PDA

View Full Version : General Politics Alan Grayson(D-Desperate): "Republicans Want you to die"


HonestChieffan
09-30-2009, 10:36 AM
This sort of thing will help the cause of democrats no doubt. Makes one wonder if there is a drug flashback going on or if this guy was injured in his crib as a baby. He needs help.

Grayson: GOP wants 'you to die'
By JONATHAN ALLEN | 9/29/09 8:09 PM EDT

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) warned Americans that "Republicans want you to die quickly" during an after-hours House floor speech Tuesday night.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-usmvYOPfco&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-usmvYOPfco&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

His remarks, which drew angry and immediate calls for an apology from Republicans, were highlighted by a sign reading "The Republican Health Care Plan: Die Quickly."


Veteran Tennessee Republican Jimmy Duncan abandoned customary reticence to chastise Grayson.


"That is about the most mean-spirited partisan statement that I've ever heard made on this floor, and I, for one, don't appreciate it," Duncan said.


"It's fully appropriate that the gentleman return to the floor and apologize," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, another Tennessee Republican.


But none was forthcoming from Grayson — a freshman Democrat from a competitive district — who said the first part of the GOP approach to health care is: Don't get sick.


"If you get sick, America, the Republican health care plan is this: Die quickly," he said.



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27726.html#ixzz0SbX8ZQMX

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:40 AM
About as stupid as the death panels comments.

Reaper16
09-30-2009, 10:47 AM
Grayson is smarmy. He constantly comes off as a huge dickbag.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:58 AM
About as stupid as the death panels comments.

Except that the death panels are actually real. Well, they're not called "death panels" per se. But they serve the same function.

banyon
09-30-2009, 11:02 AM
Except that the death panels are actually real. Well, they're not called "death panels" per se. But they serve the same function.

No, they're not.

Reaper16
09-30-2009, 11:05 AM
Except that the death panels are actually real. Well, they're not called "death panels" per se. But they serve the same function.
hurderder

Taco John
09-30-2009, 11:07 AM
No, they're not.


Maybe we can settle on "ration panels."

RJ
09-30-2009, 11:31 AM
I've suspected as much for years.

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 11:37 AM
Maybe we can settle on "ration panels."

Ration panels .... I like that.

If we cover this many more people overnight we are going to need an exponential increase in providers.

If certain parts of the bill are passed, many providers are going to leave country, change careers, or go completely private and reduce the amount of patients they see.

More patients, less providers, pooled limited money. I don't see how anyone could ascertain that ration panels would not be required simply to keep the system going.

banyon
09-30-2009, 11:43 AM
Maybe we can settle on "ration panels."

No we can't, they were voluntary and advisory only and not a service of people deciding to cut off services.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 11:46 AM
No we can't, they were voluntary and advisory only and not a service of people deciding to cut off services.

Come on Banyon. Even you are not this naive.

Voluntary and advisory only! :LOL:ROFL

That's precious, but I thought we were adults here having an adult conversation. Why do you have to come in with this Pollyannish tripe when I'm making an attempt to meet you half way.

banyon
09-30-2009, 11:47 AM
Come on Banyon. Even you are not this naive.

Voluntary and advisory only! :LOL:ROFL

That's precious, but I thought we were adults here having an adult conversation. Why do you have to come in with this Pollyannish tripe when I'm making an attempt to meet you half way.

If you have evidence they were compulsory, bring it forth, otherwise we'll disagree.

HonestChieffan
09-30-2009, 12:00 PM
Weasel words dont change either the meaning or the weasel

Taco John
09-30-2009, 12:57 PM
If you have evidence they were compulsory, bring it forth, otherwise we'll disagree.


What does it matter what it says right now? Economic reality will dictate what it becomes once the system goes into practice. We can't give everyone who comes in with a headache an MRI, no matter how much they demand it, can we? That principle works its way up the chain to life and death decisions too, particularly with questions of age and drug abuse. The panel may start out as "recommendations." Let's not be naive to think that "recommendations" is forevermore the extent of their power once they're in existence.

Ration panels is a fair term.

banyon
09-30-2009, 01:27 PM
What does it matter what it says right now? Economic reality will dictate what it becomes once the system goes into practice. We can't give everyone who comes in with a headache an MRI, no matter how much they demand it, can we? That principle works its way up the chain to life and death decisions too, particularly with questions of age and drug abuse. The panel may start out as "recommendations." Let's not be naive to think that "recommendations" is forevermore the extent of their power once they're in existence.

Ration panels is a fair term.

I'll take this as a glorified "no, I don't have any proof of what i was claiming".

Thanks

Taco John
09-30-2009, 01:28 PM
And I'll take that as a "LA LA LA LA LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! LA LA LA LA LA!"

banyon
09-30-2009, 01:28 PM
Weasel words dont change either the meaning or the weasel

it's not a "weasel word" to distinguish between compulsory death rationing panels and voluntary counseling services. That's kind of a major distinction don't you think? :spock:

Taco John
09-30-2009, 01:29 PM
"voluntary counseling services!" ROFL

That's priceless. So where's the evidence that they are voluntary, or counseling services? Who are they counseling anyway?

Taco John
09-30-2009, 01:32 PM
I like this game. I think I'm going to start calling my taxes "voluntary patriot offering." It makes what they do seem so much more reasonable.

Happy Voluntary Patriot Offering Day!

So much more festive.

HonestChieffan
09-30-2009, 01:32 PM
well, in one case its an overstatement and horrible choice of words that got all blown up as a means by the pro HC side to get the focus of the underlying fact that there will be some sort of medical group or committee that will have to establish some guidelines that amount to when to treat/what to treat relative to likelyhood of success and impact on budget. Now you can scream from the mountin thats not a "death panel" but it does not change the fact that the reality is they will exist in one form or another and be masked by the verbage wrapped around it.


That has zero to do with the second mention you make. Voluntary counseling is not the issue at all and one is not dependent upon the other.

Reaper16
09-30-2009, 01:35 PM
"voluntary counseling services!" ROFL

That's priceless. So where's the evidence that they are voluntary, or counseling services? Who are they counseling anyway?
Man: Look at my new Sony HDTV
Taco John: So where's the evidence that its high definition, or even a TV?
Man: Well, it says right here on the thing that its a HDTV, so...

In Taco John's universe, names of things aren't to be trusted.

Brock
09-30-2009, 01:40 PM
Snake Oil Salesman: Buy my product, which extends lifespan and has no ill effects. It says so on the label, which I won't let you read.

Reaper: Do you take checks?

wild1
09-30-2009, 01:42 PM
"voluntary counseling services!" ROFL

That's priceless. So where's the evidence that they are voluntary, or counseling services? Who are they counseling anyway?

The same way Dr. No was counseling James Bond when he asked him why he wouldn't just be a good boy and die?

Taco John
09-30-2009, 01:42 PM
Man: Look at my new Sony HDTV
Taco John: So where's the evidence that its high definition, or even a TV?
Man: Well, it says right here on the thing that its a HDTV, so...

In Taco John's universe, names of things aren't to be trusted.


You mean, in the real universe?

I'm in fucking marketing you naive fucking dope. OF COURSE names of things aren't to be trusted.

InChiefsHell
09-30-2009, 01:49 PM
Man: Look at my new Sony HDTV
Taco John: So where's the evidence that its high definition, or even a TV?
Man: Well, it says right here on the thing that its a HDTV, so...

In Taco John's universe, names of things aren't to be trusted.

Let me finish the conversation:

Taco John: Well you know you have to buy special cables for the TV...and you'll have to have somebody install it for you cuz it's a real pain in the ass...

Man: What? I didn't know that, I just bought a HDTV!

Taco John: This is why you need to ask questions and think ahead. Just sayin'...

banyon
09-30-2009, 01:59 PM
"voluntary counseling services!" ROFL

That's priceless. So where's the evidence that they are voluntary, or counseling services? Who are they counseling anyway?

Well the evidence they were voluntary would be from the proposed legislation in combination with existing legislation:


http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/euthanasia.asp

Reaper16
09-30-2009, 02:01 PM
You mean, in the real universe?

I'm in fucking marketing you naive fucking dope. OF COURSE names of things aren't to be trusted.
You probably suck so much. I can't even imagine how bad you are at your job.

Baby Lee
09-30-2009, 02:06 PM
Man: Look at my new Sony HDTV
Taco John: So where's the evidence that its high definition, or even a TV?
Man: Well, it says right here on the thing that its a HDTV, so...

In Taco John's universe, names of things aren't to be trusted.

I want to sell stuff to Reaper!!

I can finally offload that skid of Magnetbox, Panaphonic and Sorny.

Der Flöprer
09-30-2009, 02:09 PM
I don't believe for one second that Republicans want poor people to die. They want them to have the minimal amount of health care necessary to keep them enslaved. Someone needs to serve their base.

RJ
09-30-2009, 02:13 PM
What does it matter what it says right now? Economic reality will dictate what it becomes once the system goes into practice. We can't give everyone who comes in with a headache an MRI, no matter how much they demand it, can we? That principle works its way up the chain to life and death decisions too, particularly with questions of age and drug abuse. The panel may start out as "recommendations." Let's not be naive to think that "recommendations" is forevermore the extent of their power once they're in existence.

Ration panels is a fair term.


Don't these same things happen now with private insurers? Insurers don't agree to every test or medication a patient requests, sometimes even when a doctor is making the recommendation.

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 03:15 PM
Where are Nancy Pelosi and her apologists demanding decorum and voting to censure? Does decorum only apply to the POTUS and not the people he represents?
Posted via Mobile Device

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 03:18 PM
I don't believe for one second that Republicans want poor people to die. They want them to have the minimal amount of health care necessary to keep them enslaved. Someone needs to serve their base.
I thought that was why Dems love dual and triple generation welfare moms? Mmmmm mmmm mmmm
Posted via Mobile Device

Taco John
09-30-2009, 03:19 PM
You probably suck so much. I can't even imagine how bad you are at your job.


Hahaha! Yeah - a marketer who recognizes that human nature is to be selfish, and markets around that trait doesn't stand a chance in this field. If only I had your "everything is what the people selling it say it is" sensibility - I might stand a chance to make a buck in this field. Oh woe of woes!

Taco John
09-30-2009, 03:22 PM
Don't these same things happen now with private insurers? Insurers don't agree to every test or medication a patient requests, sometimes even when a doctor is making the recommendation.


Indeed. These decisions are distributed among an array of insurance providers, and are not controlled by a single all-powerful source. In most cases, these decisions are made policy up front, and people are able to sign on, or continue shopping to find a better answer.

Chief Henry
09-30-2009, 03:24 PM
Well the evidence they were voluntary would be from the proposed legislation in combination with existing legislation:


http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/euthanasia.asp





When obama said some people may have to decide dbetween the red pill or the blue pill, what did he mean by that? Can you read his mind ?

HolmeZz
09-30-2009, 03:27 PM
Sure sucks to have your plan for healthcare reform described as a secret plot to kill off a segment of the country's population, even when Sarah Palin's down syndrome baby isn't being hurled into the middle of the discussion. How's that medicine tasting?

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 03:32 PM
Sure sucks to have your plan for healthcare reform described as a secret plot to kill off a segment of the country's population, even when Sarah Palin's down syndrome baby isn't being hurled into the middle of the discussion. How's that medicine tasting?

Oh, so you are using the tried and true "you did it first" debate.

Nice
Posted via Mobile Device

***SPRAYER
09-30-2009, 03:40 PM
I've suspected as much for years.

The cat's out of the bag.

HolmeZz
09-30-2009, 03:40 PM
Oh, so you are using the tried and true "you did it first" debate.

Nice
Posted via Mobile Device

I'm using the "don't begin to condemn the shit-throwing only once fire has been returned" argument. I don't believe Republicans want people to die quickly and it's such a ridiculous premise that it doesn't warrant debating. I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy in the faux outrage now on display.

***SPRAYER
09-30-2009, 03:43 PM
I'm using the "don't begin to condemn the shit-throwing only once fire has been returned" argument. I don't believe Republicans want people to die quickly and it's such a ridiculous premise that it doesn't warrant debating. I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy in the faux outrage now on display.

In other word you are using the tried and true "you did it first" debate.

HolmeZz
09-30-2009, 03:45 PM
And I guess you're using the "you did it second" argument.

Der Flöprer
09-30-2009, 03:47 PM
I thought that was why Dems love dual and triple generation welfare moms? Mmmmm mmmm mmmm
Posted via Mobile Device

I don't even know what you're trying to insinuate. That Democrats are evil so it's okay for Republicans? Or that you think I'm a Democrat and that will somehow justify it. In either case, I think they're all fucking douchebags who shouldn't be trusted at word value on anything that comes out of their mouths. Just so we're clear, I hate every single one of them equally. I'm all about equality, baby.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 03:53 PM
Sure sucks to have your plan for healthcare reform described as a secret plot to kill off a segment of the country's population, even when Sarah Palin's down syndrome baby isn't being hurled into the middle of the discussion. How's that medicine tasting?


I don't think the medicine tastes that bad, actually. At this point, the Democrats have to pass this thing against the will of the American people with nearly every poll showing that the support isn't there for the Democrat's plans. The strategy to take the focus off of the Democrat plan and put it on the Republicans supposed lack of a plan will backfire.

It's practically a marketing law: if you make an outrageous claim against a competitor, it had better be true because your audience WILL check it out, and if they determine that you're not being honest, it will cost you at the register.

Grayson is setting the stage for the Republicans to elevate the visibility of their plan. It's a poor marketing strategy. He should have stayed positive, and on their own plan.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 04:10 PM
Of course, the "if someone said it, it must be true" crowd might have a different idea of the effectiveness of Grayson's message.

InChiefsHell
09-30-2009, 04:25 PM
I don't think the medicine tastes that bad, actually. At this point, the Democrats have to pass this thing against the will of the American people with nearly every poll showing that the support isn't there for the Democrat's plans. The strategy to take the focus off of the Democrat plan and put it on the Republicans supposed lack of a plan will backfire.

It's practically a marketing law: if you make an outrageous claim against a competitor, it had better be true because your audience WILL check it out, and if they determine that you're not being honest, it will cost you at the register.

Grayson is setting the stage for the Republicans to elevate the visibility of their plan. It's a poor marketing strategy. He should have stayed positive, and on their own plan.

Sadly, the Republicans are pretty inept. One would think that they would knock this one out of the park...but it IS the Republicans after all..

Reaper16
09-30-2009, 04:26 PM
Of course, the "if someone said it, it must be true" crowd might have a different idea of the effectiveness of Grayson's message.
Grayson's message? Are you sure its Grayson's message? I mean, it looks like Grayson, sure. And that man certainly has Grayson's name. In fact, all signs points to that man being Rep. Grayson. But, you know, where's the evidence that the man is Rep. Grayson?

banyon
09-30-2009, 04:27 PM
When obama said some people may have to decide dbetween the red pill or the blue pill, what did he mean by that? Can you read his mind ?

Sounds like he was referring to pills. Can you read his mind?

banyon
09-30-2009, 04:31 PM
"voluntary counseling services!" ROFL

That's priceless. So where's the evidence that they are voluntary, or counseling services? Who are they counseling anyway?

Well the evidence they were voluntary would be from the proposed legislation in combination with existing legislation:


http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/euthanasia.asp

<embed src="http://soundboard.com/sb/playerskins/singleTrackPlayer.swf?trackURL=http://soundboard.com/mediafiles/MTM0ODI2OTMxMzQ4ODY_nc6YKL_2ffGOk.mp3&vol=70&action=stop&title=Crickets - Georgia, U.S." quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="350" height="50"></embed></object><a href="http://www.soundboard.com/" ><img src="http://www.soundboard.com/1x1.gif" border="0" alt="soundboard.com" /></a>

Taco John
09-30-2009, 04:38 PM
<embed src="http://soundboard.com/sb/playerskins/singleTrackPlayer.swf?trackURL=http://soundboard.com/mediafiles/MTM0ODI2OTMxMzQ4ODY_nc6YKL_2ffGOk.mp3&vol=70&action=stop&title=Crickets - Georgia, U.S." quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="350" height="50"></embed></object><a href="http://www.soundboard.com/" ><img src="http://www.soundboard.com/1x1.gif" border="0" alt="soundboard.com" /></a>



Ignoring my point by posting something Snopes said about something called "euthenasia counseling" isn't actually making a point. The crickets you are hearing are the adequate response to your non-point.

Reaper16
09-30-2009, 04:42 PM
Ignoring my point by posting something Snopes said about something called "euthenasia counseling" isn't actually making a point. The crickets you are hearing are the adequate response to your non-point.
That Snopes link does answer this post of yours: http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=6125921#post6125921

banyon
09-30-2009, 04:44 PM
Ignoring my point by posting something Snopes said about something called "euthenasia counseling" isn't actually making a point. The crickets you are hearing are the adequate response to your non-point.

I see you didn't even read the article, since it specifically refutes the claim you made about the "mandatory" component of this counseling by showing the legislative language and explaining the confusion.

FishingRod
09-30-2009, 04:49 PM
I'm pretty anti government, anti socialistic but I do think that a socialized healthcare system in our country is inevitable . It may take another 50-75 years but sooner or later I think it will get shoved though. Probably like most other things one small bit at a time. I really would like to see an "honest" estimate as to the actual cost to the US taxpayers to cover every man woman and child. Check ups, prescriptions, major medical as well as nursing home care. If you going to look at it look at the entire thing and you may as well eliminate the health insurance industry from the equation as well. The county would in its self be the insurance company so there would be no need to have private ones. I suppose a few would survive for the rich people that wanted to go to nice hotel like hospitals but that would be about it. Factor in the savings from it no longer being a profit deal and the loss of jobs as well. My guess would be that we would just have to live like they do in Europe where gas would be $6-8 per gallon and double the price of Cigarettes and liquor double another time or two and that would about do it. People need to look at it realistically and decide what of their and their kids stuff are they willing to give up to take care of everyone.

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 05:00 PM
I'm using the "don't begin to condemn the shit-throwing only once fire has been returned" argument. I don't believe Republicans want people to die quickly and it's such a ridiculous premise that it doesn't warrant debating. I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy in the faux outrage now on display.

Faux outrage? Maybe outrage is too strong a word, but I am offended. This man used the same floor he voted from only last week to condemn Jo Wilson for an offensive statement made on the floor to a respected citizen. As a voting Republican he owes me the same apology he expected of Congressman Wilson. I have wrote my Representative and House Speaker Pelosi demanding it.
Posted via Mobile Device

ROYC75
09-30-2009, 05:08 PM
WOW, brings a new meaning to idiots in the house.

VAChief
09-30-2009, 05:23 PM
Don't these same things happen now with private insurers? Insurers don't agree to every test or medication a patient requests, sometimes even when a doctor is making the recommendation.

Exactly, we have real death panels now...1 out of every 5 Doctor Ordered procedure is denied now.

HolmeZz
09-30-2009, 05:40 PM
Faux outrage? Maybe outrage is too strong a word, but I am offended.

You're offended now that the shoe is on the other foot. I missed all this condemnation when Republican politicians and the base of the party were pushing the idea that Democrats wanted to kill off fellow Americans. There were no apologies made to supporters of the Dems healthcare reforms. If you aren't willing to speak up and condemn your own side when they make wreckless statements like that, you can't throw a shitfit when the same thing is said back.

orange
09-30-2009, 05:41 PM
Grayson Not Backing Down: "I Apologize To The Dead"
First Posted: 09-30-09 04:37 PM | Updated: 09-30-09 05:04 PM

Alan Grayson refused to apologize Wednesday for saying on the House floor Tuesday night that the GOP health care plan amounts to "don't get sick" - and if you do, "die quickly."

"I'm not taking any of it back. I stand by what I said," Grayson, a freshman Democrat who represents Orlando, Florida, told reporters.

GOP Rep. Tom Price of Georgia filed a resolution Wednesday censuring Grayson for the comments. But Grayson said he planned to stay on offense.

"The point is that if you do get sick, you're going to have huge medical bills. Your insurance company's not going to help you and as a result of that you're going to end up having the plug pulled on you," he said. "I don't think that the Democrats have to be on the defensive for a bill that reduces health care costs, makes health care premiums affordable, makes people's health care coverage comprehensive in the sense that they can't be excluded for breaching lifetime caps or by preexisting conditions and helps all of the Americans who cannot afford health insurance today. I think we should be on the offense not the defense and that's where I plan to stay."

Grayson said he arrived at his conclusion after listening to Republicans talk on the House floor for months.

"One of the responsibilities we have when we're in the majority is from time to time to be the Speaker pro tem[pore]. And it's been my misfortune to have to listen to them attack our bill now for months and drag out our work on this bill endlessly, while according to Harvard scientists, 47,000 Americans die every year for lack of health insurance. And by the way, that's 20 or so since we started talking about it. That's over a hundred a day," Grayson said.

Grayson's floor speech was intended to be satirical, he said. Now that he's under fire, however, he's standing by it.

"Yes, it was tongue-in-cheek. I'm surprised I have to explain that, but that's the way it goes these days," he said.

Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) followed Grayson on the House floor Tuesday night and chided him for "making fun of a very important issue." Still, he pronounced himself unamused.

"I can't believe what I just saw. I can't believe it," said Burton on the floor. "First of all, it's totally wrong. And secondly, it's making fun of a very important issue for the American people. We do have health care problems in this country and we need to solve those health care problems, but coming down here and making light of the issue by coming up with a lot of silly talk is just ridiculous. The Republicans have a bill, H.R. 3400, which deals with the problem in a way that does not get the government in between the patient and their doctor."

Asked to clarify if he was being satirical or serious -- two concepts which are not, actually, mutually exclusive -- Grayson responded: "I meant what I said."

Will it hurt his reelection chances? "It improves them. People like elected officials with guts who'll say what they mean," he analyzed.

He also didn't think it could harm relations between the parties. "We're way past that point. They have said no to everything. They are nattering nabobs of negativity. They've been that way since I've been sworn in," he said, echoing Richard Nixon's vice president, Spiro Agnew.

Earlier in the day, Democratic caucus chair John Larson (Conn.) said he "would suggest" that Grayson apologize. But Grayson said he'd spoken to Larson, claiming Larson had not asked him to apologize and told him he wouldn't do so.

"I've spoken to other members of leadership and nobody has asked me to apologize. Nobody is going to ask me to apologize. As I said before, no rules of the House were broken. We have a - if you bother to look it up - there's something in the Constitution called the Speech and Debate Clause and I think it well covers this situation. So no, nobody is going to ask me to apologize among the Democrats. I think the Republicans have something to apologize for but I made clear exactly what that is last night," he said.

Grayson also took to the House floor to offer a different sort of apology - to those who have died for lack of health insurance. "I apologize to the dead and their families that we haven't acted sooner to end this holocaust in America," he said.

There is "no comparison at all" between his situation and that of Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), who was condemned for not apologizing for shouting "You lie!" at President Obama, Grayson said.

Wilson, asked about Grayson, finally did offer an apology. "I need to apologize," he said. "I don't know anything about it."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/30/grayson-not-backing-down_n_305196.html

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 08:01 PM
You're offended now that the shoe is on the other foot. I missed all this condemnation when Republican politicians and the base of the party were pushing the idea that Democrats wanted to kill off fellow Americans. There were no apologies made to supporters of the Dems healthcare reforms. If you aren't willing to speak up and condemn your own side when they make wreckless statements like that, you can't throw a shitfit when the same thing is said back.

I wasn't on the board at that time, but I agree with you.

So you believe Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats should demand a public apology from Grayson or agree to censure him by vote as they did with Wilson, right? After all, they stated it was a reckless and emb arrassing incident to occur on the floor - which is where Grayson committed the same crime.

After all, "if you aren't willing to speak up and condemn your own side...", right?
Posted via Mobile Device

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 08:12 PM
Grayson Not Backing Down: "I Apologize To The Dead"
First Posted: 09-30-09 04:37 PM | Updated: 09-30-09 05:04 PM

Alan Grayson refused to apologize Wednesday for saying on the House floor Tuesday night that the GOP health care plan amounts to "don't get sick" - and if you do, "die quickly."

"I'm not taking any of it back. I stand by what I said," Grayson, a freshman Democrat who represents Orlando, Florida, told reporters.

GOP Rep. Tom Price of Georgia filed a resolution Wednesday censuring Grayson for the comments. But Grayson said he planned to stay on offense.

"The point is that if you do get sick, you're going to have huge medical bills. Your insurance company's not going to help you and as a result of that you're going to end up having the plug pulled on you," he said. "I don't think that the Democrats have to be on the defensive for a bill that reduces health care costs, makes health care premiums affordable, makes people's health care coverage comprehensive in the sense that they can't be excluded for breaching lifetime caps or by preexisting conditions and helps all of the Americans who cannot afford health insurance today. I think we should be on the offense not the defense and that's where I plan to stay."

Grayson said he arrived at his conclusion after listening to Republicans talk on the House floor for months.

"One of the responsibilities we have when we're in the majority is from time to time to be the Speaker pro tem[pore]. And it's been my misfortune to have to listen to them attack our bill now for months and drag out our work on this bill endlessly, while according to Harvard scientists, 47,000 Americans die every year for lack of health insurance. And by the way, that's 20 or so since we started talking about it. That's over a hundred a day," Grayson said.

Grayson's floor speech was intended to be satirical, he said. Now that he's under fire, however, he's standing by it.

"Yes, it was tongue-in-cheek. I'm surprised I have to explain that, but that's the way it goes these days," he said.

Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) followed Grayson on the House floor Tuesday night and chided him for "making fun of a very important issue." Still, he pronounced himself unamused.

"I can't believe what I just saw. I can't believe it," said Burton on the floor. "First of all, it's totally wrong. And secondly, it's making fun of a very important issue for the American people. We do have health care problems in this country and we need to solve those health care problems, but coming down here and making light of the issue by coming up with a lot of silly talk is just ridiculous. The Republicans have a bill, H.R. 3400, which deals with the problem in a way that does not get the government in between the patient and their doctor."

Asked to clarify if he was being satirical or serious -- two concepts which are not, actually, mutually exclusive -- Grayson responded: "I meant what I said."

Will it hurt his reelection chances? "It improves them. People like elected officials with guts who'll say what they mean," he analyzed.

He also didn't think it could harm relations between the parties. "We're way past that point. They have said no to everything. They are nattering nabobs of negativity. They've been that way since I've been sworn in," he said, echoing Richard Nixon's vice president, Spiro Agnew.

Earlier in the day, Democratic caucus chair John Larson (Conn.) said he "would suggest" that Grayson apologize. But Grayson said he'd spoken to Larson, claiming Larson had not asked him to apologize and told him he wouldn't do so.

"I've spoken to other members of leadership and nobody has asked me to apologize. Nobody is going to ask me to apologize. As I said before, no rules of the House were broken. We have a - if you bother to look it up - there's something in the Constitution called the Speech and Debate Clause and I think it well covers this situation. So no, nobody is going to ask me to apologize among the Democrats. I think the Republicans have something to apologize for but I made clear exactly what that is last night," he said.

Grayson also took to the House floor to offer a different sort of apology - to those who have died for lack of health insurance. "I apologize to the dead and their families that we haven't acted sooner to end this holocaust in America," he said.

There is "no comparison at all" between his situation and that of Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), who was condemned for not apologizing for shouting "You lie!" at President Obama, Grayson said.

Wilson, asked about Grayson, finally did offer an apology. "I need to apologize," he said. "I don't know anything about it."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/30/grayson-not-backing-down_n_305196.html

No surprise, the party in power rarely realizes when they are acting as hypocritcal assholes.
Posted via Mobile Device

Saul Good
09-30-2009, 08:13 PM
Exactly, we have real death panels now...1 out of every 5 Doctor Ordered procedure is denied now.

It's denied because it isn't covered under the health care plan that a person chose to purchase. Under our current system, you purchase the product that you feel is best for you. That doesn't mean that you will make the right choice, but nobody is making it for you.

dirk digler
09-30-2009, 08:19 PM
I concur with the others that say this sounds just like the Death Panel BS. Nevermind that Grassley and others that spewed that BS actually voted for the exact same thing in 03.

The best quote I heard the other day was when a male Republican Senator said he didn't need maternity care so it shouldn't be covered. Some of these people are absolutely brilliant.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-30-2009, 08:26 PM
Grayson is a firm believer on auditing the fed though.

VAChief
09-30-2009, 08:54 PM
It's denied because it isn't covered under the health care plan that a person chose to purchase. Under our current system, you purchase the product that you feel is best for you. That doesn't mean that you will make the right choice, but nobody is making it for you.

Sometimes, but I have worked as an adjuster and trust me the idea is to deny and stall...most of the time people give up.

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 09:09 PM
Sometimes, but I have worked as an adjuster and trust me the idea is to deny and stall...most of the time people give up.
Not true anymore. Most states have a prompt pay law in effect now. A payor must send payment or reason to review within x number of days. If a review is instituted generally most states require a 90 resolve for non-critical and 10 business day for critical situations and post procedure review for life threatening. If those time frames are not met, the the payor must pay an interest penalty on top of the payment. If denied past the time frame then a post minimum payment is due nonetheless.
Posted via Mobile Device

RJ
09-30-2009, 09:15 PM
Not true anymore. Most states have a prompt pay law in effect now. A payor must send payment or reason to review within x number of days. If a review is instituted generally most states require a 90 resolve for non-critical and 10 business day for critical situations and post procedure review for life threatening. If those time frames are not met, the the payor must pay an interest penalty on top of the payment. If denied past the time frame then a post minimum payment is due nonetheless.
Posted via Mobile Device


Do you work in the insurance field?

This may have been discussed, but if so I missed it.

RJ
09-30-2009, 09:19 PM
It's denied because it isn't covered under the health care plan that a person chose to purchase. Under our current system, you purchase the product that you feel is best for you. That doesn't mean that you will make the right choice, but nobody is making it for you.


How is the consumer supposed to know all the possible procedures they might need in the future? And how many options do most people have when signing up for a health insurance plan?

For someone like me who works for a small business, my options are narrow and narrower.

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 09:24 PM
Do you work in the insurance field?

This may have been discussed, but if so I missed it.

I did in medical billing for more than 25 years. I specialized in policy and procedure, software training, maximized recoup, and completing expected reimbursement tables.
Posted via Mobile Device

Taco John
09-30-2009, 09:26 PM
For someone like me who works for a small business, my options are narrow and narrower.


A question: Do you believe that your options are narrow and narrower because there aren't a sufficient amount of insurance companies that want your business?

RJ
09-30-2009, 09:37 PM
A question: Do you believe that your options are narrow and narrower because there aren't a sufficient amount of insurance companies that want your business?


Actually, it's because my employer doesn't particularly want to offer an insurance plan at all. And i can't say I blame him or any employer for feeling that way. I've never understood why the local restaurant or car dealer of furniture store should be involved in the health insurance business.

RJ
09-30-2009, 09:39 PM
I did in medical billing for more than 25 years. I specialized in policy and procedure, software training, maximized recoup, and completing expected reimbursement tables.
Posted via Mobile Device


I'm not following all of your lingo.

Did you have any dealings with claims and customers?

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 10:21 PM
I'm not following all of your lingo.

Did you have any dealings with claims and customers?

Extensive.
Posted via Mobile Device

RJ
09-30-2009, 10:29 PM
Extensive.
Posted via Mobile Device


Ok, that's good to know. I'll keep that in mind reading your posts on this subject.

Taco John
10-01-2009, 12:00 AM
Actually, it's because my employer doesn't particularly want to offer an insurance plan at all. And i can't say I blame him or any employer for feeling that way. I've never understood why the local restaurant or car dealer of furniture store should be involved in the health insurance business.

Under the new plan, employers will be coerced to provide health care to employees or they face increased taxes as a penalty for not doing so. Some employers will do the math and figure that it's cheaper for them to face the increased taxes over the long haul than to provide health care for everybody. In those cases, the employees will face a federal mandate to get coverage or face threats from the IRS and jail time.

It's really a great plan.

InChiefsHell
10-01-2009, 06:40 AM
Under the new plan, employers will be coerced to provide health care to employees or they face increased taxes as a penalty for not doing so. Some employers will do the math and figure that it's cheaper for them to face the increased taxes over the long haul than to provide health care for everybody. In those cases, the employees will face a federal mandate to get coverage or face threats from the IRS and jail time.

It's really a great plan.

INdeed. They get em coming and going. If a public option is there, many employers will scrap their plans and just tell their employees to jump on the public plan. So, the government's solution is to stick them with a penalty if they do so...which is funny because most employers would offer insurance if there was no public option...

...and around and around we go.

banyon
10-01-2009, 11:08 AM
Under the new plan, employers will be coerced to provide health care to employees or they face increased taxes as a penalty for not doing so. Some employers will do the math and figure that it's cheaper for them to face the increased taxes over the long haul than to provide health care for everybody. In those cases, the employees will face a federal mandate to get coverage or face threats from the IRS and jail time.

It's really a great plan.

They're not going to file their taxes?

Velvet_Jones
10-01-2009, 11:17 AM
I don't believe for one second that Republicans want poor people to die. They want them to have the minimal amount of health care necessary to keep them enslaved. Someone needs to serve their base.

Wow - just wow - you really think that?

RJ
10-01-2009, 11:21 AM
Under the new plan, employers will be coerced to provide health care to employees or they face increased taxes as a penalty for not doing so. Some employers will do the math and figure that it's cheaper for them to face the increased taxes over the long haul than to provide health care for everybody. In those cases, the employees will face a federal mandate to get coverage or face threats from the IRS and jail time.

It's really a great plan.


Aren't they already coerced to provide health care the way things are now? Most people expect that from an employer as it is their only avenue to a quality, reasonably priced plan. I've never understood why the onus of health care fell on business people. Some guy who knows a lot about plumbing parts opens up his own shop, all of a sudden he's supposed to decide for 20 people which HMO they should be on. And if he doesn't have one, he has a difficult time finding decent employees to operate his business. It's never made much sense to me.

RJ
10-01-2009, 11:22 AM
Wow - just wow - you really think that?

You know Flopnuts never jokes about anything. He is a very serious fellow, all the time.