Are McConnell Ethics Charges Valid? |...

Are McConnell Ethics Charges Valid? | Davidson

There are 69 comments on the Roll Call story from Apr 23, 2013, titled Are McConnell Ethics Charges Valid? | Davidson. In it, Roll Call reports that:

Q. I have a question about the recent news of an audio recording of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Roll Call.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#66 Apr 27, 2013
Mike Andidate wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. And that's not what obama promised. He said premiums would not go up and you could keep what you have if you like it. Neither are true.
A senior fellow at NORC at the University of Chicago, Roland McDevitt, director, Health Research, Towers Watson, and Ryan Lore, senior associate, Towers Watson says employer-based health insurance premiums have spiked unexpectedly, according to the latest Kaiser Family Foundation/Health Research and Educational Trust (KFF/HRET) Employer Health Benefits Survey. Premiums rose 8 percent for single coverage and 9 percent for family coverage from 2010 to 2011, up from 3 percent for 2009–2010.
The research also says insurance reforms will affect about 97 percent of people with employer-based coverage, and increased the premiums of group insurance by 1.8 percent. The provision having the largest impact on health insurance premiums is coverage for adult children (0.9 percent).
The ban on limits on lifetime maximum benefits will increase premiums by 0.5 percent and affect about 39 million employees who are policyholders. Requiring employers to offer select preventive services without cost-sharing will increase premiums by 0.4 percent.
Try again. This time try to blame republicans or conservatives or the tea party for obamas lies and incompetence.
We ought to have a not-for-profit government operated single payer system that will pay for health care rather than contributing to insurance companies’ profits. Then we could negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies to make medications more affordable.(Sorry Humana)
Kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#67 Apr 27, 2013
Mostafa wrote:
<quoted text>
Very well:
1)©2013 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.
2) Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.,
3) Ben McGrath (February 1, 2010). "The Movement - The Rise of Tea Party Activism". The New Yorker.
4) Weigel, David (September 14, 2009). "Beltway Conservatives Comb Tea Party Movement for Converts". The Washington Independent
There are tons more. Do you really expect me to do your work? Stop being a hypocrite and start being a useful American! Not a single American in the Tea Party is how you portray them.
Yes, let’s portray them as they really are. As we can see, there’s absolutely no need to misrepresent or exaggerate.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/StDLoTj...
Mike Andidate

Lexington, KY

#68 Apr 27, 2013
Kuda wrote:
<quoted text>
We ought to have a not-for-profit government operated single payer system that will pay for health care rather than contributing to insurance companies’ profits. Then we could negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies to make medications more affordable.(Sorry Humana)
I'm not opposed to insurance companies making money - it's the epitome of the capitalist way. I am against insurance companies having any say in a persons health and medical treatment, although limits on what they should pay for elective crap is completely acceptable.

Example, a pole dancer in Californicatia wants a tummy tuck to look better sliding down the pole would not be the insurance company's responsibility. Right now under obamascare it is completely covered. And we pay for it. This is a small example of why rates wil dramatically increase.

As far as the government interference - well there is enough history to prove they will screw it up if it can be. Just look at the postal service, the congress, the judicial system, the banking industry, etc. Anything they get involved in it becomes: 1) politicized, 2) bloated, 3) inefficient, 4) ineffective, 5) a tax burden.

I'm also in favor of state laws that require group rate reductions when a percentage of a local population sign up with a particular company.
Mike Andidate

Lexington, KY

#69 Apr 27, 2013
Kuda wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, let’s portray them as they really are. As we can see, there’s absolutely no need to misrepresent or exaggerate.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/StDLoTj...
The same type denigrating things were being said about Martin Luther King, Jr when he started his movement and call to action. They are proud to represent just like MLK was!

Is it now the new communist American way to revisit those days?

The Tea Party is a call on the government to stop spending money it does not have. Are you one whose so antiAmerican you don't get it?
Kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#71 Apr 27, 2013
Mike Andidate wrote:
<quoted text>
The same type denigrating things were being said about Martin Luther King, Jr when he started his movement and call to action. They are proud to represent just like MLK was!
Is it now the new communist American way to revisit those days?
The Tea Party is a call on the government to stop spending money it does not have. Are you one whose so antiAmerican you don't get it?
I was kind enough to picture the tea party as it is, and you respond by speculating that I must represent some “new communist American way to revisit” the days of MLK. Of course, it was you, not I, who went on the MLK tangent. MLK may have been no saint, but he helped us progress toward our founding fathers’ wish for freedom, liberty and justice for all Americans. Since you brought it up, as far as I’m concerned, we’re still in “those days,” not revisiting them.

If the tea party is “a call on the government to stop spending money it does not have,” its method is a complete suturing off of the fiscal sphincter, resulting in a total blockage due to obstruction. Of course, you make the same assumption as the the party that buying on credit is a major problem, an argument that is purely hyperbolic. Should the tea party be promoting legislation that would prohibit lending money since people, businesses and nations borrow money they don’t have to purchase stuff they can’t afford to pay for in cash or their gold, silver or platinum caches? Why buy a house when the only housing we can actually afford is a refrigerator carton? Vote tea party! They know what’s best for the middle class.
Kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#72 Apr 27, 2013
Mike Andidate wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not opposed to insurance companies making money - it's the epitome of the capitalist way. I am against insurance companies having any say in a persons health and medical treatment, although limits on what they should pay for elective crap is completely acceptable.
Example, a pole dancer in Californicatia wants a tummy tuck to look better sliding down the pole would not be the insurance company's responsibility. Right now under obamascare it is completely covered. And we pay for it. This is a small example of why rates wil dramatically increase.
As far as the government interference - well there is enough history to prove they will screw it up if it can be. Just look at the postal service, the congress, the judicial system, the banking industry, etc. Anything they get involved in it becomes: 1) politicized, 2) bloated, 3) inefficient, 4) ineffective, 5) a tax burden.
I'm also in favor of state laws that require group rate reductions when a percentage of a local population sign up with a particular company.
Nor am I opposed to insurance companies making money — or capitalism in general, as long as it provides a reasonable measure of human compassion. Let them sell life insurance, car insurance, property insurance, etc. They’re casinos and the house always wins. I believe this is not a good model for health care. If the government managed a non-profit fund, we could provide much better health care for much less money. Plus, we could negotiate much better prices for medications.

It is simply not that government “screws up” everything it manages, though a popular cliché. Of course, it is subject to human error, but then so are all corporations that are run by human beings.

Since: Jan 11

Abingdon, VA

#73 Apr 27, 2013
Huh! My post #70 has been removed. Truth hurts.
Teaman

Abingdon, VA

#74 Apr 27, 2013
It's still there on this device. Odd.
Kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#75 Apr 27, 2013
FYI, your post #70 is missing on my computer too. That is odd indeed.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Criminal Defense Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Scher, Montrose physician and convicted murdere... (Jan '11) 3 hr catnip 8
News Bail set in Hartle rape case, jury selection to... 11 hr Outrageous 61
News Officer: Military adultery ban is unfair to het... 15 hr nanoanomaly 1
News U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch to visit LA... 15 hr nanoanomaly 1
News The Senate Wants to Punish Sanctuary Cities by ... 15 hr nanoanomaly 3
News Dumping case trial date set for ex-Islip officials 16 hr whats wrong 1
News U.S. Attorney issues statement on assault of Tw... Wed Patriot 2
More from around the web