Go Home

health care

109 documents found in 0.001 seconds.

Drilldown


Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (424)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (5520)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Cue the right-wing outrage over this Friday's Real Time with Bill Maher in 10...9...8... for the way he ended his New Rules segment while talking about the dangers of record income disparity in the United States:

MAHER: If you're rich, you should be begging the government to redistribute your wealth, because you know what happens in countries where there's a huge disparity between the rich and the poor? The rich get kidnapped. It happens seventy two times a day in Mexico.

He went onto talk about people resorting to using flame throwers on their cars in South Africa to stop it. He made a lot of really good points about what's happening to our society in the wake of the latest remake of The Great Gatsby being released, and our new Gilded Age which is worse than the last one. I'm sure all those on the right will hear is that he wants to raise your taxes and the clamor will be "Why doesn't he just volunteer to pay more himself?" -- because we all know how well just asking the wealthy to voluntarily pay more taxes, and only a tiny portion of them actually doing it, would work to solve our economic problems and the huge wealth gap we have now.



From this Monday's Democracy Now, economist Richard Wolff is asked about Bill O'Reilly's remarks last week where he told his audience on Fox that Cyprus and other European countries are facing economic hardships because they’re so-called "nanny states." Wolff responded with a lesson in economics 101 for Bill-O:

AMY GOODMAN: Professor Wolff, before we end, I want to turn back to the crisis in Cyprus and relate it to what’s happening here. Bill O’Reilly of Fox News warned his audience last week that Cyprus and other European countries are facing economic hardships because they’re so-called "nanny states."

BILL O’REILLY: Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, now Cyprus, all broke. And other European nations are close. Why? Because they’re nanny states, and there are not enough workers to support all the entitlements these progressive paradises are handing out.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Bill O’Reilly of Fox News. Richard?

RICHARD WOLFF: You know, he gets away with saying things which no undergraduate in the United States with a responsible economic professor could ever get away with. If you want to refer to things as nanny states, then the place you go in Europe is not the southern tier—Portugal, Spain and Italy; the place you go are Germany and Scandinavia, because they provide more social services to their people than anybody else. And guess what: Not only are they not in trouble economically, they are the winners of the current situation. The unemployment rate in Germany is now below 5 percent. Ours is pushing between 7 and 8 percent. So, please, get your facts right, Mr. O’Reilly.

The nanny state, you call it, the program of countries like Germany and Scandinavia, who tax their people heavily, by all means, but who provide them with social services that would be the envy of the United States—a national health program that takes care of you, whether you’re employed or not, and gives you proper healthcare. In France, for example, the law says when you go to work, you get five weeks’ paid vacation. That’s not an option; that’s the law. You get support when you’re a new parent for your child care and so forth. They provide services. And they are successful in Germany and Scandinavia, much more than we are in the United States and much more than those countries in the south.

So they’re not broken, the south, because they’re nanny states, since the nanny states, par excellence, are doing better than everyone. The actual truth of Mr. O’Reilly is the opposite of what he says. The more you do nanny state, the better off you are during a crisis and to minimize the cost of the crisis. That’s what the European economic situation actually teaches. He’s just making it up as he goes along to conform to an ideological position that is harder and harder for folks like him to sustain, so he has to reach further and further into fantasy.

h/t Raw Story



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (106)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (747)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Sunday suggested that President Barack Obama's health care programs for the middle class should be slashed to stop scheduled sequester cuts from "destroying the military."

During an interview on Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace point out that the White House has said that if the sequester cuts are not stopped then 70,000 children will lose Head Start, food inspections would be cut and $900 billion in small business loan guarantees would be lost.

"You know the president will say that your party is forcing this to protect tax cuts for the wealthy," Wallace told Graham.

"The commander-in-chief came up with the idea of sequestration -- destroying the military and putting a lot of good programs at risk," Graham insisted. "Here's my idea, let's take Obamacare and put it on the table. You can make $86,000 in income and still get a subsidy under Obamacare. Obamacare is destroying health care in this country."

"If you want to look at ways to find $1.2 trillion in savings over the next decade, let's look at Obamacare. Let's don't destroy the military and just cut blindly across board," he added. "The president promised it wouldn't happen, he's the commander-in-chief and on his watch, we're going to begin to unravel the finest military in the history of the world at a time we need it most."

"The Iranians are watching us, we're allowing people to be destroyed and slaughtered in Syria. So, I just really -- I'm very disappointed in our commander-in-chief."



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (71)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (151)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

From this Saturday's The Journal Editorial Report on Fox, host Paul Gigot asks his panel what they expect from President Obama during his second term, and after the initial response from Jason Riley, saying that the president is going to be looking to fund his first term agenda, because "socialized medicine is expensive," fellow panelist Daniel Henninger threw out this stink bomb:

GIGOT: Dan, what about this theory from liberals, which is -- and they're cheering it -- no more mister nice guy. The president is going to take on Republicans. He was way to compromising in the first term -- not that I recognize that president -- but that's the line that they're taking. And so, you know... look, he's going to put them in their place. He's going to demonize them, stigmatize them. Is that what we're going to see? What is that...

HENNINGER: We are going to see it. I mean, the left has been looking for years for an answer to right wing talk radio and they've got one -- the President of the United States. He's like a left wing talk show host.

Uh.... in a word Dan... NO. We've got plenty of "left wing" talk show hosts out there and they're mostly way to the left of President Obama. They went on to complain that President Obama is to blame for making the Republicans look bad and that he's causing them to fight among themselves, as though they needed an ounce of help in that department.

And the Republican health care plan he helped get passed that you all loved until a Democrat proposed it isn't "socialism." These wingnuts just keep pushing that Overton window further and further to the right.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (131)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1076)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Before the election, Rep. Kevin McCarthy said that electing Mitt Romney would mean that Republicans have a mandate to overhaul Medicare: House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy: Election is ‘Mandate’ to Overhaul Medicare:

House Republican Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) says electing Mitt Romney this fall means Republicans have a ‘mandate’ to overhaul Medicare. As McCarthy put it, “If there’s a mandate going through this election, it’s to save Medicare.” As I put it: When Republicans say “save Medicare” they mean end Medicare as we know it. They would keep a government program called Medicare but it would not be the Medicare that has existed for almost half a century. The Republican plan for Medicare is to turn it into a program designed to shortchange seniors while increasing profits for private insurance companies.

We have a single payer health care insurance program that works very well for senior citizens. We don’t need to hand Medicare over to private insurance. Republicans can continue to blame Democrats for doing nothing to “save Medicare” but Republicans are the “kill Medicare” party and they have been for decades.

If what he said on this Sunday's Meet the Press is any indication, McCarthy hasn't seemed to figure out that they lost. And we've already explained here why this trial balloon put out there by the administration, where it seems they've forgotten who won as well, is a really bad idea that needs to be pushed back against forcefully. As everyone explained, even partially privatizing Medicare is not going to "save" the program. It just makes the cost of health care coverage more expensive for seniors.

I was glad to see Sen. Dick Durbin say raising the age is off the table during this interview, but I wasn't thrilled about him offering up means testing. Digby has more on that here: Hot Air Trial Ballooning:

I have a sneaking feeling that Durbin is throwing up a smokescreen there (or he's been smoking some of that special Alan Simpson sensimilla.) He must know that the argument is that Obamacare will pick up the slack if they decide to raise the Medicare age. If he doesn't then he needs to find another line of work.

Even Mitt Romney's health care advisor, Avik Roy from the Manhattan Institute, knows that. Here's what he said on Up with Chris Hayes this morning (with Steve Kornacki subbing for Chris)

"I have to respond to this interesting hyperbole about Medicare death sentence. If you raise the retirement age for Medicare, we have the Affordable Care Act as the backstop. Everybody under 400% poverty level is still covered with the affordable care act in place. So what we are really talking about is means testing Medicare by raising the retirement age. People who are upper income, above 400% of the poverty level won't be subsidized if they're younger retirees. It's where entitlement reform should go, to expand it into the retiree population."

(Kornacki pointed out that ACA is being challenged so it's not exactly a backstop at this point, but he let the topic drop in favor of more masturbation over tax rates.)

It sounds as if Roy and Jonathan Chait may have found the bipartisan sweet spot for Obamacare. Privatize Medicare! Now that really is a Grand Bargain.

Before everyone gets into another tizzy about how shrill and unreasonable I'm being for taking this rumor seriously, let's have a little discussion of what a "trial balloon" is. It is, simply, a rumor that's purposefully spread during a negotiation in order to gauge the reaction. Therefore, it is important to react, not act all glib and self-assured that it could never happen. They want to know if you think this is a good idea, so if you don't you should say so. And you should say it in a shrill enough fashion that they know it's a very big deal, if you think it's a very big deal.

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (340)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (4865)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Ezra Klein took a shot at John Boehner and the Republicans for pretending that they can still repeal Obamacare through the congressional oversight process. As ridiculous as that assertion is, that doesn't mean they're not going to do their best to still attempt to chip away at it where possible, but at this point, pretending that they can use the oversight process to somehow repeal the law, is just ludicrous.

After seeming to come to his senses and admitting that "Obamacare is the law of the land" Boehner quickly changed course and penned an op-ed for the Cincinnati Enquirer, arguing that the law "should be on the table for cuts in a deficit reduction deal." The White House shot that down pretty quickly, but as Klein's fellow contributor at The Washington Post wrote this week, you could still see tweaks to the law which the Democrats might go along with.

And as Klein noted, Boehner is up against the insurers and pharmaceutical companies who are now working with liberal advocacy groups, who both want to see as many Americans insured as possible for varying reasons. One wants more customers and the other wants to see as many people as possible have access to affordable health care.

Rough transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »



Obama to Leno on Mourdock Remarks: 'Rape is Rape'

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (222)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (3030)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

From this Wednesday evening's The Tonight Show, President Obama went after Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock and his comments about conception from rape being "God's will."

Obama tells Leno: 'Rape is rape':

Asked by host Jay Leno about Mourdock's comments, in which the Indiana state treasurer said during a debate Tuesday evening that "even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape that it is something God intended to happen," the president said "rape is rape."

"I don't know how these, come up with these ideas ... rape is rape. It is a crime," the president said. "These various distinctions about rape ... don't make any sense to me."

Mourdock, an Evangelical Christian, says abortion should only be legal when necessary to prevent the death of the mother. He argues it should be illegal in cases of rape and incest. Many who share his faith believe God chooses when conception occurs and that abortion is equivalent to murder.

In a press conference Wednesday, Mourdock accused Democrats of twisting the meaning of his comments.

"I would be less than faithful to my faith if I said anything other than life is precious. I think it is a gift from God. I don't think God would ever want anyone harmed, sexually abused, or raped. I think it's wrong when someone wants to take what I said and twist it," Mourdock said.

The Obama campaign aggressively criticized Mourdock's comments throughout the day Wednesday, and sent an email to female supporters in the evening linking Mourdock to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

"Not surprisingly, Romney is still standing by his endorsement and is refusing to ask that [an ad featuring Mourdock and Romney] be pulled down," deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter wrote in the email. "It's a grim reminder of something he's trying desperately to hide in the final weeks of this election: Romney has campaigned as a severe conservative, supports severely conservative candidates, and would be a severely conservative president -- especially on issues important to women."

The Romney campaign on Wednesday said that the presidential nominee disagreed with Mourdock's comments, but would not ask the Senate candidate to take down an ad featuring Romney.

President Obama also reminded the viewers just what's at stake this election with a couple of Supreme Court nominations potentially in the balance and that keeping organizations like Planned Parenthood funded and allowing women to control their own reproductive rights are not just health issues, but economic and family issues as well.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (56)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (223)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Karoli already broke down this lie that Romney has been telling out on the campaign trail here at C&L. This Wednesday on MSNBC, Willard's number one neocon fan girl was out there doing some history revisionism for Romney as well -- Wash. Post's Jennifer Rubin Pushes Lie That Romney Health Care Plan Covers Pre-Existing Conditions:

Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin falsely claimed that Republican candidate Mitt Romney's health care plan always included a provision insuring that those with pre-existing conditions are not denied insurance coverage. In fact, this is the exact opposite of what the Romney campaign has said.

In a recent study, the Government Accountability Office found that "between 36 and 122 million adults reported medical conditions that could result in a health insurer restricting coverage."

This is why one of the major features of the Affordable Care Act is its requirement that insurance companies not deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions. The ACA prohibits insurers in the private individual market from denying coverage, charging higher-than-average premiums, or restricting coverage to individuals based on the individual's health status.

During the first presidential debate, Romney claimed that his health care plan includes protections for pre-existing conditions. But as CNN reported following the debate, top Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom clarified that this protection only applied to people who already had health insurance, not those seeking health insurance for the first time. [...]

PolitiFact evaluated Romney's claim following the debate that his plan insured coverage for those with pre-existing conditions and found it "mostly false."

But on MSNBC's The Daily Rundown, Rubin stated that Romney's "plan always covered pre-existing issues." Read on...



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (194)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1280)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

From this Thursday evening's Hardball pre-debate and some of the post-debate coverage, Rep. Marsha Blackburn came on initially to field a few questions, playing the part of Paul Ryan for Chris Matthews, with her fellow House member Rep. John Yarmuth taking some questions that Joe Biden might be asked, and par for the course, Blackburn managed to throw a few whoppers out there.

She apparently wants Americans to believe that Republicans are now concerned about making everyone has health care coverage, even though they've repeatedly attempted to overturn the health care law that was initially their own party's response to Hillary-care and their own presidential candidate's plan in Massachusetts.

She also completely punted when Matthews attempted to pin her down on Paul Ryan's stance on this "fetal personhood" legislation that he and his side of the aisle have tried to push forward. She instead went into full attack mode on President Obama over and his policies and just kept repeating that she believes life begins at conception.

I hate to break it to the Congresswoman, but women who don't want to see their birth control pills outlawed, or those, like at least one of Mitt Romney's sons and daughter in laws, who used in vitro fertilization to get pregnant, might want a few more specifics on this topic and not just empty platitudes as we received here.

She apparently decided she hadn't had enough abuse yet on the network and came back on there post-debate, and Matthews hit her this time around for being another one of the Jack Welch, Donald Trump, job report truthers crowd.

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (198)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1410)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed



Daily Show: Barack Obama is the Luckiest Dude on the Planet

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (251)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (3035)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

After opening up this segment with something I could have done without, which is carrying a bit of water for the Fox/Romney theme that President Obama is somehow not doing his job or spending enough time talking to world leaders because he didn't have any one on one meetings while the United Nations was in town and heaven forbid he spent a part of his day appearing on The View, therefore he should be losing this election, he manged to get some good jabs in on Mittens and the GOP clown show he ran against in the primaries.

After calling President Obama "the luckiest dude on the planet" because of the constant string of gaffs and flip flops from Mitt Romney on everything from saying Americans have adequate health care because of access to emergency rooms -- to his claiming he has an economic plan and then telling a group of wealthy fundraisers that electing him alone will satisfy that confidence fairy and magically revive the economy -- to his saying he shouldn't be elected president if he over paid his taxes-- to his double-talk on income redistribution -- Stewart reminded the viewers of just why President Obama is not losing this race given the terrible economy and turmoil across the Middle East and Africa.

Stewart wrapped things up by reminding viewers just how Romney managed to get the nomination to begin with, showing highlights from the Republican primary race. As Stewart noted, "That concludes our segment, Mitt Romney is the 2nd luckiest dude on the planet." I'd have a hard time disagreeing with that sentiment.