Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

[10ac]

“My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.”

Yeah, blut that was before those whacko Tea Partiers came along.

[AugustWest]

keep in mind that ndaa passed the house and senate by veto-proof votes. that means that enough democrats and republicans voted for the bill that Obama didnt need to sign the bill for it to become law. please vote against every incumbent running for re-election regardless of party. those scumbags have sold us down the river by robbing us blind and eroding the bill of rights.

[AugustWest]

c/p from reddit.

TL;DR The President's opponents played the electorate like a fiddle and will get away with it because people don't seem to realize they've been tricked into being angry at the wrong person.

He signed it because if he didn't, defense spending including benefits to veterans and their families would not have been authorized. The sections of NDAA that many people here seem to have a problem with are sections that were added into the document by primarily Republican legislators and which the President adamantly opposes but was powerless to stop. I'll repeat that: the parts of this bill that many people here hate were included against the President's wishes and in a way that he is powerless to stop. The only way he could have stopped these sections from being included would have been to try to veto the bill in its entirety, a move that would have been both political suicide as well as being futile, as Congress would simply have overridden him. He is explicit in his opposition to exactly the parts of the bill everyone here hates, going so far as to detail exactly which sections he opposes and why.

You'll notice that the bill also restricts his ability to close Guantanamo Bay; this isn't coincidence. These sections are openly hostile to the President's stated mandate - they are effectively a giant 'fuck you' to the President, as well as a nasty way of eroding the President's support with his own base. Observe:

Draft legislation that is almost guaranteed to piss of the President but more importantly piss of his base.

Attach said legislation to another piece of larger, more important legislation like, say, the Defense Spending budget for the entire year so that any attempt to dislodge the offensive legislation will result in a political shitstorm, as well as place the larger legislation in jeopardy.

Once attached, begin a PR campaign that highlights the offending legislation and brings it to the attention of as many media outlets as possible - not just the traditional media, but alternative media outlets as well (Fox news, MSNBC, Media Matters, Huff-Po, Infowars, etc.)

Here's where it gets tricky: Simultaneously, speak to both your party's base and the opposition's. To your base, argue that the legislation is necessary to 'Keep America safe' and that the President, by opposing it, is clearly soft of terrorism and endangering the military by trying to strip the legislation out. At the same time, sit back and watch your opponent's liberal supporters tear into the offending legislation as being dangerous, anti-democratic, and a threat to civil liberties. You know they will; that's what they care about most. You've designed legislation that will make them froth at the mouth. You don't even have to keep flogging the message; one look at the legislation will be enough to convince most people that it is anathema to everything they hold dear. Because it is.

Pass the 'parent' legislation. Doing so forces the President to sign it or attempt to veto it. Since the legislation in question just so happens to be the military's operating budget, a veto is out of the question. The President must sign the bill, you get the legislation you wanted, but you also practically guarantee that your opponent's base will be furious at him for passing a bill they see as evil. Even if he tries to explain in detail why he had to sign it and what he hates about it, it won't matter; ignorance of the American political process, coupled with an almost militant indifference to subtle explanations will almost ensure that most people will only remember that the President passed a bill they hate.

Profit. you get the legislation you want, while the President has to contend with a furious base that feels he betrayed them - even though he agrees with their position but simply lacked the legislative tools to stop this from happening. It's a classic piece of misdirection that needs only two things to work: A lack of principles (or a partisan ideology that is willing to say anything - do anything - to win), and an electorate that is easy to fool.

This is pretty basic political maneuvering and the biggest problem is that it almost always works because most people either don't know or don't care how their political system actually functions. The President was saddled with a lose-lose situation where he either seriously harmed American defense policy (political suicide), or passed offensive legislation knowing that it would cost him political capital. To all of you here lamenting that you ever voted for this 'corporate shill', congratulations: you are the result the Republicans were hoping for. They get the law they want, they get the weakened Presidential candidate they want. And many of you just don't seem to see that. You don't have to like your country's two-party system, but it pays to be able to understand it so that you can recognize when it's being used like this.

[GBJs]

Amazing...I didn't hear anything about the signing on the 9 or the 1.

[AugustWest]

have you ever heard anything about the bill in the mainstream media? I havent. between it's support for sopa and ndaa I think the media has a death wish, because they are an obvious first target for both laws. maybe they're in on it.

[Professor Tiger]

The floor is open to alternatives to medicare.

or education lol

For starters, restore the $500 billion that the Democrats cut from the program. For decades, Democrat politicians have been scaring senior citizens screaming, "THE REPUBLICANS WILL CUT MEDICARE!!! THE REPUBLICANS WILL CUT MEDICARE!!!" Yet which party cut $500 billion from it? The Democrats. Maybe voucherize the whole program, raise the eligibility age, and means test. It's a good program - worth making smart decisions to keep it going - which it won't if they don't make big changes to it and soon.

As for education, voucherize that whole program. Give families in horrible urban school districts a choice to escape to better schools elsewhere, including private schools. The current system cares more about preserving teachers unions power than giving poor inner city kids a chance for a decent education.

[puterbac]

You don't honestly think that 'tick would admit it if Obamacare was having a negative impact, do you?

Keep dreaming.

I explained how the MLR was killing agency business...maybe I was I little too technical for you.

The biggest problems with ObamaRomney Care are:

1. As a country we cannot afford it.

So you are saying the country COULD afford the track we've been on? With all the cost pressures built into our current health payment system?

In 2001, my family of four's tab was 500/mo. with practically zero out-of-pocket. Currently, I'm at 800/mo. myself, the wife is 550, and the last son in college is 120. Deductibles and O-O-P range from 2k to 5k. Only three of us and now we're at almost 1400/mo. Hopefully we'll continue to stay out of the hospital.

Look back at where you (or your employer) were 10 years ago cost-wise; look at where you are now...and interpolate 10 years into the future. Simple.

And expecting govt to fix it is retarded. All govt knows how to do is give away other people's money, promise, everything without paying for it, and to "cut" costs by saying we will only reimburse x amount now.

[puterbac]

Not too many people going into private practice any more. Private practice is the enemy of the gubment. Too many regulations making it harder and harder to do that.

So here is some of our gubment's wisdom. Prescriptions must be electronic or you are penalized and fined/have money taken away from you as a provider. Percocet can't be faxed or sent electronically. They must have a signed origional prescription. Now Lortab, that can't be sent electronically, but it can be faxed.

Now just what makes sense about that? You have to use electronic prescriptions, but you aren't allowed to use electronic prescriptions. That's only two of the ones that can't be electronic, there are many more. Only our gubment could be that brilliant.

Same thing for all the electronic medical records and the increased documentation required and the requirement to allow the gubment to have unfettered access to these electronic medical records in the name of "monitoring".

It's actually prohibitave to go into private practice. They are changing to ICD 10 now, changing the 4 and 5 digit codes for diagnosis making it harder to get the money you earn. If you have an old, valid number but they changed it you don't get paid, but they don't tell you why it just doesn't come in and you have to hope you catch it. They don't provide you with their changes either so you legitimately think that you are submitting the right code but they get to keep your money without ever telling you that they changed the code on you. It is supposed to cost a 3 physician practice 85,000 dollars just to change to the new codes this year. They are important codes too such as a Macaw bite as opposed to the generic animal bite. Walking into a lamp post code as opposed to just the general trauma code. They went to over 140,000 codes now, over 10 time more than they have now. Brilliant.

Then to top it off you have to hire someone specifically to try and go through the payments to hold them to the fire and make sure they pay the contracted amounts. They like to pay for a bundle of 5 to 10 so the check looks OK but you look at each item and find that they were contracted to pay 20% of what you billed but in reality they only paid 5% hoping you wouldn't notice. Electronic deposits into your account makes it easier to say "you accepted it" because it went in automatically before you could make sure they paid what they were supposed to.

Of course you can buy another program to run in the background and try to find this for you too, more unfunded mandate LOL.

Yep. Was at doc office on Thursday. It's costing their group 40 to 50 thousand per doc for records crap plus the people they have to hire. And he did talk about the codes thing and he agrees that it's dumb as hell.

Friend who owns his own biz that deals with Medicare said govt hires outside firms to audit claims. That the contractors are paid by how many they reject so their incentive is to reject. Which forces him to hire attorneys and Medicare experts to fight the rejections. And he says they fight every single one because letting one go by will just give the auditor the idea he can reject more and get away with it. So in the end he has to spend more than fifty grand a year to fight it to get the money he should have I'm the first place which is a cost to him that he either has to at or pass it on.

[Big Orange Junky]

Yep. Was at doc office on Thursday. It's costing their group 40 to 50 thousand per doc for records crap plus the people they have to hire. And he did talk about the codes thing and he agrees that it's dumb as hell.

Friend who owns his own biz that deals with Medicare said govt hires outside firms to audit claims. That the contractors are paid by how many they reject so their incentive is to reject. Which forces him to hire attorneys and Medicare experts to fight the rejections. And he says they fight every single one because letting one go by will just give the auditor the idea he can reject more and get away with it. So in the end he has to spend more than fifty grand a year to fight it to get the money he should have I'm the first place which is a cost to him that he either has to at or pass it on.

Yep, you have to look at every line item and think "how much did they steal from me today", because that's what it is, theft. I performed the work, they have a signed contract saying they will pay me X amount of dollars for performing said work and they continually do not pay for that work forcing me to work at collecting the money they rightfully owe at an increased expense and loss of time.

It's definately geared to push docs away from private practice and into a "salary" from the hospital/gubment. All part of the plan IMO.

It pisses me off so I still go after it every time. I take it personally no different than someone taking money from my wallet at gunpoint. I don't care if it's 20 bucks I'm makin em pay it just on because I don't like to be taken advantage of.

I don't mind giving free care. I give free care every day but I'll be danged if I am gonna let somebody steal from me.

To top it off, in order NOT to get penalized it's not enough to have actually converted to electronic medical records or to prescribe electronically. No you have to fill out the proper paperwork, forms and do it in a manner that the gubment can understand it and file it a certian way etc. It's a beuracratic mess. I don't own a prescription pad, and I have a paperless office. I am and have been 100 percent electronic BUT I am still going to be penalized unless I do extra, non paid work, to prove to the gubment that I am compliant. It should be the other way around, I shouldn't get penalized until they can prove that I am NOT compliant.

[AlabamAlum]

Yeah, you're right in this BoJ: some of the newer requirements are great big crocks of shit wrapped up in a big bow made of red tape. But, unfortunately, it will get worse between now and 2014.

[Toemeesleather]

4 MORE YEARZZZ!!11

[puterbac]

It's all intended to make it worse and a crisis and then to claim ha govt is the only way out aka british/Canada.

[Big Orange Junky]

It's all intended to make it worse and a crisis and then to claim ha govt is the only way out aka british/Canada.

Yep, no doubt

[bluetick]

It's all intended to make it worse and a crisis and then to claim ha govt is the only way out aka british/Canada.

Yes. The US 'gubment' will soon be jailing petshop owners for selling exotic fish. And prohibiting police dogs from entering muslim households. Cause that's what they do in England...according to News of the World.

Yeah, you're right in this BoJ

More proof that 2012 really is the end..

[Jungle Rat]

I hope so

[puterbac]

It's all intended to make it worse and a crisis and then to claim ha govt is the only way out aka british/Canada.

Yes. The US 'gubment' will soon be jailing petshop owners for selling exotic fish. And prohibiting police dogs from entering muslim households. Cause that's what they do in England...according to News of the World.

Yeah, you're right in this BoJ

More proof that 2012 really is the end..

Just fucking awful.

I've posted and talked about the data from Canada and Britain. It's their own data on wait times and access.

You have nothing to say about the data or articles but just slam site posted on. You refuse to even look at the details or data. Hello....meet ostrich.

[bluetick]

Your wait-times and data don't mean squat. Canada and Britain each have an individual-based state-run healthcare system. It is socialized medicine in every sense of the word.

The US healthcare system remains employer-based and is the product of private enterprise. An individual mandate only means that more people are subjected to the whims of said private enterprise. That is admittedly highly regulated. Like the airline industry, and the banking/financial instittution industry (sometimes), and a bunch of others..

We aren't English or Canadian, puter. You get that, right?

sometimes I wonder

[AlabamAlum]

Well, the ultimate end of this will probably be a system very similar to England's (who have a system of socialized AND private pay healthcare).

It'll be okay. The world won't end, just like it didn't in England.

[Professor Tiger]

In a few more years, when we get full-blown socialized medicine, and I need a hip joint replacement or a stint, I'll have it done either here or Ireland, whichever has the shorter waiting period.

[AlabamAlum]

Little known fact: a stent in Ireland is made out of potatoes and they strerilize them with Jameson's.