BlogHer - Sarah Palin - Comments

Am starting to have this problem

genoubug — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:25:43 -0500

I'm 29 but I'd have to say that since I was 27 I started wanting to tone down my wardrobe since giving birth to my son (gave birth at 25). I had to go to our first pre-school "back to school" night at the Montessori school my son will be attending and I was lucky to find some toned down, yet trendy but still conservative enough wear from both Anthropologie and American Apparel. Anthropologie actually had black "skinny jeans" (not exactly jeans, but not leggings either... still a rather thick, forgiving fabric) that fit me and I haven't found pants to fit me since giving birth. I fit in their largest size (31...not sure what this is measuring) but was happy to find sharp pants that could turn out to be both a staple in my closet and a classic. If you approach American Apparel carefully, you can come away w/ very trendy yet conservative/pulled together looks. Be careful though since it is the trend for teens to shop there as of late. Good luck and more advice from anyone please!

My apologies

NOfreelunch — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:25:00 -0500

First off, sorry to invoke the Glenn Beck name again after Kim requesting the opposite.

But I would be remiss without saying that I'm sorry to dianaelee and siditty, in that I had no idea that Glenn Beck had called the President a racist. (Insert joke about "where have I been" or me "living under a rock" here.) The times that I have listened to Beck on my car radio I thought had been frequent enough that I was comfortable he never said anything even approaching racist. All I've ever heard from him are conservative rants, mostly about the economy, health care and the like, on which I have to say I did agree with him the majority of the time.

Notice how in my last post I said "UNTIL Beck...suggests his disagreement with the President is racial" that I thought it was dead wrong to call him so, though. As it turns out, Beck did exactly the same thing that made me so mad in this thread: accusations of racism based solely on a political belief, stereotype, assumption or quick judgment. Beck can suspect the President is "racist" until the cows come home, but who does he think he is that he knows what is in the President's heart? He's not a mind reader. Therefore he must give the President the respect to keep his mouth shut about things he only suspects based on superficialities. He's making an assumption based on his own belief, one that he cannot prove and about which he's jumping to the worst and most offensive possible conclusion.

You've both pointed out that racism is not overt like it was in the past. I realize that. But in a way, that makes accusations of racism from both sides even more vicious, dangerous and divisive. Whether it comes from someone like Glenn Beck or it comes from people who view a mass quantity of conservative thinkers racist just by the virtue of their conservative beliefs, it's so wrong and unfair. It just adds to the hostility in an already volitile political situation.

Siddity, you said in your response to me that because I was defending Glenn Beck that I was "under the impression black people are looking for a free ride and will
do anything to get it, or that we don't work or pay taxes, so this
isn't a concern for black people, just another hand out." In reality, nothing could be further from the truth about how I feel. I only defended him because I thought he was being attacked as a bigot just because he is conservative. Siddity and theprisonerswife, from what I've read here we have no chance in hell on agreeing about health care policy, although siddity I respect the fact that you have based you views on the knowledge and experience you have with the situation. But I would like to make a plea for all liberals/progessives to not be judgmental in assuming so many conservatives are racist (or homophobic or any other type of bigoted). It's become a stereotype that's just been reiterated by your side one too many times for me to stand, and I reacted strongly. As a white person who has always been one to verbally lambast anyone who is being prejudiced against any minority, being called a racist is to me one of the worst insults there is, and it really hurts. There are so many people like me out there who have respect for people of every race, religion, gender and sexual preference--we just have a different view on what boils down to me to be primarily economic and foreign policy. I wish this was the Utopian "post racial society" that so many others would. Maybe you think I'm some sort of racist liar, and if you do there's nothing I can do to change that. But I'm writing from my heart here and I hope that's coming across.

Editors of Femisex.comhiya

Femisex — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 22:31:29 -0500

Editors of Femisex.com

hiya Kim--

Femisex, the suggestion of taxing health benefits has been floated, but it;s politically risky for Obama to go there, since he promised not to do that during the campaign. Do you think he ought to spend his political capital here? And would the GOP take advantage of the flip-flop in 2010.

FemiSex responds: Hmmm, do I care about Obama's career of the millions who need insurance? That is a very easy answer.

Obama is disingenuous--to say the least!-- in saying his reforms will not mean taxing HC benes. His Cost Savings are pie in the sky projections, but taxing health benes is something Americans can bank on now and it will not kick the can down the road to financial ruin. Pay as we go, as it were. McCain had the honesty to say that this is the only way we have to pay for the millions who can't afford coverage. He reminds me of Dole, a terrible campaigner but a reasonable fellow.

Yes, McCain suffered for his honesty. Obama Knows his reforms will increase taxes down the line--no way to do this without taxing the middle class eventually, but why tell the truth when you can make stuff up or tax those vanishing millionaires. It is dangerous to count on a very very few to pay for the very very many --dangerous for fiscal as well as moral reasons.

If our taxes are on the line, it will incentivize each of us to use HC more wisely. McCain ran on this idea; Obama thumped him for it just as he thumped HRC on mandates which he also understood would be needed to get younger folks into the system. Obama now wants mandates and claims, post election to have seen the light on this now.

HC Taxes would allow middle class Americans to keep private ins. and allow help for those who can't afford ins. to gain it. I believe Mr. Obama had the trust of the people to tell us that taxes would be needed to pay for his reforms. Esp. after the CBO shot down his claims on price tags. If only he used that op to come clean. But he has evaded an honest answer on this issue and his capital is already floundering.

Americans are a skeptical bunch for the most part and we know a dog and pony show when we see one. My opinion and what I hear a lot from the public: only the far left has faith in what he says about HC at this point. If I were his advisor, I'd tell him to come clean, risk a single term, and fess up. My guess. If he got rid of public option and got behind taxes on HC benes the economists would get behind him and cheer. The far right and far left would yell and the center would come together.

It may be too late for the center to trust him these day, but I don't think so. And if the centered his plans and let go of his clear desire for single payer system, we all might get something done. I'd remind Obama that he carried 28 state in 2009, no where near a mandate of past elections where the vote came in at 40 states for one candidate.

Don't stop talking

Kim Pearson — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:23:54 -0500

Femisex and Siddity - although you are not convincing each other, you are educating me, and for that, I am grateful.

Femisex, your point about legislation being needed to standardize billing forms is well-taken. I have heard that point made by senior administration officials as well. It will be interesting to see whether this is a provision in the legislation. If I recall correctly, it requires an exception to the antitrust act, right?

Here's my suggestion. If you haven't done so, already, how about using the link widget in this post to mark up the bill at OpenCongress.org, as Nancy Watzman has suggested?

And I have questions for each of you.

Siddity, where do you think that analysts who say the public option will kill private insurance are going wrong in their reasoning? I do see that you are predicting that insurers will change their practices in order to compete. Is there anything else?

Finally, what do you (and others) think of the proposed surtax on high wage earners?

KimBlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|

Editors of

Femisex — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:00:21 -0500

Editors of Femisex.com

Siditty your mind is made up and facts will not change things for you. You want a single payer, period.

Ok, I get that now. But the plurality of the nation must agree for this to occur or we will be bitterly, and i do mean bitterly divided. The minority should not rule the majority or democracy breaks down.

We could go back and forth on the fact that public option will force folks out of their private ins., but that is not something you wish to admit. Bipartisan institutes agree on this issue, with the projections of actual numbers only differing. (that is largely a function of short term outlooks vs. long term outlooks.)

You also say: "Private insurance dollars don't prop up people." There is absolutely no serious disagreement on this issue for those in the know about hospital budgets--that is administrators all know that Medicaid payments would not allow for a functoining hospital--period.

But again, you are intent on single payer, so I now understand you viewpoints.

For those that do not want single payer, there is another answer to covering the those w/out ins.: tax our health care benefits. All those folks flooding into the system will allow the pre-existing clause to work and work well.

I won't engage you on portablity of coverage issues, again no use to go back and forth on something that is not legally permitted as we now stand. You have opted to overlook that fact.

Our best to you!

Any real reform needs to address this more effectively

Kim Pearson — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:04:21 -0500

If I remember correctly, about half of the lifetime health care expenditure for each person takes place in the last six months of life. We can't begin to calculate the cost in patient longevity and quality of life, no to mention patient and family emotional and financial resources, because too few of us have planned properly.

It may make sense to ensure that Medicare and Medicaid will pay for these kinds of consultations. Now my question is whether it's true that the bill would require that health care providers submit proof that the consultation has happened? And do we buy the argument that having this kind of consult every five years will make elderly patients feel coerced into accepting euthanasia? Do we know other countries that do this, and is there any evidence to support critics' claims in that regard? I'm not aware of any.

KimBlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|

IIf you were to get rid of

siditty — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:56:02 -0500

IIf you were to get rid of the pre-existing condition clause, that will drive up the cost of insurance, will it not. A policy with no pre-existing conditions is significantly higher than a policy without. I can say in my experience as an underwriter, it was a rare thing to see a policy without pre-existing conditions because the cost was so great.

After reading your article, I fail to see how rationing with get worse with the article you provided. It just says rationing will get worse, without providing specifics as to how this will occur. I understand how a group that advises on medicare issues with cause a shortage. The biggest issues with medicare itself are fraud and bureaucracy. The lunacy of the "donut hole" still baffles most people, most policy makers even. His cost savings as stated in the article you linked would come from that fact that pharmaceutical companies, like in most other places in the world, would be forced to be cheaper because health costs would be driven down by this plan. Does it not concern you that the same drug in Mexico, Canada, the UK, India, Switzerland, and countless other countries is significantly more expensive here in America simply because the companies simply charge so much because they can?

The article also insinuates that those with private insurance pay for those with medicaid, which is only partially true, there is an assumption all those without insurance are poor and on public assistance, when the reality is, many of those who do not have insurance are those who have been dropped or premiums are so high they can't afford it.

I would also like to see where in the plan it is modeled after medicaid pricing. If you could show me where that is I would appreciate it.

She is right, small business owners and companies like Wal Mart who offer horrible insurance to their employees will embrace and love this plan, but so will their employees who can't afford the premiums or whose insurance is severely lacking.

In terms of Kaiser Permanente type hospital systems, the majority of hospitals in major cities anyway are like that, it is rare to find a stand alone hospital that is not affiliated with some massive network of other hospitals.

Private insurance dollars don't prop up people. They are the reason healthcare is so high. They negotiate rates with the healthcare providers, and so far I don't trust them or the providers to be concerned about the people in general, but rather they have self interests at play.

The article also goes to the notion that people will be forced on the public plan. It is optional.

The plan will help the majority and not a minority. The fact is that even those of us with insurance suffer. The majority of people in this country has health insurance and for those unlucky enough to become seriously ill, these are the people who suffer when having to decide what they can and cannot afford because their insurance has not and will not pay for things to help keep them alive.

I also want someone to explain why CIGNA and other companies still manage to thrive globally even in countries with socialized health care systems. Insurance companies do very well in other parts of the world outside of America. I do not think this system will eliminate insurance companies, it will however get them to review and reorganize how they are run here in America.

The system as it stands now, insurance across state lines does not always work. It can be very costly. It is not illegal for anyone with private insurance to end up in the hospital in another state and get treatment. That would be denying people coverage. Much like if you get sick in the foreign country, the hospital in most countries would still take you, they might charge you, but they will not deny you service, even in countries with socialized health care.

Editors of Femisex.comHi

Femisex — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:13:26 -0500

Editors of Femisex.com

Hi siditty-

Your post, as written, was a bit hard to follow, but I seem to understand that you think we don't want reform. Not true. You ask:

"What private insurers will take those with a pre-existing condition/"

We fully support legislation that gets rid of the pre-existing conditions clause.

Re rationing, we know rationing occurs now, but as we outline in our post today, the rationing will get much worse under public plan--10 years out.

http://www.femisex.com/content/nita-lowey%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Ctown-hall%E2%80%9D-democracy-awol

We also explain in greater detail the mechanics of how the public plan will undermine the entire private insurance industry. I hope you will read this!

Of course, if you have your heart set on single payer system, then you will not care if private ins. goes the way of record albums. But at least we ought to outline how that will come about for the plurality.

Standardizing forms will require legislation to mandate this. We have not tried this with any heart, only fitful isolated attempts. That is a concession Mr. Obama could easily win from the ins. companies if he put muscle into this.

Opening up the insurance companies across state lines will also require legislative changes, so it is not reasonable to suggest that has not worked. In fact, is is now prohibited for those who live in one state to go out of state to get coverage in many many cases.

all best,

"And without private

siditty — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:35:29 -0500

"And without private insurance there can be no functional Medicare or Medicaid/Medical as we know it. The double Ms are propped up by the better payments private insurance pays out. Medicaid pays so little that no MDs can afford to take on those patients."How so? Explain this to me. "With is plan, Obama is consigning millions of middle class Americans to a future of sub-standard care if his plan goes through"Again explain how this will happen and why does it not happen in other countries?" And of course, the cornerstone of Obama's plan is ramped up care rationing. To bring millions under the gvt pay for it system will require serious cuts. That is a Duh! "Do you seriously think your insurance company doesn't do it now? They do trust me. What is considered experimental on many insurance policies, is common wide used practices in hospitals. Ask someone who has chemotherapy about rationing of treatment and having to decide what route to take based upon what their insurance is willing to pay. "For the millions w/out ins. we can start to tax health benefits. This incentivizes cost savings on a nationwide level and allows us to give private insurance plans to those without coverage."What private insurers will take those with a pre-existing condition. You trust private industry too much, I worked in private industry and don't. It scares the heck out of me they get away with what they currently do. "To streamline the incredible hassle of medical billing, we can standardize re-reimbursement forms across all ins. companies. "Been there, done that, and it doesn't work, it has been tried, and it won't work because not all policies work the same exact way and the standardized form would not be able to account for any and every nuance in policies. There is no huge master policies but millions of small policies. "And we can open up state lines so that Blue Cross of one state can compete with Blue Cross of another."They don't compete with each other because they work together. I have Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey, I live in Texas, I use a Texas network to access my insurance, Blue Cross isn't the only player out there, and depending upon your state, because most states have their own insurances boards what Blue Cross Blue Shield does in one state, they can't do in another. You seem to think this policy is going after folks on medicaid, and it isn't. It goes after people who can't qualify for medicaid, but can't pay for COBRA, or can't afford or receive individual policies due to pre-existing conditions. It goes after the working people.

Let's keep Glenn Beck out of this, please

Kim Pearson — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:26:50 -0500

His comment about Obama hating white people was so silly, even his managers at FOX disavowed it.

I don't pretend to discern his psychology or motives, but I do think that the effect of his remarks and approach to issues is racially divisive, intellectually deficient (because I have never seen him consider competing explanations for the limited data that he uses to support his assertions) and generally unhelpful. I know people at FOX who are real journalists and professionals, and I am embarrassed for them that Beck (and others like him) share their airtime.

KimBlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|

Lucinda, Medicare is a

siditty — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:24:54 -0500

Lucinda,

Medicare is a perfect example of healthcare gone wrong. During the Bush Administration to cut down on costs and fraud, it was determined Medicare Part D, prescription coverage be privatized, I worked for two companies that handled this, it was still full of fraud and cost more money because all the insurance companies were trying to get a piece of the pie and it didn't cost any less than when it was in government control.

He isn't vague, you can read the bill for yourself to see exactly what is going on.

Siditty

Racism isn't always obvious

siditty — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:20:47 -0500

And until Glenn Beck says "Obama's policies aren't working for me or even working in general because he's a black man" or makes any suggestion that his disagreement with the President is racial, I still maintain that you calling him or even implying he is a racist just by the virtue of you apparently being some self-appointed mind-reading racism expert is again judgmental, divisive and just plain all kinds of wrong.

Racism extends beyond the obvious, especially in this day and age, which is why with people like you, racism will continue, it goes beyond burning a cross in someone's yard and dragging them behind a truck.

Glenn Beck is under the impression that health care reform was "reparations" and "to settle old racial scores". Last I checked, health care reform was for ALL races of people, and contrary to Beck's belief, which I assume you believe since you are here defending what Beck is saying is that you are under the impression black people are looking for a free ride and will do anything to get it, or that we don't work or pay taxes, so this isn't a concern for black people, just another hand out, which to me is racist, ignorant, and inaccurate.

The Race Card Has Not Been Played

siditty — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:13:37 -0500

I am in awe over how any time race is even mentioned, it is a "card" used to trump any and everything. The whole "race card" is a buzz word used by racists to keep people from accepting or admitting that for some of these people racism exists. From the teabaggers upset about Obama bailing out big companies (even though Bush did this before Obama even got into office) from the birther movement, to this healthcare discussion that only offers dissent instead of real options; I don't see how the race card is used.

This president has been nothing but transparent, we are completely aware of what this HR 3200 is, as public option as it is available for anyone to read.

You call this plan "tired socialism" that marginalizes health care in other countries? How is this, despite the scare tactics Canada, the UK, as well as many other countries have managed to provide great care and still give people the option of using private insurance. You keep assuming this is socialized, as if this would be the only option, private healthcare will still exist. The problem with private healthcare now is it isn't accessible to those with pre-existing conditions, to those who make too much money to qualify for medicaid, but not enough to pay for COBRA when they get laid off, or when the company they own or work for doesn't provide decent coverage. There are bare bones insurance policies out there that exclude everything under the sun, including pregnancy and prenatal care.

Under a private plan you don't have choices. You go out of your network and see how much choice you have and how much your insurance company is willing to pay. You have a choice of doctors on an approved list, you don't get to choose ANY doctor. Trust me with your current insurance plan, you don't have as much choice as you think, and I want to add, there is nothing in this single payer option plan that states you will not have a choice in doctors.

You say people come to the United States for care, but you forget many other people go to other countries for their treatment because our treatment is unaffordable. I have known people to go to Mexico to get their hernia operations because without insurance here in America it is simply unaffordable. My brother who has narcolepsy can not afford his medication and often gets it from either Canada or India because in those countries, the same exact medication is significantly cheaper.

You are concerned about people waiting. Ask the family of Nataline Sarkisyan why she had to wait for a transplant because her insurance company refused to pay for it. She died waiting. Tell me how easy and quick it is to appeal a denial on a claim. I can tell you as a former claims manager for a healthcare company, the one Nataline Sarkisyan died waiting on, that it can be very time consuming and if you are dying of cancer, you sometimes don't have that much time.

What countries are "below the level of excellence"? I have yet to see this answer from you or anyone else opposing this. It is frustrating to hear the same accusations over and over with no evidence to back it up.

I come from healthcare my first jobs out of college were in insurance. I wrote and priced group insurance policies as an underwriter, reviewed claims as a claims manager, I have even worked as an insurance analyst, I know healthcare, and what you think you have, is completely different than what you have.

I doubt you have as much choice as you think you do and that your insurance is paying for random tests to give you a piece of mind. The bottom line is healthcare prices have been driven up and the only folks profiting are those in the healthcare and insurance industries, while working people suffer. Believe it or not in America you can get subpar treatment, even with insurance.

Siditty

I strongly disagree

NOfreelunch — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 15:35:18 -0500

As much as I hate to take this any further, as it annoys me that racism debates are even taking up space in what is supposed to be a helpful open forum on health care, I disagree about as much as is humanly possible with what you've said, dianaelee. You're calling it "disingenuous" to "ignore some of the racism underlying" political disagreement with a President of the United States? So then, you're saying that while not EVERYONE is a racist who has a dissenting political opinion, some are, and it's "underlying" within their statement? So then when anyone has an opinion of political dissent who is white, Latino, Asian, Pakistani--essentially any race who could qualify as being physically capable of being racist against a black President, they must first be suspected of being secretly racist, even though they have said nothing except that they don't agree with the issue? Again, you have to be kidding me.

What a riot that lefties all over were furious claiming that anyone was even lightly implying that they were not patriotic if they dissented with Bush. I don't blame them for being angry at the label, either. They made a federal case out of it and still are. But now, anyone with even one conservative viewpoint has to endure being called a racist because they have the circumstance of having a black President and they don't agree with him? Gee, I wonder which label is more offensive. Racist or "unpatriotic?" Is there even any comparison there? Considering one is actually libelous, I think not.

And until Glenn Beck says "Obama's policies aren't working for me or even working in general because he's a black man" or makes any suggestion that his disagreement with the President is racial, I still maintain that you calling him or even implying he is a racist just by the virtue of you apparently being some self-appointed mind-reading racism expert is again judgmental, divisive and just plain all kinds of wrong. Who do you think you are lobbing serious and ridiculously offensive accusations like that at someone with absolutely no legitimate reason to think it's the truth?

Respectfully

dianaelee — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:21:17 -0500

Obviously not everyone opposed to the President's reform ideas is a racist, but it is disengenuous to ignore the racism that underlies some of the comments lamenting what is happening to our country, particularly when an albeit small, but alarmingly vocal minority don't even believe he is qualified to be President because he was born in Hawaii.

Racism no longer tends to be overt. Instead, the message comes through loud & clear through particular attitudes and behaviors that reveal these views.

I offer up Glenn Beck as one prime example of this attitude.

Visit me at Somebody Heal Me: The Musings of a Chronic Migraineur

Follow me on Twitter @somebodyhealme