Al Franken Slams Joe Lieberman On Senate Floor (VIDEO)

Gov't funded Medicare has not constrained health costs, nor for that matter abated fraud. . . now they're proposing Medicare rollbacks on medical procedural funding (or so I understand) that WILL in fact impact your grandparents (I'm a grandparent) and I AM concerned.
Government has NEVER done ANYTHING cost effective. . . . . . NOT ONE FOCKING THING!

I'm not saying the government is always efficient, but you're wrong that it never does anything right. I'd like to see militia protect us during times of war these days. You're so obtuse in your view of history. When man is driven by the almighty dollar, people suffer more than they do under representative governments that don't live up to there potential. Your fear in America's government is unfounded. You probably think 'death squads' are real. Ha! It's a simple formula. If people have to be held accountable, then the system is better. Insurance companies have ultimately no accountability when it comes to PROVIDING health care to those that can't afford it. It comes down to what's better; a broken system where only those with enough money can afford to pay for life's necessities or a broken system where the people in charge are put there by your vote and the health care is provided for everyone. If you choose the latter, history is not on your side and the statistics show that countries with some form of universal health care, whether it be socialistic or private in nature, are better than this country. Mediocrity isn't a virtue. I want everyone to be covered. I want people to be able to go to a doctor or dentist when an emergency happens without worrying about going in debt or putting the bill on our feet. If I have to pay an extra 5% of my income, so be it. I don't care if it's private or government ran, so long as everybody is covered and those running it are held accountable for not providing necessary procedures, like treating cancer properly or giving people necessary procedures so the can live. I'd rather pay that tax than to pay to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. Talk about throwing money away. Alexander the Great even gave up on Afghanistan. If he couldn't conquer that region and bring peace to it 2,000+ years ago when he conquered the known world, I doubt we can do any better. Focus our hard earned money on ourselves. If we don't nation build at home, then we won't have a nation worth fighting for in the future.

jayrye, first let me caution you from presupposition of what I may or may not 'believe,' I'm not shy about saying what I think.
How does cost effectiveness and efficiency correlate pertaining to ANY government? - answer: it doesn't.

Then you say, "Your fear in America's government is unfounded." - you've determined that of me how? Do I "trust" my Government? NO. There was a time that I'd have quickly said yes, however that time passed quite some time ago.
A simple cursory glance of our national debt and the governments administrative oversight is enough to scare the shit out any rational citizen.

Then you further hypothycate "You probably think 'death squads' are real." - Shucks Bubba, I have no clue if that is true or not , do you? Do I presuppose that it is now so? - once again, NO. Could it possibly happen? - of course. . . Don't confuse possible with probable (they ride on different horses).

Then you further state "I want everyone to be covered. I want people to be able to go to a doctor or dentist when an emergency happens without worrying about going in debt or putting the bill on our feet. If I have to pay an extra 5% of my income, so be it. I don't care if it's private or government ran, so long as everybody is covered and those running it are held accountable for not providing necessary procedures, like treating cancer properly or giving people necessary procedures so the can live. I'd rather pay that tax than to pay to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. Talk about throwing money away. Alexander the Great even gave up on Afghanistan. If he couldn't conquer that region and bring peace to it 2,000+ years ago when he conquered the known world, I doubt we can do any better. Focus our hard earned money on ourselves. If we don't nation build at home, then we won't have a nation worth fighting for in the future."

- * I agree* -

- * yet* -
Because I and others do not embrace the socialists Utopian ideology as the road map to nirvana does not preclude that we pragmatist care not for our fellow man.

I don't think I have the "right" to raid your pantry for 'fish' to feed slackers (when you may in fact be struggling to care for your own), when it is best served to teach those slackers to fish, and no matter if you admit it or not, we have a nation chock full of slackers who believe it is their "inherent right" to a free focking ride and that the "govmint" should fish for them. . . and then 'my' government is going to mandate that I "fish"(pay) for their sorry asses? Pardon me, but that pisses me off!

jayrye you are wasting time and energy trying to reason with 2hel. Logic and reason obviously play no role in this individuals perceptions. The Govt. is bad in his views and no matter the effort he will not move from that belief.
When the argument presents itself as to the efficiency of Govt. what is the reference point? A private business? Which one? For how long? At one time GM was the envy of most manufacturers..how about now? Financial institutions..like Lehman Bros perhaps? Every entity has it's strong points and it's weaknesses..as to no govt agency does a good job ask the folks who were living in Germany or Japan around 1945 about how inefficient the US govt run military is.

"I'm on the side of the guy who graduated cum laude from Harvard in 1973 with a degree in Political Science."..........who had to steal an election in order to even make it to the Senate.

When government attempts to practice medicine: Doctors respond to government coercion instead of patient cues, and patients die prematurely. Even if the public option is eliminated from the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) health care reform bill, these onerous rationing provisions will remain intact, says Dr. Tom Coburn, a physician and a Republican senator from Oklahoma.

For instance:

* The Reid bill (in sections 3403 and 2021) explicitly empowers Medicare to deny treatment based on cost.
* An Independent Medicare Advisory Board created by the bill -- composed of permanent, unelected and, therefore, unaccountable members -- will greatly expand the rationing practices that already occur in the program.
* Medicare, for example, has limited cancer patients' access to Epogen, a costly but vital drug that stimulates red blood cell production.
* It has limited the use of virtual, and safer, colonoscopies due to cost concerns.
* And Medicare refuses medical claims at twice the rate of the largest private insurers.

There's more:

* Section 6301 of the Reid bill creates new comparative effectiveness research (CER) programs.
* CER panels have been used as rationing commissions in other countries such as the United Kingdom, where 15,000 cancer patients die prematurely every year according to the National Cancer Intelligence Network.
* CER panels here could effectively dictate coverage options and ration care for plans that participate in the state insurance exchanges created by the bill.

Additionally:

* The Reid bill depends on the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in no fewer than 14 places.
* This task force was responsible for advising women under 50 to not undergo annual mammograms.
* The administration claims the task force recommendations do not carry the force of law, but the Reid bill itself contradicts them in section 2713.
* The bill explicitly states, on page 17, that health insurance plans "shall provide coverage for" services approved by the task force.
* This chilling provision represents the government stepping between doctors and patients.
* When the government asserts the power to provide care, it also asserts the power to deny care.

Source: Dr. Tom Coburn, "The Health Bill Is Scary; Government guidelines would likely have forbidden the test I used to discover Sheila's cancer," Wall Street Journal, December 16, 2009.

. . . and the Demoncrats are pissed that Lieberman exercises good judgment and listens to his conscience?

I miss where the government is practicing medicine or denying care. It may be making it possible for insurance companies to do those things, as they already do, and I agree this bill sucks. But the government itself does not have that control over medical care, and I seriously doubt it will with this bill. Quote me where that is stated in black and white.

Simple. . . tell me who decides what procedures are acceptable or not? . . . now who authorizes payment for services rendered?. . .

Sanders should have hired one of those speed readers, it wouldn't be the first time they've been used.

Negative externalities and government rationing and price distortions for the last 60 years is what drove up the cost.....everybody wants to blame freedom while ignoring the government backed corporatist sector that destroyed our free market, are there really this many clueless people?!?!? Why is it so hard to see that our current healthcare system has nothing to do with freedom?

No matter what happens, we'll be getting more and more of the same thing.....

2hellnwait: who decides these things is the insurance companies based on their rate charts, not the governemnt, not even doctors. Insurance companies control all of it based on what they want to spend and what profit they want to make. That's how it is now and that's how it will continue to be under the current bill.

Really Jon? - possibly you may want to reread and research what I posted.

Well I'd like to imagine how the GOP would act towards a Republican who supports this bill against the wishes of the rest of his caucus. You guys would respond the same way and call him a traitor and just about every bad word in the book.

The GOP would be just as angry with someone who "thought for himself"...

Its even worse because Lieberman was for it before he was against it. So in the case of the GOP, I'd like to imagine what the Republicans would call a GOP senator who was against the healthcare bill and then suddenly turns for it at the last second. I imagine you guys would be fuming just the same.

Actually, although unhappy about an adverse decision by a "colleague," the GOP moves on. . . all the more wiser. For the most part, the majority know that vitriol fulfills no useful purpose.

That's not true and you know it.

I don't think so, the GOP have members that are liberal leaning, just as the Demoncrats have their "Blue dogs" - those that are capable of thinking out of the box, and they realize that and move on.
I don't keep a "tally" on those who make the most snarky remarks about their opposition, but it seems to the best of my recollection the left wins hands down. . .

Think for themselves..hmmmm...is that why the Republicans are in lockstep opposition to virtually every bill presented by the Democrats? The fact that there are in fact Democrats who do disagree with their own party is testament that they are in fact the ones who ARE members of the party that is thinking...not just following orders.

That the GOP are in "lockstep" in opposition (as you say) over 'every bill' proposed by the MP, is it possible that it's because they disagree to that which they're proposing? ?
That the MP has problems selling this legislative garbage to a number of their own constituency speaks volumes of the host of their questionable proposals, imho.

Governments stop people from affording healthcare, not freedom......

learn some economics.......

You can keep your price distortions, negative externalities, and slavery, after 60 years of central planned healthcare the last thing I want is more of it!

If you think we live in a free market system you are &^*@(#) crazy!

I will excuse your ignorance this time because you are in over your head with me on this issue. My wife is an upper level executive with an insurance firm, which for obvious reasons will remain anonymous. i won't make jest of your lack of knowledge on this subject..however, if you actually believe that the formulas employed for the pricing of insurance policies are govt. mandated all I can say is that you are in one of two situations...you are either lying...or.. you have been lied to. I'm also not going to waste a great deal of time with you on this because you clearly have an uninformed opinion of how the insurance industry operates.
If it is important to you to have the last word , be my guest.

Since you claim your wife is all important in some anonymous company, we'll just have to take your word as gospel I guess. Thanks for keeping us informed with a great source such as yourself.

Where do you see the term " all important " when I referenced my wife's position within her company? As far as taking my word as gospel, I have no idea what 'word" you speak of..My response was to the lack of understanding as to how the pricing policies are formulated. I gave no information concerning how they were, i only pointed out that that it's an ill informed person who believes that it's some govt, agency that provides the various insurance providers in this country the criteria that determine their policy pricing formula.

Actually it's because Lieberman sucks.

Traitor? Why would you call him that?

Horse's Ass! He's a horse's ass. When talking about Joe L please feel free to use a much profanity as you may.

Do you have video of that hearing? What is your name, you put a lot of information on the current profile, do you think I could get a name to verify all these activities? It would seem you have a resume longer than most, would like to research your work and life, get an idea of where you come from......why you believe in government slavery so much....

oh, and I agree, McCain and berman both suck...