Just being careful when I wrote that, probably, was deliberate to acknowledge that there are smart and well read people here. Yes, it has been covered by more than Fox, never said it wasn't. Once again, I put in the word, meaningfully. How much airtime, how many columns ? Yes, I am sure and do know the BBC (and a lot of people read the BBC here and post links to it often) is all over this, but the NYT and the WAPO ? I really wouldn't know about the NYT but the WAPO did say more than a few words, rather late, but yes and it was pretty straight forward.
There is the facet of this whole matter where the UK is bound by a UN treaty, Convention on the Rights of the Child they signed onto regarding who has the ultimate say in matters like this. The treaty prevents the parents from ultimately deciding and forces the court's intervention. Somehow and thankfully the US did not ratify and was the only country that didn't. It would give up sovereignty on the matters covered, forever. Because the UK signed and ratified, it is bound by it. This is where the Single Payer issue comes into play, its the UK's NHS vs. the parents, even though they aren't asking the NHS to do anything. They just want to try to seek other medical care, at their own expense and can't because the government has the ultimate say so over their child even though they are doing no harm to the child and seeking to help their child.
That is a problem that shouldn't be. Its not like they are going to Springfield to see Doc Riviera ...
Who is Charlie Gard ? Unless you watch Fox, you probably don't know. Its not being covered anywhere else meaningfully, because of the damage it is causing to the Single Payer solution. I suggest that you catch up on that.
I've been reading about Charlie Gard for a couple of weeks. WaPo, NYT, BBC, pretty much everywhere. Even the Vatican got involved. And I don't watch any news whatsoever. I read. Every day. FYI.
The world is bigger than Fox News. Much, much bigger and equally as strange.
Just being careful when I wrote that, probably, was deliberate to acknowledge that there are smart and well read people here. Yes, it has been covered by more than Fox, never said it wasn't. Once again, I put in the word, meaningfully. How much airtime, how many columns ? Yes, I am sure and do know the BBC (and a lot of people read the BBC here and post links to it often) is all over this, but the NYT and the WAPO ? I really wouldn't know about the NYT but the WAPO did say more than a few words, rather late, but yes and it was pretty straight forward.
There is the facet of this whole matter where the UK is bound by a UN treaty, Convention on the Rights of the Child they signed onto regarding who has the ultimate say in matters like this. The treaty prevents the parents from ultimately deciding and forces the court's intervention. Somehow and thankfully the US did not ratify and was the only country that didn't. It would give up sovereignty on the matters covered, forever. Because the UK signed and ratified, it is bound by it. This is where the Single Payer issue comes into play, its the UK's NHS vs. the parents, even though they aren't asking the NHS to do anything. They just want to try to seek other medical care, at their own expense and can't because the government has the ultimate say so over their child even though they are doing no harm to the child and seeking to help their child.
That is a problem that shouldn't be. Its not like they are going to Springfield to see Doc Riviera ...
Who is Charlie Gard ? Unless you watch Fox, you probably don't know. Its not being covered anywhere else meaningfully, because of the damage it is causing to the Single Payer solution. I suggest that you catch up on that.
Ta ta ...
I've been reading about Charlie Gard for a couple of weeks. WaPo, NYT, BBC, pretty much everywhere. Even the Vatican got involved. And I don't watch any news whatsoever. I read. Every day. FYI.
The world is bigger than Fox News. Much, much bigger and equally as strange.
Who is Charlie Gard ? Unless you watch Fox, you probably don't know. Its not being covered anywhere else meaningfully, because of the damage it is causing to the Single Payer solution. I suggest that you catch up on that.
The comment by Trump in the Daily Beast article linked in the above blog post, from when Trump was asked about Terry Schaivo, another unfortunate soul whom politicians attempted to exploit for political gain, is telling. He has no living will or AMD because he simply refuses to acknowledge reality.
A couple quick points: trump promised throughout his campaign that he had a healtcare plan — a great one, one with heart. One that he would roll out on Day One. In January, he said they were just dotting the eyes and crossing the tees. When will we see this plan of Trump's? Or is the plan he has been talking about for about a year now whatever comes out of the Senate? If he has a great plan, why does he not unveil it? Inquiring minds want to know. And no one is buying this crap about him being blocked by Dems, establishment Repubs, the media, and other swamp creatures. How can anyone stop him form articulating his plan?
when I google the name Charlie Gard, it pulls up a myriad of news stories, from all kinds of sources, not just Fox News. I do not understand why conservatives often claim that some story is being ignored when it is so transparently not so. In my experience, when someone resorts to those kind of tactics, it usually means he or she is lacking a bonafide argument.
I guess you disagree with everything in my post.
Yes Trump claimed he had a plan on the shelf. So far, its a no show other than an outline of requirements.
My google search of Charlie Gard only shows CNN and the WAPO on the first page for American sources and they are late to the party. I won't bother looking at CNN, but the WAPO gives a fair accounting.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Jul 19, 2017 - 6:46am
kurtster wrote:
Thanks for relighting this thread, Dave, so I wouldn't be accused of restarting the beating of a dead horse.
But it is what it is. Those of us who were against the ACA from the beginning were against it because of what is happening right now. We warned that it was designed to fail, as soon as Obama's second term was over. We warned that it was unsustainable as designed, that it created a whole new dependency on the government, another poorly designed entitlement that would become the hot potato de jour of 2017. But we were laughed at, scorned as racists for warning about the obvious.
Back when this was passed, the republican party was pronounced dead by Obama and the democrats. The whole charade of the ACA was to pass something guaranteed to self destruct with either Clinton or Biden in office when it did.
Why was it designed to self destruct at this particular time one might wonder ? It was designed to implode so that the next democratic POTUS would then finally get the obvious solution to all of our needs passed, A Single Payer government O&O system.
But it didn't work out that way. The republican party didn't die. Instead it rose up from the ashes, dragged back to life by the Tea Party and other like minded people who were fed up up with the railroading of the establishment of both parties. We got Trump instead of Clinton or Bush as the next POTUS.
Single Payer was taken off the table by default because of Trump's election. So now the democrats are caught holding the bag. Sure Trump campaigned, just like all the other republicans about repealing and replacing the ACA. But Trump was the only one serious about it as we now have proof, thanks to the Senate. Ya sure, vote to repeal the ACA all you want when its safe to because it would be vetoed as soon as it got to Obama's desk. But now when it can really happen, look at who is chickening out. They had 7 years to have an alternative ready. Pffffffftttttt. And the democrats aren't saying anything either except Russia, Russia, Russia, cuz all they have is Single Payer as their solution to the mess after 7 years.
Single Payer ain't gonna happen, at least not until the democrats regain control of the government. So they have the same thing as the republicans as their solution to the ACA, which is nothing. Meanwhile, the ACA is imploding as we warned. Everyone on both sides of the establishment aisle are determined to see Trump fail at everything he does. You democrats fail to see that the establishment republicans hate Trump more than you do. Right now the only people who support Trump are the ones who voted for him, the little common folk, the unwashed, uneducated, bigoted, and racist. Y'all really do believe that, don't'cha ? Come on, admit it.
So Trump has finally said FU, like he warned he might and let the ACA implode to see what the democrats have waiting as their solution to the train wreck they designed and they knew was coming. They grudgingly admitted, they knew it wasn't perfect when they passed it saying we can and will fix it in time. That is proving to be just as empty a promise as the republican's promise to repeal and replace.
So vat vee gonna do ? The answer so far is Russia, Russia, Russia, and impeach, impeach, impeach as far as the dems are concerned to hide the fact that they have nothing other than Single Payer, which ain't happening in the current climate, especially with the case of Charlie Gard raising its ugly head as the poster child for the reason not to have a Single Payer system. The establishment repubs want Trump to fail, enough so that they are willing to destroy their own party to do it, so they have nothing to offer either.
Who is Charlie Gard ? Unless you watch Fox, you probably don't know. Its not being covered anywhere else meaningfully, because of the damage it is causing to the Single Payer solution. I suggest that you catch up on that.
Ta ta ...
A couple quick points: trump promised throughout his campaign that he had a healtcare plan — a great one, one with heart. One that he would roll out on Day One. In January, he said they were just dotting the eyes and crossing the tees. When will we see this plan of Trump's? Or is the plan he has been talking about for about a year now whatever comes out of the Senate? If he has a great plan, why does he not unveil it? Inquiring minds want to know. And no one is buying this crap about him being blocked by Dems, establishment Repubs, the media, and other swamp creatures. How can anyone stop him form articulating his plan?
when I google the name Charlie Gard, it pulls up a myriad of news stories, from all kinds of sources, not just Fox News. I do not understand why conservatives often claim that some story is being ignored when it is so transparently not so. In my experience, when someone resorts to those kind of tactics, it usually means he or she is lacking a bonafide argument.
There is much to be learned about Jonathan Gruber, the architect of the ACA. He designed and warned about the problem with subsidies and the federal exchanges as early as 2012. This part is headed to the SCOTUS for resolution. Yet another unintended intended consequence of the ACA baked in the cake, yet hidden in order to get it through as quickly as possible. Remember we need to pass it to find out what is in it ? Another piece of Democratic bullshit. They knew well in advance how effed up this was, but party first.
Are you aware that Senator Chuck Schumer, D NY has come out recently and said that the D's blew it with the passage of the ACA ? And how about retiring Senator Tom Harkin, D Ia ( chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee) who has offered his Mea Culpa on Obamacare as well. The ACA is falling apart as y'all were warned, yet denied the truth, because of where the truth was coming from. The truth is the truth, regardless of source or messenger. Y'all better wake up.
Thanks for relighting this thread, Dave, so I wouldn't be accused of restarting the beating of a dead horse.
But it is what it is. Those of us who were against the ACA from the beginning were against it because of what is happening right now. We warned that it was designed to fail, as soon as Obama's second term was over. We warned that it was unsustainable as designed, that it created a whole new dependency on the government, another poorly designed entitlement that would become the hot potato de jour of 2017. But we were laughed at, scorned as racists for warning about the obvious.
Back when this was passed, the republican party was pronounced dead by Obama and the democrats. The whole charade of the ACA was to pass something guaranteed to self destruct with either Clinton or Biden in office when it did.
Why was it designed to self destruct at this particular time one might wonder ? It was designed to implode so that the next democratic POTUS would then finally get the obvious solution to all of our needs passed, A Single Payer government O&O system.
But it didn't work out that way. The republican party didn't die. Instead it rose up from the ashes, dragged back to life by the Tea Party and other like minded people who were fed up up with the railroading of the establishment of both parties. We got Trump instead of Clinton or Bush as the next POTUS.
Single Payer was taken off the table by default because of Trump's election. So now the democrats are caught holding the bag. Sure Trump campaigned, just like all the other republicans about repealing and replacing the ACA. But Trump was the only one serious about it as we now have proof, thanks to the Senate. Ya sure, vote to repeal the ACA all you want when its safe to because it would be vetoed as soon as it got to Obama's desk. But now when it can really happen, look at who is chickening out. They had 7 years to have an alternative ready. Pffffffftttttt. And the democrats aren't saying anything either except Russia, Russia, Russia, cuz all they have is Single Payer as their solution to the mess after 7 years.
Single Payer ain't gonna happen, at least not until the democrats regain control of the government. So they have the same thing as the republicans as their solution to the ACA, which is nothing. Meanwhile, the ACA is imploding as we warned. Everyone on both sides of the establishment aisle are determined to see Trump fail at everything he does. You democrats fail to see that the establishment republicans hate Trump more than you do. Right now the only people who support Trump are the ones who voted for him, the little common folk, the unwashed, uneducated, bigoted, and racist. Y'all really do believe that, don't'cha ? Come on, admit it.
So Trump has finally said FU, like he warned he might and let the ACA implode to see what the democrats have waiting as their solution to the train wreck they designed and they knew was coming. They grudgingly admitted, they knew it wasn't perfect when they passed it saying we can and will fix it in time. That is proving to be just as empty a promise as the republican's promise to repeal and replace.
So vat vee gonna do ? The answer so far is Russia, Russia, Russia, and impeach, impeach, impeach as far as the dems are concerned to hide the fact that they have nothing other than Single Payer, which ain't happening in the current climate, especially with the case of Charlie Gard raising its ugly head as the poster child for the reason not to have a Single Payer system. The establishment repubs want Trump to fail, enough so that they are willing to destroy their own party to do it, so they have nothing to offer either.
Who is Charlie Gard ? Unless you watch Fox, you probably don't know. Its not being covered anywhere else meaningfully, because of the damage it is causing to the Single Payer solution. I suggest that you catch up on that.
Strangely enough in respect to the deficit anyway, Clintons bitter pill is becoming more palatable to swallow:
An analysis by the Center for a Responsible Federal Budget, which crunched the numbers on the available plans of each of the five major presidential candidates still in the race, found only Ohio Gov. John Kasich, on the GOP side, would cut government spending, by about 2 percent.
Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton would oversee a 2 percent spending hike over the next decade, GOP front-runner Donald Trump would raise spending by 3 percent, Sen. Ted Cruz would boost it by 6 percent, and Sen. Bernard Sanders wants a massive 33 percent hike in government outlays.
No mention of the interest that will come due on Obama's debt and the 1 trillion that isn't budgeted yet but has to go into the nuclear triad?Maybe it'll just go away after the election.
Strangely enough in respect to the deficit anyway, Clintons bitter pill is becoming more palatable to swallow:
An analysis by the Center for a Responsible Federal Budget, which crunched the numbers on the available plans of each of the five major presidential candidates still in the race, found only Ohio Gov. John Kasich, on the GOP side, would cut government spending, by about 2 percent.
Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton would oversee a 2 percent spending hike over the next decade, GOP front-runner Donald Trump would raise spending by 3 percent, Sen. Ted Cruz would boost it by 6 percent, and Sen. Bernard Sanders wants a massive 33 percent hike in government outlays.
A lot of conservative partisans will gloat when they see this, but I actually have a different take. As someone who is not caught up in the partisan bullshit and realize most mainstream candidates are full of it, I am actually pleased to hear that Clinton is listening and has a plan to alleviate some of the atrocities of Obamacare and seeing how she is going to be our President whether we like it or not, this is indeed good news!
Chelsea Clinton: Obamacare Has Created 'Crushing Costs'
The idea that an insurance plan that pays for things, with an affordable deductible and a max OOP that has a survivable upper limit... that's derisively called a Cadillac plan... too good for the likes of us. So we should all be happy with a plan that doesn't begin to pay for anything until we've sold a car to meet the whopping deductible, and thanks to negotiated rates, really never pays a penny for anything under, say, $50K worth of broken bones.
The idea that an insurance plan that pays for things, with an affordable deductible and a max OOP that has a survivable upper limit... that's derisively called a Cadillac plan... too good for the likes of us. So we should all be happy with a plan that doesn't begin to pay for anything until we've sold a car to meet the whopping deductible, and thanks to negotiated rates, really never pays a penny for anything under, say, $50K worth of broken bones.
Gruber has collected as much as $6 million in taxpayer money for contracts with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, the Department of State, the Department of Justice, the US National Institutes of Health and several states, including Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Vermont, which this week announced it was severing ties with the professor.
I think what Kurt was saying, my belligerent friend, is that setting yourself as "against" other people here is ultimately a loser's game. Disagreeing with others here leaves open the possibility of actual dialog.
Nevertheless, kudos for using the "I'm a Rebel, Dottie" gambit so early in the game. If we gathered up all the people who claimed to be alone in this hostile environment but are determined to fight the good fight as long as the ammo holds out, we could invade some small island nation and take all their rum and cigars.
