Contributors

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Give Me My Damn Government Health Care...Stat!

In what has to be the finest example of hypocrisy I have EVER seen (and I've seen quite a bit every day on here and in the political world), Andy Harris, the newly elected Maryland GOP Congressmen, demanded his government health care a month early.

Apparently, Rep. Harris, who ran on an anti-Obamacare platform, was at an orientation meeting and wondered when his government run health care was available to utilize. Apparently, it doesn't kick in until Feb 1, 2011 which he was not happy with at all. "He stood up and asked the ladies who were answering questions why it took so long, what he would do without 28 days of health care," a congressional staffer related.

Why, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, Dr. Harris!

Dr. Harris then wondered if he could buy his insurance early. No, Dr. Harris, you can't. Sorry...we don't have that option with health care. Remember, socialized medicine is a boiling pit of sewage.

Check out this clip of Dr. Harris demonizing government run health care.



What a tool...

30 comments:

Damn Teabaggers said...

More of a tool than the unions who pushed for ObamaCare and are now getting waivers from having to comply with it, do ya think?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/health/policy/10waiver.html

last in line said...

Would one of you lefties on here tell us exactly who is exempt from the new health care law please. Thanks.

GuardDuck said...

Mark,

The government is now his employer. That would not be socialized health care, it would be part of his benefits package.

As you are a gov't employee, I don't consider your benefits package socialistic wealth distribution - I just consider it money poorly spent.

Anonymous said...

To repeat GD, where does the "government health care start" with this federal employee?

According to the US Office of Personnel Management, it looks like he has a bevy of private insurance providers to choose from. Private companies that you seem to dislike because they offer a service for a price. I don't see an option for 'gov't run healthcare' on the OPM website.

It must seem obvious in retrospect (I'm guessing) that the only thing you can do is admit you were wrong on this topic and got all lathered for no reason, and then reconsider exactly who is the 'tool'.

Will you?


http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/search/plansearch.aspx

last in line said...

Congress exempted themselves from Obamacare anyway.

Angela said...

As usual, all of you have missed the point. The guy vilified government health care and then demanded it early for himself. If government health care is that awful, why is he so desperate to get it? More importantly, why is worried about health care in the first place? The answers to these questions illustrate the lies about health care that have been spread for decades. What struck me, just as it did the aide, is how similar he sounds to every American today worried about their health care and the ridiculous costs.

Last in line said...

Angela, Mark,

You are both calling it "government health care"?

(Here's a link to a website on the internet - where all knowledge exists)

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/health-care-for-members-of-congress/

From that link...

"Members of Congress have good health insurance by any standard, but it’s not free and not reserved only for them – and it’s not government insurance. House and Senate members are allowed to purchase private health insurance offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which covers more than 8 million other federal employees, retirees and their families.

It’s not a "single-payer" system where the government acts as the one and only health insurance company. As President Bush’s chief of personnel Kay Coles James said in 2003, while lecturing at the conservative Heritage Foundation, "the FEHB program is not centralized, government-run health care."

A little less than truthful to call it "socialized medicine" isn't it?

juris imprudent said...

If government health care is that awful, why is he so desperate to get it?

Do you REALLY think you are going to get the same healthcare as Congress-critters and Senators?

HAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahaha

GuardDuck said...

Getting a fact to override a predisposed feeling around here is like trying to herd cats.

Damn Teabaggers said...

As usual, all of you have missed the point. The guy vilified government health care and then demanded it early for himself. If government health care is that awful, why is he so desperate to get it?

And as usual Angela, all you folks didn't "not get" my point, you deliberately ignored it. The unions have been praising ObamaCare to the housetops ever since the debate over it was first joined. If government healthcare is that awesomely awesome, why are they all so desperate to get waivers from having to comply with the law they demanded for the rest of us?

rld said...

You mean to tell me your views can't stomach a couple questions lefties?

Haplo9 said...

Mark has spent a lot of time running away from questions lately, hasn't he?

Damn Teabaggers said...

I'm still waiting for his post calling for an investigation of the Obama '08 campaign's finances.

Good think I'm not holding my breath, huh? That'd be like waiting for blk to extend his criticism of millionaire fatcats who don't want to pay their taxes to, say, John Kerry.

Mark Ward said...

Well, I can't speak for everyone but with the holidays coming up, I've been quite busy with my LIFE and haven't had time much time to blog.

But you could imagine that the lack of response here translates into you winning the argument. Which means you are right about everything, correct?

Damn Teabaggers said...

You can imagine whatever you please, it doesn't matter to me. For that matter, you can post or fail to post whatever you please, and that doesn't matter to me either. It wasn't me who was up in arms over the gazillions of dollars in this last election whose sources weren't disclosed. It was folks like you and, ironically enough, Barack Obama.

And I have to admit, I've been pretty busy myself. But again, it wasn't me who found time to post a dozen or so pieces demonizing Republicans since the subject of untraceable campaign cash came up, either.

A refusal to answer is considered a type of answer by most people. That's not up to you or me.

Haplo9 said...

.. And as expected, Mark shows up to assure everyone that he is, in fact, not running away. He swears it. :)

(Hint: I was just needling you into posting on this thread. You've been running away for 3+ years, so saying that you've been running away "lately" is not alltogether accurate.)

jeff c. said...

Still don't get how someone who posts on a blog nearly every day is defined as "running away." It's a strange world you folks live in. I'm glad I don't live there.

Haplo9 said...

It's known as "defending your positions" Jeff. Like, in the comment threads where Mark's positions are ripped up. I'm not surprised you aren't familiar with it. You don't tend to stick around when the going gets a little tough either.

juris imprudent said...

You don't tend to stick around when the going gets a little tough either.

Hell, the going doesn't have to get even a little tough. You simply ask one relevant question and the thread screeches to a halt.

jeff c. said...

That's actually not it. The primary reason I don't answer many of your questions is that they come from a place that is profoundly rigid and completely lacking in intelligence. If it makes you feel better that it's because it's a "tough" one, tell yourself whatever you need to but I'm not going to placate Bircher drivel.

juris imprudent said...

that is profoundly rigid and completely lacking in intelligence.

Love your tolerance and appreciation for diversity man. Want to talk about rigid fucking moralists? The right-wing religious whackos can't hold a candle to you.

This represents the Westboro Baptist wing of liberalism.

You have no chance holding up your end of an intellectual conversation, but you tell yourself that it is all because I'm such a bad person. I hope that makes you feel better.

Haplo9 said...

>profoundly rigid and completely lacking in intelligence.

Ah yes, us troglodytes could never appreciate the rarified air breathed by you ascended mortals. Just like Mark - always with the self flattery. It's as if feeling morally superior is more important than having a coherent world view to you clowns..

Damn Teabaggers said...

The primary reason I don't answer many of your questions is that they come from a place that is profoundly rigid and completely lacking in intelligence.

Like thinking Democrats should have to obey the laws just like everybody else? Even if they're non-white, or female, or even gay?

Eeek, how narrow minded of us.

last in line said...

We don't have to tell ourselves anything...the whole readership of the blog can see you all avoiding discussion on here. You've had your opportunities and you know it.

Chickenshits!!

rld said...

and still nobody admits they were wrong to refer to it as government socialized health care? Sounds like everything you don't like about the right Angela. Keep looking in that mirror.

oojc said...

Ah, yes. The running away theme again to win the argument. The government health care Harris is purchasing is exactly like Obamacare: private insurance but purchased through a public entity, the government. His employer is the government and he knows that it's better health care than what he has now. So if the government is that bad at the health care biz, why is he so eager to get it? Simple question for any of you anti government health care types: is there any way that the government could succeed with health care? Be honest. If the answer is no, then explain to me the point in continuing this discussion.

Damn Teabaggers said...

Ah, yes. The running away theme again to win the argument.

Feel free to explain at any time why if the SEIU is so in favor of ObamaCare, why they want a waiver from having to comply with it.

So far as I can tell, you guys think if you are against government run healthcare you shouldn't be allowed to get it, but you should still be required to pay for everyone else to get it.

Haplo9 said...

>Ah, yes. The running away theme again to win the argument.

What exactly would you call refusing to answer questions that either a. ask for clarification of your views or b. point out holes in your logic? Not running away? Being nobly silent? For whatever reason, Mark and co like to pontificate about how the world works, without having to deal with inconvenient facts that undercut their positions. Which is fine, but do you honestly expect anything other than mockery for that behavior?

> is there any way that the government could succeed with health care?

The question is ambiguous, so:

To the extent that the question amounts to "does government involvement make health care better", I agree that we would be very unlikely to find common ground. I don't see much of anything that the government does in health care that doesn't either increase the cost of it (mandates, rules, regs), artificially restrict it's supply (again, mandates, rules, regs), or artificially pump up demand. (By discouraging price sensitivity in health care consumers.)

To the extent the question amounts to "what should Obamacare have been such that it would improve health care right now, rather than the waivers-are-needed-to-survive-it monstrosity it is turning out to be", i'd start with two simple changes - eliminate the tax favored status of health benefits to untie employment and health care, and allow insurance companies to compete across state lines. I would also love to eliminate a lot of the economically moronic mandates that drive up the cost of insurance, but to be fair, a lot of these exist at the state level, not the federal level.

juris imprudent said...

Simple question for any of you anti government health care types: is there any way that the government could succeed with health care?

oojc please see this for a complete review of Congressional member health insurance (and special perks).

As you will see, THAT program is exactly like every other employer health insurance plan. Is that what YOU mean by government providing health insurance/care? Because that is NOT ObamaCare including the individual mandate to purchase your own health insurance if you don't have a qualifying employment-based benefit.

You also use health insurance and health care interchangeably - which they are not. So which are you really asking about? Or are my questions too rigid and ideologically suspect to answer?

last in line said...

You get info from factcheck.org (a site often referenced on this blog) and not one of you admits that it really isn't government sponsored, socialist healthcare? Chickenshits!! Not one of you can admit you were wrong...EVERYTHING you always say about the other team...EVERYTHING....and everyone can see it too. Ah well, just go talk about Palin some more.