The new (Suicidal) GOP establishment

There are 20 comments on the Feb 4, 2013, New York Post story titled The new (Suicidal) GOP establishment. In it, New York Post reports that:

The New Establishment's leaders claim to speak for the very loose agglomeration of voters who gathered three years ago under the banner of the Tea Party, and they angrily assert that anyone who has a different view of how best to achieve conservative aims isn't a conservative at all.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at New York Post.

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#86 Feb 7, 2013
serfs up wrote:
<quoted text> Same old... same old.
Yes, Same old... same old 'serf's out' drivel.
serfs up

Kissimmee, FL

#87 Feb 7, 2013
Mykro wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, Same old... same old 'serf's out' drivel.
What are you talking about, Saul?
serfs up

Kissimmee, FL

#88 Feb 7, 2013
Buffalo Bull wrote:
<quoted text>
Health care has had 'Death panels' for years.
These existing Death panels use corporate profits to determine level of care that you will receive.
Obama's health care would eliminate two levers that private companies use as reasons for denying care. Existing conditions and hard caps on care.
A publicly controlled death panel would in be required to take into account, available funds as well the effectiveness of the proposed treatment. An insurance company already determines which drugs you may or may not receive by their covering or not covering the drug that your doctor has prescribed .
Either way some one will determine the care you will receive.
If it is an insurance company it will be profit that will become the determining factor
A publicly controlled board would be subjected to and more sensitive to political pressure thus, far easier to to influence
If you believe that no one was limiting your care under the for profit model, you need to look again
.
I have family members tha thave not seen death panels. But maybe it is different in Buffalo.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#89 Feb 7, 2013
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
Our money woes are over debt, the driver of our debt is entitlement spending. How you figure that is bush s fault?
Geez...i forgot, did President Obama creat the recession AND introduce entitlements to America?......

“Moderately yours....”

Since: Aug 12

Buffalo, NY

#90 Feb 7, 2013
serfs up wrote:
<quoted text> I have family members tha thave not seen death panels. But maybe it is different in Buffalo.
I have no idea what company covers you..
Read the literature that came with it.
Plainly writen is a list of covered providers.
If your doctor is out side of the plan, you will not be covered
Ask you doctor if he or she has ever had to alter a prescripton or treatment to get it to conform to insurance company specs.

As I rule I would not to us personal information here.
But.
Maybe things are diffrent in Buffalo.
in 2007I was denied coverage for Hepititus c treatment due to a hard cap set inplace by Independent Health.
Fortunatly i was able to switch to my wifes plan and, in 2011 I required a second round, which killed the virus.

Not every treatment nor every doctor will be covered under any plan. someone draws the line as to what is allowed. It is reasonable to say you would place more faith in a profit motive control, by a free maket provider
But to say there is no shaping treatment to fit insurance companies specs is plainly incorrect
Billy Ringo

United States

#91 Feb 7, 2013
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>Geez...i forgot, did President Obama creat the recession AND introduce entitlements to America?......
Yes he did !!!!

And he also started unfunded wars in Iraq in Afghanistan.
Robert

Douglasville, GA

#92 Feb 7, 2013
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>Geez...i forgot, did President Obama creat the recession AND introduce entitlements to America?......
Geez did bush create the recession, how ??? What laws did he sigh or policies did he create and how did it cause the recession?

He did not and it does not matter because the recession is not the driver of our long term debt. Even his wars are a short term problem, if you could sap your fingers and and the debt from iraq and afghanistan was paid for we would still be looking down the barrel of a debt gun.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#93 Feb 7, 2013
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
Wanting to keep religion and government separate does not mean you hate religion and being pro choice does not mean you love abortions.
You won't get any argument from me.
I'm pro-choice, even though I wish abortions never had to happen. I just don't think women should be forced into bearing children they don't want.
I don't hate religion, either. If someone has a strongly held belief, I have no quarrel with it. Even if I don't agree, I don't get offended or feel like they're trying to "force" their religion on me. They have as much right to it as I have to dismiss it.
Free speech grants us all the right to an opinion, whether we like those opinions or not.
Freedom of religion grants us all the right to a belief, or not to believe at all.
If someone is opposed to abortion because of a religious belief, they have the right to that, and the right to express it, as well.
It would only run afoul of the Constitution if a state or the fed tried to implement a law in the name of or based on a religious concept.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#94 Feb 7, 2013
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>A plan for universal healthcare, is not the same topic....stay on point....
It may not be the same topic, but universal (government) healthcare can say what we can and can't do with our bodies.
And, according to your own quote "...neither party has any right at all to the telling of people what they can or cannot do with our bodies...it's our most basic freedom."
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#95 Feb 7, 2013
Buffalo Bull wrote:
<quoted text>
Health care has had 'Death panels' for years.
These existing Death panels use corporate profits to determine level of care that you will receive.
Obama's health care would eliminate two levers that private companies use as reasons for denying care. Existing conditions and hard caps on care.
A publicly controlled death panel would in be required to take into account, available funds as well the effectiveness of the proposed treatment. An insurance company already determines which drugs you may or may not receive by their covering or not covering the drug that your doctor has prescribed .
Either way some one will determine the care you will receive.
If it is an insurance company it will be profit that will become the determining factor
A publicly controlled board would be subjected to and more sensitive to political pressure thus, far easier to to influence
If you believe that no one was limiting your care under the for profit model, you need to look again
.
Read the above post to understand the nature of my comment.
Though we are covered by insurance, I've only had one incident to date for which the insurance company wouldn't pay. We promptly paid out of pocket. We determined, in fact, that the procedure would proceed.
We would all do well to grasp that notion. To go back to having fat savings accounts, even if it means smaller houses, older appliances and autos and not needing closets the size of bedrooms, stuffed to overflowing with our "stuff".
We're growing far too reliant on others to take care of us. We can b!tch and scream about for profit health care, crooked insurance companies and the equally crooked elected officials in Washington, but it's not going to change a thing.
Even in all the countries with government health care, those who can pay buy better health care for themselves, by hook or by crook. And no matter if it's a government board or an insurance board, nothing will change here, either.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#96 Feb 8, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
It may not be the same topic, but universal (government) healthcare can say what we can and can't do with our bodies.
And, according to your own quote "...neither party has any right at all to the telling of people what they can or cannot do with our bodies...it's our most basic freedom."
Does calling it government healthcare, make it easier for you to slam it? Tell me, what the abortion debate have to do with your insurance coverage? If you want to continue playing word games, pleeeeeaaase respond to another.......
Robert

Douglasville, GA

#97 Feb 8, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
You won't get any argument from me.
I'm pro-choice, even though I wish abortions never had to happen. I just don't think women should be forced into bearing children they don't want.
I don't hate religion, either. If someone has a strongly held belief, I have no quarrel with it. Even if I don't agree, I don't get offended or feel like they're trying to "force" their religion on me. They have as much right to it as I have to dismiss it.
Free speech grants us all the right to an opinion, whether we like those opinions or not.
Freedom of religion grants us all the right to a belief, or not to believe at all.
If someone is opposed to abortion because of a religious belief, they have the right to that, and the right to express it, as well.
It would only run afoul of the Constitution if a state or the fed tried to implement a law in the name of or based on a religious concept.
Republicans would be better off to change their party platform on abortion to our desire is that abortions are rare but legal, that way they could still promote things to reduce unwanted pregnancies and still can promote alternatives to abortion like adoption and leave women to make the choice.

“Moderately yours....”

Since: Aug 12

Buffalo, NY

#98 Feb 8, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the above post to understand the nature of my comment.
Though we are covered by insurance, I've only had one incident to date for which the insurance company wouldn't pay. We promptly paid out of pocket. We determined, in fact, that the procedure would proceed.
We would all do well to grasp that notion. To go back to having fat savings accounts, even if it means smaller houses, older appliances and autos and not needing closets the size of bedrooms, stuffed to overflowing with our "stuff".
We're growing far too reliant on others to take care of us. We can b!tch and scream about for profit health care, crooked insurance companies and the equally crooked elected officials in Washington, but it's not going to change a thing.
Even in all the countries with government health care, those who can pay buy better health care for themselves, by hook or by crook. And no matter if it's a government board or an insurance board, nothing will change here, either.
My main point was to refute the 'Gov't death panel' canard.
It sounds as if you are agree. For profit companies have their own 'death panels'. It is a raw fact that having someone draw the line determining what services are available, is not a creation of Obama, as was claimed.

I can see Canada from my back yard. I have competed against canadian hockey players for years .
People cross the boarder here and mingle freely. They are not impoverished and sick because of their gov't run health care system. They pay 2\3 of the cost that we pay per capita And everyone has access to basic care. And they live longer. And their stats on infant mortality put ours to shame. All that separates us is about 200 yards of fast moving water, so environmental factors can be taken off of the table..
I submit, that the alternative system is not the horror show that some, politically inspired people claim.
Robert

Douglasville, GA

#99 Feb 8, 2013
Buffalo Bull wrote:
<quoted text>
My main point was to refute the 'Gov't death panel' canard.
It sounds as if you are agree. For profit companies have their own 'death panels'. It is a raw fact that having someone draw the line determining what services are available, is not a creation of Obama, as was claimed.
I can see Canada from my back yard. I have competed against canadian hockey players for years .
People cross the boarder here and mingle freely. They are not impoverished and sick because of their gov't run health care system. They pay 2\3 of the cost that we pay per capita And everyone has access to basic care. And they live longer. And their stats on infant mortality put ours to shame. All that separates us is about 200 yards of fast moving water, so environmental factors can be taken off of the table..
I submit, that the alternative system is not the horror show that some, politically inspired people claim.
They may not be called that but their has always been and always will be death panels, a lot of cutting edge and complex medical treatments are in limited supply due to the capacity to perform them. There has always been some kind of limitation to them. Under Canadian federal law, private clinics are not legally allowed to provide services covered by the Canada Health Act but they do and government truns a blind eye to it because they are unable to furnish the services demanded and private clinics and trips to the us take up the slack so I am not so impressed. Private clinics typically offer services with reduced wait times compared to the public health care system. For example, obtaining an MRI scan in a hospital could require a waiting period of months, I can get one the next day.

Whats more where would the Canadian system be without the advances provided the world by the us for profit system.

What ever the government touches turns to s#it, we are going to run out of money because government does not know how to handle money like the for profit world does and it is going to be a really big deal.

“Moderately yours....”

Since: Aug 12

Buffalo, NY

#100 Feb 8, 2013
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
They may not be called that but their has always been and always will be death panels, a lot of cutting edge and complex medical treatments are in limited supply due to the capacity to perform them. There has always been some kind of limitation to them. Under Canadian federal law, private clinics are not legally allowed to provide services covered by the Canada Health Act but they do and government truns a blind eye to it because they are unable to furnish the services demanded and private clinics and trips to the us take up the slack so I am not so impressed. Private clinics typically offer services with reduced wait times compared to the public health care system. For example, obtaining an MRI scan in a hospital could require a waiting period of months, I can get one the next day.
Whats more where would the Canadian system be without the advances provided the world by the us for profit system.
What ever the government touches turns to s#it, we are going to run out of money because government does not know how to handle money like the for profit world does and it is going to be a really big deal.
The is always some one who has to say no.
there are flaws in either system . their systems flaws do cause inconvenience but don't cost life where as our systems flaws cost us a lots of $$$. I do believe that if we could cut through the baldersquat and create some hybrid we might be best off.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#101 Feb 8, 2013
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>Does calling it government healthcare, make it easier for you to slam it? Tell me, what the abortion debate have to do with your insurance coverage? If you want to continue playing word games, pleeeeeaaase respond to another.......
While I often find myself ageeing with you, you're pettifogging on this little debate.
Plainly put, you stated that control over our own bodies is our most basic freedom and that neither party has any right to tell us what we can do.
And I simply said you must not like Obamacare.
You are the one playing word games. The only question that remains is: "Why?"
Abortion came up in response to another poster. Keep up if you wish to play topic moderator.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#102 Feb 8, 2013
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
Republicans would be better off to change their party platform on abortion to our desire is that abortions are rare but legal, that way they could still promote things to reduce unwanted pregnancies and still can promote alternatives to abortion like adoption and leave women to make the choice.
Republicans, like Democrats, respond to their base, and if they become the other party, then we'll have a one party system.
I'm pretty sure that's not a good idea.
Their "platform", which we heard a lot about in this last election cycle, doesn't actually represent all who run on an R ticket and seems like a far right wish list that has barely changed in thirty years.
It's also a farfetched wish list, particularly concerning the angst over the R's overturning Roe v Wade. Though some R's may wish to, it can't happen.
But that didn't stop a lot of people from buying the hype.
Many of us wish abortions were rare, yet they aren't, though the numbers have been declining. And as we've seen with several clinic busts, too many aren't legal, women are being rendered infertile, being infected with deadly diseases due to lack of proper sterilization, having their organs perforated and some have even died. I won't even go into what happens to some of those nearly full term...fetuses.
Yet, my party won't even acknowledge these cases, let alone address it, and that's not good, either.
Given the highly charged, highly emotional state of this debate, neither side, unfortunately, is going to budge any time soon.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#103 Feb 8, 2013
Buffalo Bull wrote:
<quoted text>
My main point was to refute the 'Gov't death panel' canard.
It sounds as if you are agree. For profit companies have their own 'death panels'. It is a raw fact that having someone draw the line determining what services are available, is not a creation of Obama, as was claimed.
I can see Canada from my back yard. I have competed against canadian hockey players for years .
People cross the boarder here and mingle freely. They are not impoverished and sick because of their gov't run health care system. They pay 2\3 of the cost that we pay per capita And everyone has access to basic care. And they live longer. And their stats on infant mortality put ours to shame. All that separates us is about 200 yards of fast moving water, so environmental factors can be taken off of the table..
I submit, that the alternative system is not the horror show that some, politically inspired people claim.
I do agree. Obamacare isn't doing anything that insurance companies don't already do.
I have traveled extensively in Canada (Ontario and Quebec)in what started many moons ago through business and now because we really like it and have made a lot of good friends north of the border.
And I LOVE hockey. What positon do you play? In my youth, I'd play pond hockey (when those French Canadian boys allowed it)...I turned out to be a darned good goalie, much to their frustration! I mean, I'm just a girl.
As far as their health care system, in recent years, as our families and parents age, we can see some drawbacks, particularly in areas of diseases like cancer.
The U.S. is far more aggressive in treating it, especially in cases that are deemed inoperable or incurable. Our system of deliver is much faster, too, which is a key element with cancer.
Consequently, our cure rate and survival rates are higher here in the U.S..
And when the health care debate started in 2009, I did research and compared a lot of stats...our infant mortality rates are higher, but the statistics aren't uniform, not only between the U.S. and Canada, but throughout the world. What one country counts as fatality, another country counts a miscarriage. By a uniform statisical measure, we are still higher, but the gap is much narrower and there are two areas where the U.S. population differs from populations in other industrialized countries that do explain the difference.
Our system is expensive, but as I'm sure you know, Canadians pay much higher taxes on everything (Fed income, Provincial income, Fed and Provincial Sales tax), not to mention much higher prices on goods. Only three weeks ago, a couple came to visit for three days, and we had to shop for a flat screen (I hate shopping). They saved nearly $220 compared to the same TV and chain store in Quebec and it was under the newly raised duty rate at the border.
So I made them buy us dinner.
Neither system is as bad as the politically inspired make it out to be, but that is the trouble with politics, isn't it?
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#104 Feb 8, 2013
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
They may not be called that but their has always been and always will be death panels, a lot of cutting edge and complex medical treatments are in limited supply due to the capacity to perform them. There has always been some kind of limitation to them. Under Canadian federal law, private clinics are not legally allowed to provide services covered by the Canada Health Act but they do and government truns a blind eye to it because they are unable to furnish the services demanded and private clinics and trips to the us take up the slack so I am not so impressed. Private clinics typically offer services with reduced wait times compared to the public health care system. For example, obtaining an MRI scan in a hospital could require a waiting period of months, I can get one the next day.
Whats more where would the Canadian system be without the advances provided the world by the us for profit system.
What ever the government touches turns to s#it, we are going to run out of money because government does not know how to handle money like the for profit world does and it is going to be a really big deal.
When my friends were here three weeks ago, I was asking them about those private clinics (she's a nurse).
They buy health insurance through her job just like we do, because it covers a lot of things that the government system doesn't. Their insurance wouldn't be too helpful with the clinics and their complaint was that you need money, in many cases. There is still some waiting, though not for as long the regular system, for tests like MRI's and CT scans, but the clinics are flourishing and should be able to acquire more equipment in short order.
That aside, the majority of them are on Canada's west coast...but the government is turning a blind eye.
Basicly, if you have money, you can buy swifter healthcare, but that's true in many countries with "government" systems.

Since: Jan 12

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

#105 Feb 9, 2013
Dear Republicans,

Here's a hint: it's your policies not how your language to try to "reach out" to minorities.

Let's look at the GOP platform of 2012:

* Ban all abortions under all circumstances.
* Ban gay marriage federally overriding several states that have same-sex marriage.
* Continue the failed war on drugs that disproportionately effects blacks and Latinos.
* No amnesty for millions of immigrants in America who do lots of hard work for us.
* Impose draconian cuts on social programs for the poor.
* Support tax policies that overwhelming fair the rich and tax the middle class and poor more.
* Deny the existence of global warming.
* Deny the existence of evolution.
* Deny the existence of science and rational thinking in general.

It's your policies we hate. You can put up a bunch of token minorities like Herman Cain or Marco Rubio but it doesn't mean we will vote for them.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

US Senate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Chris Matthews slams racist GOP dogwhistles: Re... 5 min californio 47
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min Tinka 1,219,718
News Labor Department says it can't investigate So C... 9 min AMNESTY 8
News 2016 GOP Hopefuls Hold Fire After Drone Disclos... 10 min barefoot2626 15
News Ben Carson plans May 4 Detroit announcement 17 min barefoot2626 204
News POLL Marco Rubio jumps to the head of GOP 2016 ... 26 min barefoot2626 21
News Thought We had a Deal: Iran leaders blast Us, m... 28 min barefoot2626 325
More from around the web