to pay. If you want to have sex and not get pregnant, then either find a way to pay, get your partner to pay, or don't have sex.
Who paid for in when we were in HS and college? Why is it a congressional issue to discuss now?
Rush stepped over the line, I am not defending him ... but give me a break that we even need to be talking about it at the federal level.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 8:39:59 AM
|
Feb, Once again, it is not just "a" health care plan, Lord Obama and Catherine Sibelius want it to be the only option for any health care plan. Do you see how there is a loss of choice?
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 9:11:50 AM
|
Any religious group or person has the choice whether to use birth control or not. You never answered my question; What is unnnatural birth control?
It is part of an overall comprehensive health plan. I have allergies and take allery shots. Medicare and Blue Cross pays my complete cost. Other who pay into both help pay for my allergy shots just as I may help them pay into their needs like diabetes and etc.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 9:17:07 AM
|
So, I guess you would consider any pill, shot, etc. to be natural? Let's go Bill Clinton: I'll let you define natural.
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 9:18:51 AM
|
No, I do not see your point. I believe it is President Obama and not Lord Obama. It is not for me. I caught a ration of you know what a few years ago on this forum for not aggreeing with President Bush. I never called Bush any names or modified names for him, but I was almost hung from a light pole for not giving him the respect he was entitled to as the President and Commander in Chief. Now, it seems there is no problem with being disrespectful to the Office of the President and the person serving in the position. How times change.
By the way, I will most likely vote for Romney in the next election. If you disagree with the Democratic Party or the current President, use your vote.
|
Name: |
greycove
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 9:18:54 AM
|
Boy am I out of my area of expertise. My wife informs me that women take birth control pills for a number of important health reasons other than preventing pregnacies. She mentioned several. I'm not sure Rush understands this!
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
This argument somehow shifted
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 9:22:13 AM
|
I did not call it natural or unnatural. I ask what another poster meant by unnatural. It was the first time I had ever heard the term applied to birth control. I do not think of medications in those terms. I think of them in terms of beneficial and/or safe to use.
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Unnatural = artificial
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 9:35:44 AM
|
Sorry I confused you.
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Great News
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 9:40:36 AM
|
Sandra Fluke placed herself, and her positions, in the public eye.
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
Unnatural = artificial
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 10:23:50 AM
|
I can see where the Amish would have a real problem. I see a lot of good things science and research has brought to mankind which would be considered artifical. Many of them help us conserve our natural resources.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 10:30:12 AM
|
The topic was contraception, not all possible indications. And somehow, there has been no answer to the question of whether it is desirable to lose your choice. In the name of public health, any number of limitations could be forced upon the herd. Repeat after me: Moo, mooooo............
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Unnatural = artificial
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 10:41:11 AM
|
Then you should have no trouble seeing where Catholics, and the Roman Catholic Church, have an issue with the mandate ordering Catholic schools, Catholic hospitals, and Catholic universities must provide contraceptive coverage in their insurance plans. As for the medical need, beyond contraception, I have not heard or read even one Catholic spokesperson or representative of any US Diocese, speak against it.
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
Great News
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 10:52:47 AM (updated 3/5/2012 10:54:42 AM)
|
First of all Rush Limbaugh was wrong to engage in name-calling, and he does not speak for me. I don't even listen to his show.
But Barneget is right. The young lady opened herself up to scrutiny when she decided to testify before Congress. And although there are legitimate health advantages to the hormones in BC pills, she didn't state that as a reason. One could only surmise that she wants protection as she engages in recreational sex.
If a private industry health plan decides to provide contraceptive services, that should be between the insurer and the insured. It just so happens that my carrier does. However, my company and I pay for it. I don't think I should also be forced to pay for her coverage through some federally funded insurance plan.
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
Unnatural = artificial
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 12:44:47 PM (updated 3/5/2012 12:46:11 PM)
|
Oh Yeah, now you have put me in a real corner. My wife is Catholic and so on. I personally disagree with the Catholic Church on many issues such as birth control, divorce and the list goes on. I just don't want to go there since we are steering way away from the issue. The Catholic Diocese and it Hiearchy is not one to emulate, and in my view is totally out of date by centuries. There once form of birth control was natural alright - just castrate the choir boys and allow the Priest to enjoy another form of natural birth control which currently sickens all of Society. It was touched on last night on Sixty Minutes.
Now, I would support a movement to tax the Churches and their property in return for allowing them to have a say in rights of the State and the general population. Otherwise, allow them to just preach to their bretheren. Nuf said.
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
The doors are open to you
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 2:07:54 PM
|
Feb, thanks for your take on the history of the church, and your respect for the faith. There are principles that I would like to be able to ignore, as a matter of fact, there are some that I do ignore. That is between me and my God, just as those that have sinned in the ne of the church will be held accountable. I am sorry to keep confusing you here but the issue is religious freedom, and this administrations mandate requiring a religion to fund artificial birth control in benefit plans offered their employees. The institution stands against it yet it, and it's members are required by edict to provide the funding.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
The doors are open to you
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 5:01:38 PM
|
You are going to confuse him if you say it that clearly.......
|
Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
Subject: |
The doors are open to you
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 7:45:17 PM
|
I do not think I am confused. I just do not think we agree on this issue. You and I do agree on a number of other issues other than this one. At least, this has been my take on past post by you on the Forum.
I can not say the same about comrade since I am not familiar with his or her stance on issues. From what I have seen in this thread, you have handled your position in the debate with me far better than comrade's supportive attempt.
Take Care, Feb
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 7:58:26 PM
|
There are a number of reasons why women take birth control pills. This whole discussion reminds me of trying to thread a needle with middle aged eyes --- The issue is health care; not morality. i don't want any part of the government in my womb or in my bedroom. What i want is that when my Dr. writes me a prescription for whatever it is i need, i can get it filled. i don't care about the pharmacist's politics, i don't expect my health care provider to have politics, and i don't want to be subjected to it. i just want my prescription filled and paid for -- just like i would for HBP pills or cholesterol medication. i don't know who the Catholic organizations employ... is there a requirement that you have to be Catholic to work for a Catholic organization? if you are a good Catholic, and adhere to church doctrine, then this isn't a problem for you, because you don't use birth control regardless who pays for it. And if you are Catholic and you do, then can you say you are truly a Catholic? The Pope and the church set the doctrine and individuals follow it or they don't, regardless of who pays. As long as the Catholic church is an employer, i do not see why they should be exempt.
i'm still waiting to hear the GOPs alternative to the health care issue, other than cutting all benefits. i once again remind everyone that before the economic crisis took hold, most Americans thought this and illegal immigration were the two biggest domestic issues facing our country. The uninsured still get sick, they still go to the hospital (primarily the ER) they still can't pay, and we are still paying for it, whether under the auspices of a government program or by paying rising premiums. Don't know about you, but my health care went up again this year.
|
Name: |
4691
-
|
|
Subject: |
The doors are open to you
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 8:28:42 PM
|
The Catholic church operates businesses such as hospitals that have private citizens employed; many of which are not Catholic. Yet they want to selectively follow the U.S. laws that are "approved" by the Pope and the Catholic church. I don't care, or even want to know, what the Pope thinks. That is for Catholics that freely choose to follow the church's position when making their personal choices. On this issue specifically, the stats I've seen indicate the majority of American Catholics don't care what the church thinks. What happened to separation of church and state anyway? This issue is NOT about freedom of religion. We are a nation of laws. If you don't like the laws for what ever reason lobby, protest, and vote to get the laws changed. And that is what the Catholic church is doing and I support that. However, this particular battle is just another example of the Republicans doing their very best to ensure that Obama wins in 2012. We're $16T in debt and this is what people are worried about? Focus on the economy!!!
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 10:20:24 PM
|
The fact that you can rationalize your behavior to satisfy your economic needs is not an answer to those people who choose to believe in absolutes -that is the stance of the Catholic Church, and not only have its tenets been propagated in the Church for centuries, but has been honored by multiple nations and governments (including the US) through those years.
But I guess it's OK to marginalize a sacred institution as long as I get my drugs on demand....
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/5/2012 10:48:11 PM
|
I don't see being provided free contraception as a fundamental right, and if the Catholic Church says to an employee, "we'd love to contract with you to work for us, but that contract does not offer free contraceptve services", they should have that option. If the potential employee thinks they need to have free contraceptive services they can look for work elsewhere.
What comes next, dictating cafeteria menus only include food that is good for you just because it IS what is good for you?
As to the health care problem overall, there needs to be more true competition, especially for providers of medical equipment and supplies. There needs to be competition among providers. There needs to be competition for BCBSAL, because I took a professional certification class with one of their system administrators, and he said they basically could spent whatever they wanted because the were so flush with overhead cash. In the real world of competition thy wold have to be more "lean and mean", because if they weren't they would lose customers. Competition by itself won't cure the problem but it will certainly help.
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 6:50:21 AM
|
Comrade, I think that perhaps you have gone a bit off the deep end here.
|
But what about those instances where women are taking the pill for other than for birth control? Should they not be expected to have their health care pay for a legitimate medical need? And I'm not sure I want the church parsing my medical needs any more than I want the government doing it.
I have long thought that the idea of getting health care through your employer should not be the only option. Nor should getting a high priced individual policy. I don't have a full finished thought on it, but it has seemed to me that hospitals or Drs. could offer health care plan that provides basic services for a reasonable price. -A "clinic" if you will. Not paid for by the tax-payers, but by individuals for a negotiated reduced rate. It wouldn't provide universal health care, but it would be a start.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 7:47:48 AM
|
I'm quite mad you know...
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
Hodja
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 8:27:02 AM
|
You have a valid point there, as my daughter was prescribed BC pills when she was having a little problem with acne. I almost thought that they should be able to produce something that had the desired hormonal effect but short of providing assured avoidance of pregnancy, but that would certainly be the tail wagging the dog. And if the Church were to allow prescribing BC pills for other than contraceptive reasons, it surely would be abused. I feel like Rev Tevye (sp?) from Fiddler on the Roof.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 5:49:45 PM
|
i believe the underlying reason for Sandra Fluke’s
testimony, and the reason why it is so important, is that we need health
insurance plans to have uniform minimum standards as part of US Health
Policy. Fluke believes, as i do, that
birth control should be available thru all policies... regardless of who the
employer is. Making birth control available reduces
health care costs and creates social/financial/healthcare outcomes that prove
to be good for everyone involved. if Conservatives want to oppose
nationalized health care & still control spiraling costs, then raising the
standards & increasing the efficiency of insurance corporations by creating
more uniform coverage is a pretty good idea.
Otherwise, we will continue to build a patchwork system of insurance
policies that is nearly impossible for consumers to comprehend, the sheer
complexity of which continues to add to the upward momentum of costs.
Right now, administrative expenses account for about 50% of
every dollar we spent on healthcare…. That’s a LOT of capital that is drawn off
by corporations for organizational overhead… leaving only 50% available for
real services.
To me, it’s similar to mandating that insurance companies
can’t deny coverage to someone for a pre-existing condition or insuring the
portability of coverage. in order to reign in health care costs, we
really do need more uniformity in the health care insurance system because this
will keep national costs down. We
already have hundreds, thousands, of different policies creating an inefficient
system FAR worse than a single payer system could be.
When the Catholic Church comes into the marketplace and sets
up a corporation, they should do so under the same rules that any other
corporation has to follow….. with the possible exception of their favored tax
status.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 7:28:15 PM
|
What you want is socialized healthcare (don't bother with the silk purse and sweet sound of "nationalized") I suppose you believe that every nation that has this system has better care than the US? Or is there good socialized and bad socialized? I know. This time it will be different.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 9:24:19 PM
|
Wasn't trying to mince words, yes. Socialized medicine. Eventually, I doubt we will have any choice except a national plan, but for now we'll just be muddling along with the current system. There is just too much disagreement between the political sides on this to move forward (or backward, or sideways). We're stuck with this for now.
The US does not have the best health system in the world now, but we should. Obamacare is far from socialized medicine, but it does contain efforts to unify & improve the system. It makes sense for the govt to create a centralized development plan for national health care going forward, trying to bring the insurers into line with the needs of the country .....even if you don't want socialized medicine.
The alternative would be to let Insurance Corporations write our National Health Care Policy. That would be a lot like having defense contractors write Foreign Policy. That wouldn't be a good idea either.
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Another quote
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 9:26:16 PM
|
your words -- "Making birth control available reduces health care costs and creates social/financial/healthcare outcomes that prove to be good for everyone involved"
Tow thoughts. First, birth control is already available most everywhere, supermarkets, drug stores, convenience stores, bars, and other outlets. Second, regarding outcomes. I suppose we can prove this, or should we just "feel" it to be true?
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 9:27:20 PM
|
By the way, what is the administrative cost of the US government?
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 9:45:27 PM
|
Have to disagree. Placing greater responsibility on an ineffective, unaccountable beauracracy is the answer only for those incapable of thinking, and doing, for themselves. I recognize that is a large group, but at this point, I am not a member, and stand opposed to the Feds, with their extensive record of successfully administering ANYTHING, USPS, EPA, DoE, DHS, ATF, DEA, holding the keys to my access to healthcare, and the current free market choices associated with it. You want to address health care costs, treat EVERYONE like the health insurance companies do smokers and motorcyclists. Rate risky or unhealthy behavior. Rate fatties, rate hoochie mamas, rate gays, rate hypo dopers, rate the perpetually constipated, and moderately to severly depressed. The issue is not the "uninsured" as there is a 30+ million difference in the broadcast numbers hi to low. The issue is control of 16% of domestic spending.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 9:53:56 PM
|
I don't understand what you mean by "30+ million difference in the broadcast numbers hi to low."
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
Two Great Quotes
|
Date:
|
3/6/2012 10:47:04 PM
|
The numbers published, by the admin, and the dem controlled congress, as the legislation was being crafted, ranged from 12 million uninsured to 42 million.
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/7/2012 9:13:44 AM
|
Barneget, if you hate everything about our government, why do you continue to live here? I would think it would be exhausting carrying around all that animosity, so why don't you find another country that is more to your liking and move there? I'm not trying to be ugly here, but I really am curious.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/7/2012 9:55:31 AM
|
Pot, meet kettle.
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/7/2012 10:13:41 AM
|
How so? I don't hate the government. I don't agree with everything it does -- I don't think anyone does, but I don't have an animosity for it. So maybe you'd better explain.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/7/2012 10:36:46 AM
|
I guess animosity interpreter is on the fritz.
|
Name: |
Barneget
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/7/2012 11:54:42 AM
|
NEVER said I hate the government. Never meant to imply that either. I do stand opposed to accelerating central government over reach, the past leaders that enabled the expansion by abdicating their responsibilities to beauracrats, and present leaders that have nothing short of a socialist objective. I will continue to take my elected reps to task for what I see as misguided policy, spending accountability, replication of efforts, and program results. I understand why you, a person who made a career in that swamp, might take some of my central government objections personally. I don't understand why a person with your apparent aptitude professes to see everything right in the quest for power, through restriction of rights I occasionally reference, like Fannie, Freddie, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Energy, Department of Education, Dept of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, NLRB, and the Department of Labor. Here is a question. Why, with a State Department, and a Defense Department, do we have a National Security Advisor, outside of both departments? The answer is a matter of historical record. I just want to hear it from you.
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/7/2012 5:08:02 PM
|
Your question is a good one, and I don't have a good answer. Presumably, the National Security Advisor spend their time working out the issues between the Defense and State Departments to propose a coordinated national security recommendation to the President. But, is it needed? Don't know. I'm not a huge fan of the NSC and whenever I have been summoned there on a issue by the staffers, as far as I was concerned it only served to muddy the water;
In my mind, the Department of Homeland Security's biggest problem (besides its current leader) is that even years after its creation it is still not a fully integrated Department. My observation is that a good portion of it's mission is not clear. My interface with them had to do with some technology that they were considering buying (they look at world wide sources), but did not have the technical staff to evaluate. It seems to me, they get a lot of money, and they are not sure what to do with it. And from what I've heard from a few people I knew that worked over there, no one had ever been able to assimilate the cultures of the multiple agencies that were thrown together to make it up.
I'd be the very last person to tell you that I think the government is efficient or well organized or even especially well managed. Despite encouragement to "think outside the box" the fact is that no one really wants that, and when it happens the thinker will likely be ostracized. For the most part, the political appointees do not trust the civilian workforce, nor does the civilian workforce trust the political appointees and nobody trust the Hill or it's staffers. So a lot of time gets wasted. And the first year of any Admnistration, nothing gets done while all the "key" players are going through confirmation processes. So the first year, nothing much of any consequence will be accomplished.
I don't feel animosity towards the government. Despite the inefficiencies things do get done. The government is good at coming up with frameworks under which things can operate. I'm not a person that believes that businesses will ever be self-regulating. It's a nice thought, but frankly, nothing I've ever seen would lead me to believe that. Some of the biggest Defense companies in this country would sell out our technology base and advantages for quarterly earnings. It's not that they are bad people, it's just that is the nature of business. They focus on the short term. Under the best circumstances government focuses on the long term.
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/7/2012 11:28:00 PM
|
I don't doubt your assessment of some Defense contractors. Fotunately the one I work for isn't one of them. We are a US company that is foreign owned...and I can tell you that our US company stands tall when it comes to ethical behavior. Our international owners, on the other hand, have been caught doing some things that we would get fried for (yes, fried, AND fired!). But maybe we are so squeaky clean because most of our work depends on being able to hold a security clearance and we have a formidable firewall between ourrselves and our international owners.
As to Homeland Security, our company has done a TON of physical security work for them, and yes, they have A LOT of money to spend. Not sure that a study of chain saws has THAT much relevance to our homeland security but someone at DHS thought it did.
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
A bit off topic, but I'm curious
|
Date:
|
3/8/2012 2:51:24 PM
|
I think it depends on the company and what businesses they are engaged in. Some of the foreign companies are very diligent because they know they will be scrutinized. And it is not always the employees that are at fault -- sometimes Corporate just makes a decision against the advice of their own people. One company that I won't name appears to just have made up it's corporate mind that they are going to do what they want, no matter how unethical or damaging to national security, and they'll just pay the fines that are levied against it. It's demonstrated time and again, and on a lot of different fronts that ethics is not part of their corporate culture.
|
|
|