(Please don't ridicule me) but what is going on in Massachusetts?

A naked guy beat a lady with a foot sewn in her mouth, and now you can’t have health care.

Coakley blew it. She ran a negative campaign while Brown played it cool and didn’t say ANTHING negative.

He has the worst policies and will change the future of the country single-handedly, all because Martha Coakley was the best that the Democrats could offer.

@kevbo LOL! GA!

@kevbo lol, I doubt anyone can beat that explanation

@PrancingUrchin it has been a Democrat state, for ever and ever – good for Obama who is trying to get national health care. But because the people already have health care, they decided to vote Republican. Also the Democrat candidate did a bad job of campaigning. Something like that.

I’m not familiar with either of the policies, but I guess I don’t see how this will single-handedly change the country.
@kevbo Even knowing nothing about it, that answer was concise and funny. GA
@flo Thanks. That helps a bit.

Massachusetts has shown just how broken, partisan, and ineffective our current system of government has become. When national issues are determined, ultimately, by a single individual, something needs to change.

this is true regardless of who won.

Massachusetts, a truly blue state that has not had a US Senator that was a Republican since 1966 has taken a bold step to stop LEGISLATION (Healthcare Bill) that would adversely affect no only the nation’s economy but the quality of the GREATEST healthcare system in the world. Even thought Massachusetts REQUIRES healthcare for all, it does not mean that system is perfect. Like the proposed Healthcare Bill it’s flawed.
The Obama Healthcare bill hurts our most vunerable population, the very young, the very old, and the non-nuro typical, ie. Autism, Down’s Syndrome, Mentally Retatrded etc.
If the proposed Healthcare plan was so wonderful, why did the president and the Democratic Congress put a clause into the bill allowing them to opt out of the coverage and have a private plan paid for our taxpayers.
When the Republicans proposed that the healthcare plan must be taken by all members of the United States, regardless of their position, the Democrats said, “No way.”
The blue blooded Bostonians saw this as a wake up call and like their forefathers “tossed” the bill into Boston Harbor. Tea anyone?

Red sux fans have proved how stupid they are.

@Flo_Nightengale Greatest healthcare system in the world? What have you been smoking? We’re not even in the top 25 buddy, sorry.

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/mlm/healthscatter2.png

The “clause” you speak of allowed ANYONE in the country to opt out and get private insurance, so long as they HAD some insurance. And moreover, what you seem to be talking about (the public option) isn’t even IN the current proposed plan genius. Its ALL expansion of private insurance.

And hurts the vulnerable? How? Please show me how it hurts the vulnerable? Cuz the way I see it, it’s giving a lot of people with those problems health care. How many old people do you know that work at Wal Mart so they can afford to pay for their medication after they’re retired? Or how about poverty stricken parents who are forced to join the military simply so a family members medical problems can actually be cared for? I know people in those situations. Hell I’m a college graduate with a full time job and I can’t even afford insurance!

The Massachusetts voters (The “blue blooded Bostonians” as you call them actually voted for Coakley more than 2 to 1) probably saw that the democratic candidate wasn’t running a campaign cuz she thought she was a shoe in. Which allowed the other guy to back his way into the job by running an in your face campaign that saw him not even listing any of his ideas…. in fact he tried to NOT talk about them, even invoking the Obama “Yes We Can” in his rallies.

I don’t want any Tea, I want [removed by Fluther moderators] look around and see that all the crap Glen Beck and the other right wing radio hosts are feeding you is actually nonsense.

@westy81585 If you measure by outcome rather than mortality – which has nothing to do with health CARE and everything to do with living dangerously (and counting preemie deaths as baby deaths rather than sweeping them under the rug) – we have the best health care system.

@kevbo LOVE that answer!

@Blondesjon I want to agree with you but the issue of whether to have national health care or not is just that close – in government. As far as I have been able to read, the nation as a whole – the populace not the guys making decisions on our behalf – is against it.

This is a tribute to Kevbo’s answer

We have the greatest healthcare in the world for those who can afford it.

The rest can go hang.

@Mike_Hunt, that is totally going on my fridge. Thanks!

No, thank you for inspiring me!

[mod says] Personal attacks are not permitted and have been removed via internal edit.

Thanks for asking this question. I was curious too.

@westy81585 I feel bad for you working and not getting benefits. Who might be to blame for that? I might remind anyone that reads this that there was a time when insurance paid 80% and the patient was responsible for 20%. Health Insurance was designed for HELP and not entirely pay for medical expenses.
May I PM you and ask a question?

@Flo_Nightengale you’re more than welcome too, but I’m slow to respond as I don’t usually get on here often.

And may I remind you that the time you speak of is still current. What you’re thinking of is called a “copay.” This is the normal thing how you pay say $10 dollars or some amount of money everytime you go to the doctor or ER, while the insurance company pays the rest. Well in the case of many insurance plans currently in this country, there is a “copay” for major surgeries and the like. In fact that copay is often larger than the amount the insurance company must pay.

And if health insurance was designed to not pay for all medical expenses of those who are paying premiums for it, then it needs to be redesigned to fix that HUGE design flaw.

@kevbo I don’t get it…..can someone explain lol?

@augustlan Thanks for not modding out my whole answer…. I got carried away there. My apologies.

@Blackberry A naked guy beat a lady with a foot sewn in her mouth, and now you can’t have health care.

Give those facebook friends the TLC they need, if they’re up in arms they voted as I did (Coakley) and are now as upset and disappointed in our state as I am. Ugh.

@buckyboy28 Ahhhh I see, thanks a lot lol : ) That’s…...surprising actually.

Just found this. Adds a bit of humor I thought.

@Flo_Nightengale, you said:

• The Obama Healthcare bill hurts our most vunerable population, the very young, the very old, and the non-nuro typical, ie. Autism, Down’s Syndrome, Mentally Retatrded etc.
Can you support a single one of these claims?

Or are you just bearing false witness?

• If the proposed Healthcare plan was so wonderful, why did the president and the Democratic Congress put a clause into the bill allowing them to opt out of the coverage and have a private plan paid for our taxpayers.
There is no such thing in either the house or the senate bill. You are making stuff up.

If you are referring to the public option in the house bill—I believe states could opt out of offering it. It would not be the default option for anyone.

• When the Republicans proposed that the healthcare plan must be taken by all members of the United States, regardless of their position, the Democrats said, “No way.”
Support this assertion; you are making stuff up again.

Do you believe in a God that punishes bearing false witness?

@Qingu Bearing false witness involves knowingly giving false information in a legal setting.

I think you owe Ms. Nightengale an apology. Whether you also owe an apology to God I will leave to your judgment.

That’s a conveniently technical definition of bearing false witness found nowhere in the Bible. I understand Christ tends to take a more broad interpretation of the laws (i.e. you’re guilty of adultery if you even think about it). Something to consider.

She is making statements about a subject which are demonstrably false to anyone who would take even a moment to check them. Perhaps she’s not knowingly lying, but she’s certainly being immorally lazy with the truth.

If you think it’s morally okay to carelessly and maliciously write false statements then you’re certainly entitled to your opinion. I don’t.

lol. who spit in his ^ butt?

@Blondesjon He’s right even if he is being a bit of a stuck up about it. A public option, and/or this health care plan will be GREAT for the American people. The only reason people think it wouldn’t be is because they ignorantly believe what people ignorantly (or even worse, purposely for their own reasons) tell them.

God, would want everyone in our country to be able to get good medical treatment and not have to die slow terrible deaths because they can’t afford it. In fact if I’m not mistaken, helping the poor was kind of Jesus’ thing.

@Qingu That would be the ninth or eighth commandment depending on your version of the Bible. Your interpretation is your own business: I don’t see how demanding someone else’s contributes to the argument for or against universal medical care.

‘Immorally lazy’? Please stop being offensive.

@westy81585 It was Jesus’ thing. He asked people to do it. Not Caesar.

@Factotum What are you talking about? Your posts have been very confusing to me. I don’t see what religion has to do with this at all.

@westy81585 What I was addressing was the nature of Quingu’s response to Flo.

What I wrote to you concerned your comment that ‘helping the poor was kind of Jesus’ thing’. Which it was but it was about individuals helping the poor not about government redistribution of money.

@Factotum Ok, you’re aware that under the current system, the Federal govt. will pay the bill for anyone who goes to the ER and is unable to pay? Hospitals by law cannot turn anyone away in our country. But when it comes time to pay, 40 million of us (my college graduate self included) have no insurance and no money to pay the large bill. When this happens the Fed pays it. As a result, many of the 40 million uninsured use the ER as their regular doctors office (since they can’t get an appt. at a regular one with no insurance/money). Keep in mind here too that the ER costs on avg, SIX TIMES the cost of a regular doctors visit.

The public option, which you seem to view as “redistribution of wealth” would actually LOWER the redistribution. Those 40 million would be given an option for low cost insurance (it isn’t free as many mistakenly think, it would just be cheaper than the private options). This money would be pooled to pay the medical bills of those on the plan, and the Fed would pay the difference if this amount wasn’t enough (which would seem likely). So the Fed would still be paying money into the system, but it would be SIGNIFICANTLY less than it is currently paying to give those 40 million people poor care (as the ER is a last line, they won’t be given medications or surgeries until they are in a do or die now situation). In fact the CBO estimated this would lower the US deficit by as much as 200 BILLION dollars a year.

If anything this would give those poor people some responsibility in paying for their own health insurance, rather than it being entirely on the backs of the US tax payer. But it’s ok, next time I break my leg or get the flu and have to go to the ER, I’ll send you a thankyou card for paying my bill.

In no way am I in favor of how things are currently done. No conservative is.