If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Balloon Juice)   On Tuesday, Soledad O'Brien insulted a Romney spokesman by pointing out he was full of shiat. Well, she went on TV yesterday and apolog - wait, strike that. She pointed out again how full of shiat he was   (balloon-juice.com) divider line 227
    More: Followup, Soledad O'Brien, John Sununu, soylent greens, second shift, romney  
•       •       •

6788 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Aug 2012 at 3:57 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



227 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-16 11:06:39 AM
Wow, its like actual journalism or something.
 
2012-08-16 11:30:55 AM

DamnYankees: Wow, its like actual journalism or something.


And it won't matter in the slightest. The people who are smart enough to see through the lies aren't going to vote GOP, and the people who aren't will attack anything that doesn't agree with them. The CBO will be a mouthpiece of George Soros, world-renown economists (liberal and conservative alike) will be communist conspirators, and confirmation bias will once again put the entire country at risk of economic meltdown.
 
2012-08-16 11:32:22 AM
And the GOP shills will go on every other 'news' show, spout off the exact same lie, and the interviewer will let it slide without blinking an eye.
 
2012-08-16 11:33:30 AM
soledad is shouting into the wind. the other 99.999 percent of the media will happily repeat the GOP's talking points or at least not refute them with facts, in order to maintain the illusion of 'balance.'
 
2012-08-16 11:39:09 AM
Good. For. Her.

Every news org should be treating lies in this fashion.
 
2012-08-16 12:04:15 PM
I believe Sununu's next crap will come from several different orifices.
 
2012-08-16 12:08:36 PM

Dinki: And the GOP shills will go on every other 'news' show, spout off the exact same lie, and the interviewer will let it slide without blinking an eye.


And they'll toss in Soledad as an example of how the mainstream media is unfairly biased against bullshiat.
 
2012-08-16 12:16:20 PM
Wow. I just watched the initial video and my god, the man really didn't have anything other than a talking point to continue repeating. He's clearly not used to having them debunked right in his face. You can see him looking dejected while she tears into him.
 
2012-08-16 12:20:46 PM
Man, that lady is unflappable. She could not be flapped.
 
2012-08-16 12:45:29 PM

Quasar: Man, that lady is unflappable. She could not be flapped.


Well, I'd flap her, if you know what I mean. Watching her kick Sununu's ass was kinda sexy.
 
2012-08-16 01:06:21 PM

Quasar: Man, that lady is unflappable. She could not be flapped.



(looks at pic of Soledad) flap flap flap flap flap flap flap flap
 
2012-08-16 01:15:51 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Wow. I just watched the initial video and my god, the man really didn't have anything other than a talking point to continue repeating. He's clearly not used to having them debunked right in his face. You can see him looking dejected while she tears into him.


For a second, you almost expect Sununu to say, "this is outrageous. I'm a politician; we're allowed to lie and you're not supposed to make a big deal abou it."

It wouldn't be a new tactic for people like him. Remember when Scooter Libby broke multiple federal criminal statutes in defending the Bush administration against charges of fraudulently ginning up support for the Iraq war? Enablers claimed that prosecuting Libby would essentially be "criminalizing politics."

These people seriously believe that lying is a perfectly legitimate political strategy...and any news organization or prosecutor who denies them that "right" isn't playing fair.
 
2012-08-16 01:18:24 PM
Have no fear - the greatest thinker in the modern GOP has already crafted a ready-made response:

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."
 
2012-08-16 01:22:40 PM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: Have no fear - the greatest thinker in the modern GOP has already crafted a ready-made response:

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."


Please tell me that's not a real quote. 

Please.
 
2012-08-16 01:23:42 PM

sigdiamond2000: Mr. Coffee Nerves: Have no fear - the greatest thinker in the modern GOP has already crafted a ready-made response:

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

Please tell me that's not a real quote. 

Please.


Sarah Palin quote.
 
2012-08-16 01:26:39 PM
I wish Sununu would learn how to be a decent human being.
 
2012-08-16 01:28:19 PM

mr_bunny: sigdiamond2000: Mr. Coffee Nerves: Have no fear - the greatest thinker in the modern GOP has already crafted a ready-made response:

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

Please tell me that's not a real quote. 

Please.

Sarah Palin quote.


For real? Wouldn't surprise me. She's the queen of "asking me a substantive, fact-based question is an attack."
 
2012-08-16 01:28:32 PM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: Have no fear - the greatest thinker in the modern GOP has already crafted a ready-made response:

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."


So the greatest threat to the First Amendment is the First Amendment?
 
2012-08-16 01:32:29 PM

Diogenes: For real? Wouldn't surprise me. She's the queen of "asking me a substantive, fact-based question is an attack."


She said that about a week before the 2008 election. And 46% of people still voted for her,
 
2012-08-16 01:38:54 PM
[HERO]
 
2012-08-16 01:42:01 PM

DamnYankees: Diogenes: For real? Wouldn't surprise me. She's the queen of "asking me a substantive, fact-based question is an attack."

She said that about a week before the 2008 election.


Christ. I don't know how I missed that one. It's a classic.
 
2012-08-16 01:44:02 PM

Diogenes: convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/10/palin-fears-med/
 
2012-08-16 01:46:22 PM
What an interesting world it would be if more journalists acted like journalists instead of simpering yes-men cowering under Rupert Murdoch's great, wrinkled sack.
 
2012-08-16 01:47:37 PM
You mean repeating a lie over and over again doesn't make it true?!
 
2012-08-16 01:55:38 PM

simplicimus: Mr. Coffee Nerves: Have no fear - the greatest thinker in the modern GOP has already crafted a ready-made response:

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

So the greatest threat to the First Amendment is the First Amendment?


No no no: the greatest threat to the first amendment is the press. When they refuse to uncritically parrot Republican talking points and call it 'news,' liberty is well and truly dead.
 
2012-08-16 01:59:17 PM
And there is John Sununu saying the exact point of any rebuttal of any republican talking point.....

O'Brien: "There is independent analysis of what this is about"
Sununu: "No there isn't!"
O'Brien: "Yes there is"
Sununu: "No, there's democratic analysis"

Basically, if anything isn't a talking point of the GOP, it is something from the "far left, liberal, evil democrats". There are no "independents" in GOP eyes.... anyone not toeing the line is a filthy commie.
 
2012-08-16 02:02:08 PM

dletter: anyone not toeing the line is a filthy commie.


Personally, as a filthy commie I hate being bunched together with those Democratic twat-waffles.
 
2012-08-16 02:11:22 PM

DamnYankees: Wow, its like actual journalism or something.


That was my thought, too.

Karac: Dinki: And the GOP shills will go on every other 'news' show, spout off the exact same lie, and the interviewer will let it slide without blinking an eye.

And they'll toss in Soledad as an example of how the mainstream media is unfairly biased against bullshiat.


It's time for good journalists to take a stand. This Soledad had me smiling from ear to ear to see a journalist doing their due diligence and calling a lie. Don't be afraid of their slander- just keep doing the right thing, and people will notice.

Having said that, the media is all owned by a few large conglomerates who only care about turning a profit. Less and less news, more and more sensationalism.
 
2012-08-16 02:22:22 PM
Remember kids, a long-term reduction in growth or savings is the exact same thing as an immediate budget cut. But only when Democrats do it, and specifically to Medicare only. For virtually every other program, it's exactly how the GOP claims it will pay for more tax cuts everytime.
 
2012-08-16 02:48:19 PM
Dear Romney campaign,

Please keep putting John Sununu on camera.

Sincerely,

An Obama supporter
 
2012-08-16 03:21:18 PM

CommieTaoist: dletter: anyone not toeing the line is a filthy commie.

Personally, as a filthy commie I hate being bunched together with those Democratic twat-waffles.


Well prove it then! Speak proper grammar like stuff.
 
2012-08-16 03:52:33 PM

DamnYankees: Wow, its like actual journalism or something.


That wasn't CNN. It was a clip from the HBO series The Newsroom.
 
2012-08-16 03:54:48 PM
I called it right when this first came up

1) Boehner asks CBO what would happen if Obamacare was repealed
2) CBO says Medicare costs would increase by $716B
3) derpasphere: Obama cut Medicare by $716B
 
2012-08-16 03:57:02 PM

mrshowrules: DamnYankees: Wow, its like actual journalism or something.

That wasn't CNN. It was a clip from the HBO series The Newsroom.


No it wasn't. The O'Brien clip was interesting...
 
2012-08-16 03:59:03 PM
A "liberal conspirator" is not someone who lies to make Democrats look good. A "liberal conspirator" is someone who questions Republican assertions.
 
2012-08-16 04:00:01 PM
Can somebody fill me in on the $700 billion Medicare lie? I can't watch the video at the moment.
 
2012-08-16 04:00:51 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Wow. I just watched the initial video and my god, the man really didn't have anything other than a talking point to continue repeating. He's clearly not used to having them debunked right in his face. You can see him looking dejected while she tears into him.


Even more surprisingly, Sunununununu thinks Romney has a plan.
 
2012-08-16 04:03:04 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Can somebody fill me in on the $700 billion Medicare lie?


The lie is the source of the $700 billion. Sunununununnuunununuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu (and the Romney campaign) is claiming that it's a reduction in services, when it's not.
 
2012-08-16 04:03:15 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Can somebody fill me in on the $700 billion Medicare lie? I can't watch the video at the moment.


I assume you can read at the moment

LINK
 
2012-08-16 04:05:20 PM

Madbassist1: Well prove it then! Speak proper grammar like stuff.


Proper grammar is so bourgeois, btw, I was typing, not speaking, I don't speak when I type, that's just odd.
 
2012-08-16 04:06:18 PM
That retarded old fark needs to have his index finger broken, but it looks like someone beat me to it.
 
2012-08-16 04:07:26 PM
FTFA:
"When he acted like a dick, she pushed back hard..."

Giggity.
 
2012-08-16 04:07:30 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: Quasar: Man, that lady is unflappable. She could not be flapped.


(looks at pic of Soledad) flap flap flap flap flap flap flap flap


I'd like to debunk her.

/If you know what I mean
 
2012-08-16 04:08:01 PM
farm8.staticflickr.com
 
2012-08-16 04:08:46 PM

Nadie_AZ: DamnYankees: Wow, its like actual journalism or something.

That was my thought, too.

Karac: Dinki: And the GOP shills will go on every other 'news' show, spout off the exact same lie, and the interviewer will let it slide without blinking an eye.

And they'll toss in Soledad as an example of how the mainstream media is unfairly biased against bullshiat.

It's time for good journalists to take a stand. This Soledad had me smiling from ear to ear to see a journalist doing their due diligence and calling a lie. Don't be afraid of their slander- just keep doing the right thing, and people will notice.

Having said that, the media is all owned by a few large conglomerates who only care about turning a profit. Less and less news, more and more sensationalism.


Hasn't this demonstrated that actual journalism can be sensational? I mean, we're all talking about this event... but that's probably because it is unusual. Still, something to consider.
 
2012-08-16 04:09:13 PM

qorkfiend: A "liberal conspirator" is not someone who lies to make Democrats look good. A "liberal conspirator" is someone who questions Republican assertions.


You really should put this in any thread talking about LSM-blah-blah. You could be like TPoC except not get paid by the post.
 
2012-08-16 04:09:35 PM

mrshowrules: I called it right when this first came up

1) Boehner asks CBO what would happen if Obamacare was repealed
2) CBO says Medicare costs would increase by $716B
3) derpasphere: Obama cut Medicare by $716B


Pretty much this.

I still don't get how Republicans are trying to create this false outrage over lies about Obama cutting Medicare when Ryan's own budget plan would have really cut Medicare. I guess they are relying on the willful ignorance of their base not to want to notice the hypocrisy.
 
2012-08-16 04:09:36 PM
Did some actual reporting slip past the corporate overlords at CNN? What are they going to do if this inspires other reporters to do their jobs for the first time in a decade or so?
 
2012-08-16 04:09:52 PM
[applause.gif]
 
2012-08-16 04:10:14 PM

Coolfusis: DamnYankees: Wow, its like actual journalism or something.

And it won't matter in the slightest. The people who are smart enough to see through the lies aren't going to vote GOP, and the people who aren't will attack anything that doesn't agree with them. The CBO will be a mouthpiece of George Soros, world-renown economists (liberal and conservative alike) will be communist conspirators, and confirmation bias will once again put the entire country at risk of economic meltdown.


It really goes deeper then that my friend. Beck et. al. has shown that Soros, through Obama, are tied to Marxist Illuminati members that planted and trained Obama to be the perfect Manchurian Candidate, if you will. Alex Jones has repeatedly and rightly pointed out that the New World Order (hereafter NWO) has worked with Obama to orchestrate the Wisconsin Shootings as a pretense to steal all of the guns in the US. The final piece of the puzzle was Sununu and Romney pointing out that Obama is personally stealing the billions that go to Medicare to line his own campaign pocket. I mean, how can anyone vote for Obama after all of these things are presented!?
 
2012-08-16 04:10:32 PM

imontheinternet: Did some actual reporting slip past the corporate overlords at CNN? What are they going to do if this inspires other reporters to do their jobs for the first time in a decade or so?


More updates from the Twitterverse, undoubtedly.
 
2012-08-16 04:10:40 PM
I'd fark her
 
2012-08-16 04:11:03 PM
Well he was full of shiat.
 
2012-08-16 04:11:16 PM
So CNN is trying out the whole journalism thing now? They really are out of ideas...
 
2012-08-16 04:11:55 PM
It amazes me that no one holds them accountable for their lies, not the public, not the journalists, not the law, nothing. They can say whatever retarded thing they wish and the vast majority of people (idiots) believe it as fact.
 
2012-08-16 04:13:05 PM
And apparently Pawlenty went on her show with the same talking points on Tuesday, and also got hit in the nose with a rolled up newspaper of justice. BAD DOG! BAD DOG!
 
2012-08-16 04:13:40 PM

Quasar: Man, that lady is unflappable. She could not be flapped.


Seriously, take any random screenshot of O'Brien and Sununu, any random frame, and odds are it'll have O'Brien smiling all sweetness and light on one side, and Sununu a gibbering buffoon on the other.
 
2012-08-16 04:14:12 PM

Diogenes: I wish Sununu would learn how to be a decent human being.


He could start by learning how to dress himself for a tv interview. It looks like he slept in those clothes and woke up 2 minutes before he went on the air.
 
2012-08-16 04:14:20 PM
John "Havana" Sununu, the Cuban born, Lebanese and El Salvadorian who talked Bush into raising taxes and appointing a liberal to the Supreme Court.
 
2012-08-16 04:15:54 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Diogenes: I wish Sununu would learn how to be a decent human being.

He could start by learning how to dress himself for a tv interview. It looks like he slept in those clothes and woke up 2 minutes before he went on the air.


Is he a booze hound? Cause it looks like he's wearing the uniform.
 
2012-08-16 04:16:44 PM
Soledad O'Brien is like Anderson Cooper, it seems like every so often they just randomly get tired of "infotainment" and turn into real journalists for a few days until they get it out of their systems.
 
2012-08-16 04:16:50 PM

imontheinternet: Did some actual reporting slip past the corporate overlords at CNN? What are they going to do if this inspires other reporters to do their jobs for the first time in a decade or so?


There have been various reports of journalism breaking out. I'm sure the news corporations will be able to contain it.
 
2012-08-16 04:18:28 PM

Coolfusis: DamnYankees: Wow, its like actual journalism or something.

And it won't matter in the slightest. The people who are smart enough to see through the lies aren't going to vote GOP, and the people who aren't will attack anything that doesn't agree with them. The CBO will be a mouthpiece of George Soros, world-renown economists (liberal and conservative alike) will be communist conspirators, and confirmation bias will once again put the entire country at risk of economic meltdown.


I think it gets better every time a reporter does their job.

Think where we have come since the Bush administration. It's not perfect, but every time a reporter refuses to let a half-truth go unchallenged WE are better off.
 
2012-08-16 04:22:04 PM
Real Journalism......
 
2012-08-16 04:22:51 PM
www.examiner.com 

Well-well look. I already told you: I deal with the god damn voters so the politicians don't have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?
 
2012-08-16 04:22:59 PM
Fired for 'irreconcilable differences' in 3....2...
 
2012-08-16 04:23:24 PM
"María de la Soledad Teresa O'Brien" is a pretty awesome name.

// she avoided death by Sunununu-sununununu
 
2012-08-16 04:23:52 PM
FTFA

Finally, there's some limit to the number of lies the media will tolerate and that limit is probably being reached with the Romney campaign. There's a general air of disrespect from the Romney people, they campaign almost totally on falsehoods, and they do so arrogantly.

This...is actually pretty true. Kudos to your blog for not sucking entirely.

/amorphous "you"
//not YOU you
 
2012-08-16 04:24:10 PM
Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?
 
2012-08-16 04:24:49 PM

Pincy: mrshowrules: I called it right when this first came up

1) Boehner asks CBO what would happen if Obamacare was repealed
2) CBO says Medicare costs would increase by $716B
3) derpasphere: Obama cut Medicare by $716B

Pretty much this.

I still don't get how Republicans are trying to create this false outrage over lies about Obama cutting Medicare when Ryan's own budget plan would have really cut Medicare. I guess they are relying on the willful ignorance of their base not to want to notice the hypocrisy.


They are literally trying to convince voters over 55 that Obama is destroying Medicare today and the only way to protect it (at least for them) is to reform it which will only effect people under 55 anyways.

The problem is that the only people who believe them are the idiots already voting for him.
 
2012-08-16 04:25:52 PM
Soledad better find a new home. she's not going to be long for the network since they announced that they are switching to reality-show programming next year
 
2012-08-16 04:25:53 PM
Sununu is a big piece of shat,



/NH resident.
 
2012-08-16 04:25:59 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Soledad O'Brien is like Anderson Cooper, it seems like every so often they just randomly get tired of "infotainment" and turn into real journalists for a few days until they get it out of their systems.


I love her.
 
2012-08-16 04:26:29 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?


if i'm following this right, her point is that it doesn't reduce benefits, but rather inefficiencies and payments to insurance companies in that amount. so she is correct in the sense that medicare, as a benefit, is not reduced at all.
 
2012-08-16 04:28:28 PM

sprawl15: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Can somebody fill me in on the $700 billion Medicare lie?

The lie is the source of the $700 billion. Sunununununnuunununuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu (and the Romney campaign) is claiming that it's a reduction in services, when it's not.


Right. It's a reduction in payments to providers of those services. So of course, they'll be more than willing to keep on providing services.

I don't get that last part.
 
2012-08-16 04:29:03 PM

Dinki: And the GOP shills will go on every other 'news' show, spout off the exact same lie, and the interviewer will let it slide without blinking an eye.


Well they'd HATE to be accused of a Liberal Bias, a very serious accusation that carries the penalty of......nothing. Nothing whatsoever. But it's SCARY AND HURTFUL!!
 
2012-08-16 04:29:05 PM

thomps: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?

if i'm following this right, her point is that it doesn't reduce benefits, but rather inefficiencies and payments to insurance companies in that amount. so she is correct in the sense that medicare, as a benefit, is not reduced at all.


Exactly. And they aren't even actual cuts. The $700b is a reduction in projected increases.
 
2012-08-16 04:29:10 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?


Nope. the money wasn't cut, it's just not expected to be paid out. The funds would have been spent on waste and price increases, rather then providing care. It's pretty much the same style of savings private companies have done, and that the GOP actually advocated for. They really are just trying to deflect from thier benefits cuts in their budget, by pulling a 'both sides are bad so..'
 
2012-08-16 04:29:21 PM

carrion_luggage: [www.examiner.com image 400x300] 


It's a human opossum sitting at a table like it's people.
 
2012-08-16 04:29:45 PM
3.bp.blogspot.com

sure is a lot of this going on here..........the smell is overpowering. And, I quit reading before page 2

And, your blog sucks
 
2012-08-16 04:30:27 PM

tedthebellhopp: Sununu is a big piece of shat,



/NH resident.


Agree. Always has been. Masshole here.
 
2012-08-16 04:31:01 PM

imontheinternet: thomps: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?

if i'm following this right, her point is that it doesn't reduce benefits, but rather inefficiencies and payments to insurance companies in that amount. so she is correct in the sense that medicare, as a benefit, is not reduced at all.

Exactly. And they aren't even actual cuts. The $700b is a reduction in projected increases.


i really appreciate that the guy can run ads simultaneously criticizing the president's out of control spending and ads criticizing his out of control spending decreases
 
2012-08-16 04:31:13 PM
HOw can these mother farkers sleep at night? Lying the way they do. These people have no morals.
 
2012-08-16 04:31:18 PM
I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

cdn.pjmedia.com
 
2012-08-16 04:31:39 PM

Death_Poot: sure is a lot of this going on here..........the smell is overpowering. And, I quit reading before page 2

And, your blog sucks


You have nothing.
 
2012-08-16 04:31:46 PM
Approves:

i.usatoday.net
 
2012-08-16 04:32:37 PM

imontheinternet: Exactly. And they aren't even actual cuts. The $700b is a reduction in projected increases.


If you use a coupon at the grocery store, you are slashing food benefits for your family.
 
2012-08-16 04:32:47 PM

thomps: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?

if i'm following this right, her point is that it doesn't reduce benefits, but rather inefficiencies and payments to insurance companies in that amount. so she is correct in the sense that medicare, as a benefit, is not reduced at all.


I can understand that, but I have a hard time believing that the government managed to find a way to save $711 billion due to inefficiencies in the system without affecting befits at all.

This seems to be much more insightful than what was greenlit anyway.
 
2012-08-16 04:34:33 PM

Alphax: Death_Poot: sure is a lot of this going on here..........the smell is overpowering. And, I quit reading before page 2

And, your blog sucks

You have nothing.


I didnt say I did, I said that the smell in here is overpowering.
 
2012-08-16 04:34:54 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?


No; the $700 billion was saved from elsewhere, not cut from benefit programs.

The ACA has provisions to combat waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare. The CBO estimates that these provisions would result in saving about $700 billion; repealing those provisions would obviously result in not saving that $700 billion.
 
2012-08-16 04:35:10 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?


H.R. 6079 is the Obamacare repeal. Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period."

Now, what SunnO))) is arguing is that the Obamacare spending reduction comes from cutting benefits. I.e., that Grandma gets a smaller check or lower health care access. The reductions don't come from cutting benefits, they come from things like reducing Medicare payments to hospitals that provide shiatty service and run high re-admittance rates. If they improve their service and reduce their re-admittance rates, they get paid better and end up lowering health care costs indirectly by reducing the burden on hospital resources.
 
2012-08-16 04:35:19 PM
Does he have some kind of dimensia or something? The stuttering, the "uhs", giving a different number every time...

He acts like my Grandpa did while he was recovering from brain surgery.
 
2012-08-16 04:35:52 PM

The Why Not Guy: [farm8.staticflickr.com image 320x190]


She looks like she's about to say "U mad, bro?"
 
2012-08-16 04:36:20 PM

Death_Poot: Alphax: Death_Poot: sure is a lot of this going on here..........the smell is overpowering. And, I quit reading before page 2

And, your blog sucks

You have nothing.

I didnt say I did, I said that the smell in here is overpowering.


you might have a mental illness if you can smell stuff through the internet...
 
2012-08-16 04:37:09 PM

I Said: Good. For. Her.

Every news org should be treating lies in this fashion.


As mentioned on another thread, the threat of them losing "access" to certain people prevents them from letting their inner Edward R. Murrow/Walter Cronkite surface and call the GOP's BS out for what it is.
 
2012-08-16 04:37:42 PM
Soledad O'Brien may just be the female equivalent of the BBC's Jeremy Paxman. Now someone please let him interview RoRy.
 
2012-08-16 04:37:45 PM
How desperate are you for some simple honest jounalism when you turn Soledad into some hard hitting reporter. Don't worry cons she'll be right back to throwing softballs at you in a day or two. She would never be where she is today if she was a real reporter.
 
2012-08-16 04:37:48 PM
FTFA - It's pretty clear that she and her producers were well-prepped with actual facts, and that she didn't give a shiat whether she offended the delicate feelings of John Sununu.

Her attitude needs to be adopted by more jouranlists (especially when dealing with politicians).
 
2012-08-16 04:39:01 PM

Rwa2play: As mentioned on another thread, the threat of them losing "access" to certain people prevents them from letting their inner Edward R. Murrow/Walter Cronkite surface and call the GOP's BS out for what it is.


Which is what allowed O'Brien to do this - she's not a political reporter and doesn't rely on access to make her living.
 
2012-08-16 04:39:41 PM

Bob16: How desperate are you for some simple honest jounalism when you turn Soledad into some hard hitting reporter. Don't worry cons she'll be right back to throwing softballs at you in a day or two. She would never be where she is today if she was a real reporter.


We the People are VERY desperate indeed.
 
2012-08-16 04:40:06 PM

Headso: Death_Poot: Alphax: Death_Poot: sure is a lot of this going on here..........the smell is overpowering. And, I quit reading before page 2

And, your blog sucks

You have nothing.

I didnt say I did, I said that the smell in here is overpowering.

you might have a mental illness if you can smell stuff through the internet...


Hey, there are a lot of guys who can pick up the scent of other guys' semen from far off distances. It doesn't make them gay. Maybe they were members of the Weapon X program.
 
2012-08-16 04:40:19 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: This seems to be much more insightful than what was greenlit anyway.


What may be more insightful for you is reading the actual CBO report (PDF warning). Go to page 13, it breaks down where they build the $700b number from.
 
2012-08-16 04:40:42 PM

beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

[cdn.pjmedia.com image 371x433]


Aw look, beta_plus thinks he can make a point.
 
2012-08-16 04:40:53 PM

Rwa2play: I Said: Good. For. Her.

Every news org should be treating lies in this fashion.

As mentioned on another thread, the threat of them losing "access" to certain people prevents them from letting their inner Edward R. Murrow/Walter Cronkite surface and call the GOP's BS out for what it is.


you can probably always get some right wing slob to parrot talkingpoints...
 
2012-08-16 04:40:59 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: thomps: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?

if i'm following this right, her point is that it doesn't reduce benefits, but rather inefficiencies and payments to insurance companies in that amount. so she is correct in the sense that medicare, as a benefit, is not reduced at all.

I can understand that, but I have a hard time believing that the government managed to find a way to save $711 billion due to inefficiencies in the system without affecting befits at all.

This seems to be much more insightful than what was greenlit anyway.


definitely a better article. i think sununu makes a huge leap in logic when he infers that if the repeal of the ACA would increase costs by $717b over a number of years, that must mean that the ACA extracted $717b from medicare benefits. he also very clearly had no level of understanding of the talking point deeper than the bullet point on the page in front of him.
 
2012-08-16 04:42:19 PM

Death_Poot: I didnt say I did, I said that the smell in here is overpowering.


So... you're not contributing anything and you're staying in a smelly place when you didn't have to come in in the first place. That is the most literally retarded example of trolling I've ever seen. I mean your behavior is literally that of a retarded person.
 
2012-08-16 04:42:46 PM

beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.


If it was the morher farking tooth fairy that told her, it makes no difference to the way sununununu reacted.

The point is the media challenged a politician/campaigns assertions. This is good.

The fact sunununu lost it is extra bonus. Either he knows what he was saying is BS, or somwthing scarier happens.

Before you call me biased, I reallly realllly hope this happens to obama's campaign as well.

/Would be epic if it happened to bith at same time during the debates.
 
2012-08-16 04:43:51 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: I can understand that, but I have a hard time believing that the government managed to find a way to save $711 billion due to inefficiencies in the system without affecting befits at all.

This seems to be much more insightful than what was greenlit anyway.


I need to thresh out some of the details myself. But I think another factor is in the ACA's goal to expand Medicare coverage to more people via the states. But SCOTUS shiat all over that part.
 
2012-08-16 04:44:12 PM

Pincy: I still don't get how Republicans are trying to create this false outrage over lies about Obama cutting Medicare when Ryan's own budget plan would have really cut Medicare


Rovian tactics 101: accuse your opponents of your own doings.
 
2012-08-16 04:44:26 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: thomps: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?

if i'm following this right, her point is that it doesn't reduce benefits, but rather inefficiencies and payments to insurance companies in that amount. so she is correct in the sense that medicare, as a benefit, is not reduced at all.

I can understand that, but I have a hard time believing that the government managed to find a way to save $711 billion due to inefficiencies in the system without affecting befits at all.

This seems to be much more insightful than what was greenlit anyway.


seems like it isn't much more insightful but it is not.

"Again, Sununu is basically right. If repealing health care reform raises federal spending by $711 billion, he infers that health care reform cuts Medicare by the same amount."

Let's say you live in old house. You upgraded your house's insulation and your heating bill goes down from $1,000 a year to $800. It cost you $4,000 to do it.

Let's say that you tear out. your insulation. Your heating costs would go up by $200 a year or $2,000 for ten yeas. Obviously a dumb thing to do. Correct?

Conclusion: you gutted your heating budget by $2,000 to pay for your stupid re-insulation project and now you won't have enough money to pay for the heating costs and granny is going to die
 
2012-08-16 04:45:14 PM

sprawl15: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?

H.R. 6079 is the Obamacare repeal. Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period."

Now, what SunnO))) is arguing is that the Obamacare spending reduction comes from cutting benefits. I.e., that Grandma gets a smaller check or lower health care access. The reductions don't come from cutting benefits, they come from things like reducing Medicare payments to hospitals that provide shiatty service and run high re-admittance rates. If they improve their service and reduce their re-admittance rates, they get paid better and end up lowering health care costs indirectly by reducing the burden on hospital resources.


The CBO report breaks down the removal of certain provisions within Obamacare and its effects on that specific program's spending. The $711 billion is solely from the removal of the Medicare and other federal program provisions, not the repeal of the entire act.
 
2012-08-16 04:46:04 PM

DORMAMU: beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

If it was the morher farking tooth fairy that told her, it makes no difference to the way sununununu reacted.

The point is the media challenged a politician/campaigns assertions. This is good.

The fact sunununu lost it is extra bonus. Either he knows what he was saying is BS, or somwthing scarier happens.

Before you call me biased, I reallly realllly hope this happens to obama's campaign as well.

/Would be epic if it happened to bith at same time during the debates.


You know what would epic? A scroll at the bottom of the screen pointing out mistruths.
 
2012-08-16 04:47:41 PM

mrshowrules: seems like it isn't much more insightful but it is not.

"Again, Sununu is basically right. If repealing health care reform raises federal spending by $711 billion, he infers that health care reform cuts Medicare by the same amount."

Let's say you live in old house.


Better example. You have a $100 food budget, and food prices keep going up. The Obama plan would reduce your spending by $10 by going to a cheaper store. Sununu looks at this and claims that you're simply buying 10% less food, thus 'gutting' your food budget.
 
2012-08-16 04:47:45 PM
My sisters husbands family are ultra orthodox Jews. They are in the 10-15% of Jews who consistently vote GOP due to agreement on social issues. No gay marriage. No abortions. "Family values", whatever the hell that means.

They are voting for Obama because the Ryan plan scared them and because they're not wealthy and they're getting old.

If these bearded black-hatted relics of 17th century eastern Europe are voting Democratic that's a really really bad sign for the R&R campaign.
 
2012-08-16 04:47:53 PM
I've been hot for Soledad since '95. She was awesome on The Know Zone.
 
2012-08-16 04:49:13 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: The CBO report breaks down the removal of certain provisions within Obamacare and its effects on that specific program's spending. The $711 billion is solely from the removal of the Medicare and other federal program provisions, not the repeal of the entire act.


Are you intentionally being stupid?
 
2012-08-16 04:49:17 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Dear Romney campaign,

Please keep putting John Sununu on camera.

Sincerely,

An Obama supporter


I suspect that John Sununu will probably decline any further interviews with Soledad. Her Obama sticker on her forehead turns him off.

/wish all interviews with Romney supporters would be this epic.
//also wishes that neocons could form their own thoughts without listening to FOX News
///also wish that Santa Claus was real
 
2012-08-16 04:49:40 PM

simplicimus: DORMAMU: beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

If it was the morher farking tooth fairy that told her, it makes no difference to the way sununununu reacted.

The point is the media challenged a politician/campaigns assertions. This is good.

The fact sunununu lost it is extra bonus. Either he knows what he was saying is BS, or somwthing scarier happens.

Before you call me biased, I reallly realllly hope this happens to obama's campaign as well.

/Would be epic if it happened to bith at same time during the debates.

You know what would epic? A scroll at the bottom of the screen pointing out mistruths.


Everytime mistruth scrolls call BS, you drink!
 
2012-08-16 04:51:08 PM
Token journalism is the same as a token black employee. It's there to keep real journalism from happening by satisfying amerikas need for superficial answers.

The delusion must be preserved. As Jim Douglass ( author of the amazing book "JFK and the Unspeakable" ) has said truth is God and no positive force or God or whatever you want to call it can survive for long in the center of negativity ( amerika ).
 
2012-08-16 04:52:32 PM

impaler: Pincy: I still don't get how Republicans are trying to create this false outrage over lies about Obama cutting Medicare when Ryan's own budget plan would have really cut Medicare

Rovian tactics 101: accuse your opponents of your own doings.


IOW projection.
 
2012-08-16 04:56:15 PM

sprawl15: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Text of Paragraph
"Many of the other provisions that would be repealed by enacting H.R. 6079 affect spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The ACA made numerous changes to payment rates and payment rules in those programs, established a voluntary federal program for long-term care insurance through the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) provisions, and made certain other changes to federal health programs. In total, CBO estimates that repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period. (Those budgetary effects are summarized in Table 1.)"

If repealing the changes to Medicare and other federal programs nets $711 billion dollars, wouldn't that mean that the money was removed, "cut", from those various programs? In that sense, isn't OBrien wrong?

H.R. 6079 is the Obamacare repeal. Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period."

Now, what SunnO))) is arguing is that the Obamacare spending reduction comes from cutting benefits. I.e., that Grandma gets a smaller check or lower health care access. The reductions don't come from cutting benefits, they come from things like reducing Medicare payments to hospitals that provide shiatty service and run high re-admittance rates. If they improve their service and reduce their re-admittance rates, they get paid better and end up lowering health care costs indirectly by reducing the burden on hospital resources.


And (if I may add) by cutting fraud, mostly in Medicare Advantage (the old Medicare + Choice, which are private-company plans that people pay a premium for to receive more-than-Part-A-and-B coverage).

Here's the beauty of the GOP duplicity in their talking point. Ryan slams Obama for this - Ryan's own plan leaves the same things in place.

So at the end of the day, it just keeps bringing Medicare front and center. Which is a debate the GOP will lose.

whatifpost.com

Because if you're not already living in prosperity, you can't afford the toll for the road.
 
2012-08-16 04:56:39 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: H.R. 6079 is the Obamacare repeal. Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period."

The CBO report breaks down the removal of certain provisions within Obamacare and its effects on that specific program's spending. The $711 billion is solely from the removal of the Medicare and other federal program provisions, not the repeal of the entire act.


What part of in total don't you understand?
 
2012-08-16 04:56:47 PM

sprawl15: The Dog Ate The Constitution: The CBO report breaks down the removal of certain provisions within Obamacare and its effects on that specific program's spending. The $711 billion is solely from the removal of the Medicare and other federal program provisions, not the repeal of the entire act.

Are you intentionally being stupid?


Why are you so hostile? Read the report. It gives a break down of every aspect of Obamacare and the effect that removing each provision has on its affected program. The repeal of the entire act doesn't increase spending by $711 billion dollars. The removal of the specific Medicare provisions in Obamacare would increase Medicare spending by $711 billion.

That's why the report specifically states "repealing those provisions would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period." It's referring solely to the Medicare provisions and the effect their removal has on the program.
 
2012-08-16 04:58:15 PM

Death_Poot: Alphax: Death_Poot: sure is a lot of this going on here..........the smell is overpowering. And, I quit reading before page 2

And, your blog sucks

You have nothing.

I didnt say I did, I said that the smell in here is overpowering.


You could try showering.
 
2012-08-16 04:59:26 PM

Bloody William: The Dog Ate The Constitution: H.R. 6079 is the Obamacare repeal. Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period."

The CBO report breaks down the removal of certain provisions within Obamacare and its effects on that specific program's spending. The $711 billion is solely from the removal of the Medicare and other federal program provisions, not the repeal of the entire act.

What part of in total don't you understand?


What part of Effects on Spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and Other Programs don't you understand? The next break down is the Effects on Discretionary Spending, where it closes with In Total referring only to discretionary spending.
 
2012-08-16 05:00:18 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Read the report.


I just farking linked it to you. Scroll up.

The Dog Ate The Constitution: The repeal of the entire act doesn't increase spending by $711 billion dollars.


Nobody's saying it would.

The Dog Ate The Constitution: The removal of the specific Medicare provisions in Obamacare would increase Medicare spending by $711 billion.


No shiat. Did you just suddenly realize that? That's what everyone (but you, apparently) has been talking about in this and the last dozen threads.
 
2012-08-16 05:00:31 PM
I really do think the coddling they get on Fox is hurting the average Republican shill's ability to appear reasonable on regular TV.

Wow, that's one of the most awesome sentences I've ever read, sums it up perfectly.
 
2012-08-16 05:01:54 PM
question - Where is Chris Hedges ( a real reporter ) today ?

answer - The supposed liberal NY Times fired his ass in a NY minute when he got a little too truthy for prime time.

Ray Bonner found out what happens to real reporters at the NY Times too when he tried to give us the truth about mad dog Rayguns death squads in central America.
 
2012-08-16 05:02:01 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: What part of Effects on Spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and Other Programs don't you understand? The next break down is the Effects on Discretionary Spending, where it closes with In Total referring only to discretionary spending.


So... what are you arguing about? The question here is what it would do to Medicare. Obama is accused of cutting Medicare (hilariously). Ryan has actually tried to cut Medicare to a much worse extent, and Romney hasn't denied the possibility of using that approach. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MEDICARE.
 
2012-08-16 05:02:43 PM
Since when has "increasing spending more slowly than we originally planned" NOT been called a cut?

Now if politicians and the media want to suddenly get honest and define cuts and increases the way the rest of us do, I would be delighted. Really. So would most Americans.

In the meantime, according to standard government-speak for at least my lifetime, this is a $700+ billion CUT.
 
2012-08-16 05:04:33 PM

thenewmissus: ///also wish that Santa Claus was real


WHAT?!?
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-08-16 05:04:50 PM

sprawl15: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Read the report.

I just farking linked it to you. Scroll up.

The Dog Ate The Constitution: The repeal of the entire act doesn't increase spending by $711 billion dollars.

Nobody's saying it would.


Are you messing with me? You said Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period.", which is wrong. The removal of ONLY the Medicare and other federal program provisions increase spending by $711 billion.
 
2012-08-16 05:05:12 PM
FTA: "There's a general air of disrespect from the Romney people, they campaign almost totally on falsehoods, and they do so arrogantly."

God i hope that's true.
 
2012-08-16 05:05:13 PM

DORMAMU: simplicimus: DORMAMU: beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

If it was the morher farking tooth fairy that told her, it makes no difference to the way sununununu reacted.

The point is the media challenged a politician/campaigns assertions. This is good.

The fact sunununu lost it is extra bonus. Either he knows what he was saying is BS, or somwthing scarier happens.

Before you call me biased, I reallly realllly hope this happens to obama's campaign as well.

/Would be epic if it happened to bith at same time during the debates.

You know what would epic? A scroll at the bottom of the screen pointing out mistruths.

Everytime mistruth scrolls call BS, you drink!


I wouldn't make it through the whole debate.
 
2012-08-16 05:05:59 PM

cchris_39: Since when has "increasing spending more slowly than we originally planned" NOT been called a cut?

Now if politicians and the media want to suddenly get honest and define cuts and increases the way the rest of us do, I would be delighted. Really. So would most Americans.

In the meantime, according to standard government-speak for at least my lifetime, this is a $700+ billion CUT.


If you saved 10% on groceries by going to a different store, would you call that a cut in your food budget?
 
2012-08-16 05:06:47 PM
Did she do it with the Obama bumper sticker on her forehead, like she was supposed to?
 
2012-08-16 05:09:01 PM

Polly Ester: Did she do it with the Obama bumper sticker on her forehead, like she was supposed to?


Thank you for your valuable contribution to this important discussion, Mrs. Palin.
 
2012-08-16 05:10:32 PM

beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

[cdn.pjmedia.com image 371x433]


You sound pretty tired.
 
2012-08-16 05:15:06 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Are you messing with me? You said Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period.", which is wrong. The removal of ONLY the Medicare and other federal program provisions increase spending by $711 billion.


You really don't know how context works, do you? I'll reword it, because I assumed you weren't a semi-literate troglodyte:

"In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period [FOR THE THING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, AND NOT OTHER THINGS THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT]."
 
2012-08-16 05:15:42 PM

Calmamity: What an interesting world it would be if more journalists acted like journalists instead of simpering yes-men cowering under Rupert Murdoch's great, wrinkled sack.


This is the ultimate in TeaBagging. I would pay to see this in cartoon form with the right and left testicles labeled "Fox" and "News".
 
2012-08-16 05:15:47 PM

simplicimus: DORMAMU: simplicimus: DORMAMU: beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

If it was the morher farking tooth fairy that told her, it makes no difference to the way sununununu reacted.

The point is the media challenged a politician/campaigns assertions. This is good.

The fact sunununu lost it is extra bonus. Either he knows what he was saying is BS, or somwthing scarier happens.

Before you call me biased, I reallly realllly hope this happens to obama's campaign as well.

/Would be epic if it happened to bith at same time during the debates.

You know what would epic? A scroll at the bottom of the screen pointing out mistruths.

Everytime mistruth scrolls call BS, you drink!

I wouldn't make it through the whole debate.


Make it a bet @ a party! "how many minutes will you last?
 
2012-08-16 05:17:06 PM

Diogenes: Polly Ester: Did she do it with the Obama bumper sticker on her forehead, like she was supposed to?

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this important discussion, Mrs. Palin.


That wasn't a dig, that was making fun of something said by a right-winger guy about how she was calling Mitt's spokesman on his shiat, and that somehow makes her the Obama supporter General of the Lefty Troops.

It might have been Sununu, but I don't pay that much attention to the human opossum.
 
2012-08-16 05:18:05 PM

qorkfiend: cchris_39: Since when has "increasing spending more slowly than we originally planned" NOT been called a cut?

Now if politicians and the media want to suddenly get honest and define cuts and increases the way the rest of us do, I would be delighted. Really. So would most Americans.

In the meantime, according to standard government-speak for at least my lifetime, this is a $700+ billion CUT.

If you saved 10% on groceries by going to a different store, would you call that a cut in your food budget?


Budget, maybe.

Cut to benefits, or quantity, NO.
 
2012-08-16 05:21:30 PM
[Fark Independent]

I think the the main thing this teaches us is that you can't trust politicians. So now that a Republican was caught in a baldfaced lie, it makes me question whether Obama has been 100% forthcoming in his responses on this issue. In fact, now that I am not sure whether or not he is lying, it makes me wonder why he is being so secretive. And why haven't we seen his college transcripts, Hmmmm?
 
Ehh
2012-08-16 05:23:02 PM
Here's a handy rule to remember: When John "Travel Scandal" Sununu is talking to you, he's lying.*

* He will be offended if you point it out, because he is a somebody and you are a nobody. This has been true since his arrogant butt occupied a government-funded airplane seat back in they day when he was somebody. Now he is just another rich, entitled a-hole who thinks he's somebody.
 
2012-08-16 05:25:16 PM

sprawl15: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Are you messing with me? You said Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period.", which is wrong. The removal of ONLY the Medicare and other federal program provisions increase spending by $711 billion.

You really don't know how context works, do you? I'll reword it, because I assumed you weren't a semi-literate troglodyte:

"In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period [FOR THE THING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, AND NOT OTHER THINGS THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT]."


You have some serious anger issues. I hope you don't go shooting anybody who disagrees with your political opinions.
 
2012-08-16 05:26:01 PM

DORMAMU: qorkfiend: cchris_39: Since when has "increasing spending more slowly than we originally planned" NOT been called a cut?

Now if politicians and the media want to suddenly get honest and define cuts and increases the way the rest of us do, I would be delighted. Really. So would most Americans.

In the meantime, according to standard government-speak for at least my lifetime, this is a $700+ billion CUT.

If you saved 10% on groceries by going to a different store, would you call that a cut in your food budget?

Budget, maybe.

Cut to benefits, or quantity, NO.


Tap the breaks there. It's not a "different store". It's paying the same store(s) 10% less.

Some will go out of business - limited access.
Some will discontinue certain product lines - limited access.
Some will substitute cheaper alternantives - limited access.

The benefits will ALWAYS be there. To take them away is political suicide. To assume that the same quantities will be availalbe is not logical.
 
2012-08-16 05:28:37 PM
I have been a fan of hers since that cable show she hosted way back when that I don't remember.

Also, thread needs more daylight:

static.oprah.com
 
2012-08-16 05:31:03 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: I hope you don't go shooting anybody who disagrees with your political opinions.


It's OK, maybe in time you'll learn to keep up with conversations.

Keep your chin up, champ!
 
2012-08-16 05:31:39 PM

Arkanaut: I'd like to debunk her.

/If you know what I mean


You'd like to... throw her off a bed?
 
2012-08-16 05:34:33 PM
AeAe


HOw can these mother farkers sleep at night? Lying the way they do. These people have no morals.


Its because they are secure in the lie that Obama will take care of them
 
2012-08-16 05:44:01 PM

Buffalo77: AeAe


HOw can these mother farkers sleep at night? Lying the way they do. These people have no morals.

Its because they are secure in the lie that Obama will take care of them


Thats the scary part, they actually sleep quite well at night, their bellys and their pockets are full and think fark the people, we only really need them come election day, the rest of the time it's after me you are first.
 
2012-08-16 05:46:53 PM
So it takes Soledad O'Brien to point this out??? Cuban Irish Aussie. Damn that's some serious drinkin'

"I'm telling you what Factcheck.com tells you, I'm telling you what the CBO tells you, I'm telling you what CNN's independent analysis says,".

"Put an Obama bumper sticker on your forehead when you do this!"

Bob Beckel would have told him to go fark himself. She kept her shiat together and dropped some knowledge.

Pretty impressive for a woman of Cuban Irish Aussie descent.
 
2012-08-16 05:50:51 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: sprawl15: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Are you messing with me? You said Read the last sentence like this: "In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period.", which is wrong. The removal of ONLY the Medicare and other federal program provisions increase spending by $711 billion.

You really don't know how context works, do you? I'll reword it, because I assumed you weren't a semi-literate troglodyte:

"In total, CBO estimates that repealing [Obamacare] would increase net federal spending by $711 billion over the 2013-2022 period [FOR THE THING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, AND NOT OTHER THINGS THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT]."

You have some serious anger issues. I hope you don't go shooting anybody who disagrees with your political opinions.


He's not angry. He's just frustrated at your stupidity.
 
2012-08-16 05:51:14 PM
Not that impressive.

When CNN and others announce a policy change on the definition of "cut", maybe.

For now, she's a lone wolf defending her candidate.
 
2012-08-16 05:51:32 PM

Death_Poot: Alphax: Death_Poot: sure is a lot of this going on here..........the smell is overpowering. And, I quit reading before page 2

And, your blog sucks

You have nothing.

I didnt say I did, I said that the smell in here is overpowering.


You could have, you know, refuted O'Brian's statements, or Sununu's, or supported either one. Instead, you announce that you're ignorant ("I quit reading") and then squeeze out a comment.

The stench of threadshiat will overwhelm most other smells.
 
2012-08-16 05:57:13 PM

cchris_39: When CNN and others announce a policy change on the definition of "cut", maybe.


The word "cut" doesn't need to be redefined. People need to understand what's being cut and from where.

Does this cut come from beneficiaries? No. Will the cuts in any way diminish access or services? No.

Isn't this the sort of cost cutting "conservatives" claim to like?
 
2012-08-16 05:57:18 PM

cchris_39: Not that impressive.

When CNN and others announce a policy change on the definition of "cut", maybe.

For now, she's a lone wolf defending her candidate in limited company slapping down blatant lies.


There are not many people in the media today that challenge people on their bullshiat. Thankfully here are fark there are many people who can and will slap down your stupidity.
 
2012-08-16 05:59:16 PM
The $700 billion in savings is a budget forecast.

No benefits have been reduced.

If those savings to materialize, there won't be $700 billion saved.
 
2012-08-16 06:01:11 PM
If those savings fail to materialize,

FTFM
 
2012-08-16 06:01:56 PM
As some one in the healthcare industry, I know most of you have no clue what you are talking about.

Give you example. We have a rainmaker doctor who invented a stent used in the brain to treat aneurysms and other blockages. Real cutting edge stuff. Stent costs $4500 to buy. Medicare reimburses 800 for the device during a procedure. If you need 1, medicare gives 800, if you need 5 medicare gives 800.

We have a gamma knife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife.

We take medicare/medicaid patients because it is our mission to provide care in the name of Jesus Christ just as he healed the sick. We honor him in doing so. Most institutions do not. And the doctors, well the doctors are independent contractors and the best ones won't take on medicare/ medicaid patients because of the reduced payments medicare makes.

So you actually believe that reducing further payments to healthcare providers will work at reducing costs. Think about that when you or your parent is on an operating table being cut into by the doctor who doesn't mind being paid reduced fees because that's all he can get. Or when you or your parent are recovering in a ward instead of a private room with 1 nurse looking over 20 patients. Drugs yeah no new innovations there. Welcome to socialized medicine.

Remember your partisan hack statements which you yourself know are bullshiat but advance your political agenda in the short term. Live (or die) with your rhetoric
 
2012-08-16 06:03:29 PM

Buffalo77: We have a rainmaker doctor


Dude, rainmaker is not the preferred nomenclature. American Indian, please.
 
2012-08-16 06:07:21 PM

Buffalo77: aneurysms and other blockages


Don't you have a bedpan to change?
 
2012-08-16 06:08:43 PM

ukexpat: Soledad O'Brien may just be the female equivalent of the BBC's Jeremy Paxman. Now someone please let him interview RoRy.


A US politician would freaking die if they were subjected to a Paxman interview.

Obligatory: Did you threaten to over rule him?
 
2012-08-16 06:08:53 PM

Buffalo77: We take medicare/medicaid patients


Buffalo77: the best ones won't take on medicare/ medicaid patients

 
2012-08-16 06:13:43 PM

Buffalo77: We have a gamma knife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife.


The Gamma Knife is not an experimental procedure. More than 100,000 procedures have been performed and it is recognized by most insurance carriers including Medicare.

Medicare will definitely cover Gamma Knife radiosurgery for patients with brain metastasis.

Gamma Knife radiosurgery is reimbursed by most insurance companies, PPOs, HMOs and Medicare.

It's reimbursed by most insurance companies, PPOs, HMOs and Medicare.
 
2012-08-16 06:14:14 PM

Biological Ali: Arkanaut: I'd like to debunk her.

/If you know what I mean

You'd like to... throw her off a bed?


Hey, don't judge me.
 
2012-08-16 06:15:51 PM

Buffalo77: As some one in the healthcare industry, I know most of you have no clue what you are talking about.

Give you example. We have a rainmaker doctor who invented a stent used in the brain to treat aneurysms and other blockages. Real cutting edge stuff. Stent costs $4500 to buy. Medicare reimburses 800 for the device during a procedure. If you need 1, medicare gives 800, if you need 5 medicare gives 800.

We have a gamma knife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife.

We take medicare/medicaid patients because it is our mission to provide care in the name of Jesus Christ just as he healed the sick. We honor him in doing so. Most institutions do not. And the doctors, well the doctors are independent contractors and the best ones won't take on medicare/ medicaid patients because of the reduced payments medicare makes.

So you actually believe that reducing further payments to healthcare providers will work at reducing costs. Think about that when you or your parent is on an operating table being cut into by the doctor who doesn't mind being paid reduced fees because that's all he can get. Or when you or your parent are recovering in a ward instead of a private room with 1 nurse looking over 20 patients. Drugs yeah no new innovations there. Welcome to socialized medicine.

Remember your partisan hack statements which you yourself know are bullshiat but advance your political agenda in the short term. Live (or die) with your rhetoric


So gamma knives for some and no medical treatment at all for others?

Medicare costs cannot continue to rise or the program will collapse, I know you believe that somehow that is Obama's fault, but it isn't. Also quit wearing your faith on your sleeve, Jesus warned against that. Probably because he knew only assholes would do it. "I'm christian, screw all those without healthcare"

"Remember your partisan hack statements which you yourself know are bullshiat but advance your political agenda in the short term. Live (or die) with your rhetoric"

I hope you do.
 
2012-08-16 06:17:00 PM

Buffalo77: As some one in the healthcare industry...


Wow. A mikey-mop post. Haven't seen one of these for a while.
 
2012-08-16 06:18:35 PM

Epoch_Zero: thenewmissus: ///also wish that Santa Claus was real

WHAT?!?
[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 180x240]


HEY!!!! Where did you get that pic of me?

; )
 
2012-08-16 06:19:09 PM

Biological Ali: Arkanaut: I'd like to debunk her.

/If you know what I mean

You'd like to... throw her off a bed?


Not throw her off so much as roll off while...

Excuse me, I'll be in MY BUNK!
 
2012-08-16 06:25:29 PM
bahamasorbust


Buffalo77: We take medicare/medicaid patients

Buffalo77: the best ones won't take on medicare/ medicaid patients


Read that again, I don't work for a doctor.
 
2012-08-16 06:29:23 PM

Buffalo77: I don't work for a doctor.


Well, unlike your assertion that medicare doesn't pay for gamma knife treatments at least this is a claim that is believable and can't be easily debunked with one minute on google.
 
2012-08-16 06:30:08 PM
Thrag


Buffalo77: We have a gamma knife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife.

The Gamma Knife is not an experimental procedure. More than 100,000 procedures have been performed and it is recognized by most insurance carriers including Medicare.

Medicare will definitely cover Gamma Knife radiosurgery for patients with brain metastasis.

Gamma Knife radiosurgery is reimbursed by most insurance companies, PPOs, HMOs and Medicare.


My mistake, I had Gamma Knife on the brain, I meant Cyberknife.
 
2012-08-16 06:35:33 PM

Buffalo77: We have a gamma knife Cyberknife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife Cyberknife.


Which is still bullshiat.

"While Accuray cannot guarantee reimbursement from any third-party payer, data collected from US-based CyberKnife centers indicate that Medicare has covered the CyberKnife treatment, and over 100 unique commercial, private payers are reimbursing the related codes, and any or all portions of CyberKnife services. Patients should always consult with a physician in connection with any and all treatment options, and if required, obtain prior authorization from their insurance companies once a treatment option is determined."
 
2012-08-16 06:36:03 PM

Buffalo77: bahamasorbust


Buffalo77: We take medicare/medicaid patients

Buffalo77: the best ones won't take on medicare/ medicaid patients

Read that again, I don't work for a doctor.


But he did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
 
2012-08-16 06:38:19 PM
 
2012-08-16 06:40:18 PM
Somebody get that man a ham.
 
2012-08-16 06:44:06 PM
kapaso


Buffalo77: As some one in the healthcare industry, I know most of you have no clue what you are talking about.

Give you example. We have a rainmaker doctor who invented a stent used in the brain to treat aneurysms and other blockages. Real cutting edge stuff. Stent costs $4500 to buy. Medicare reimburses 800 for the device during a procedure. If you need 1, medicare gives 800, if you need 5 medicare gives 800.

We have a gamma knife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife.

We take medicare/medicaid patients because it is our mission to provide care in the name of Jesus Christ just as he healed the sick. We honor him in doing so. Most institutions do not. And the doctors, well the doctors are independent contractors and the best ones won't take on medicare/ medicaid patients because of the reduced payments medicare makes.

So you actually believe that reducing further payments to healthcare providers will work at reducing costs. Think about that when you or your parent is on an operating table being cut into by the doctor who doesn't mind being paid reduced fees because that's all he can get. Or when you or your parent are recovering in a ward instead of a private room with 1 nurse looking over 20 patients. Drugs yeah no new innovations there. Welcome to socialized medicine.

Remember your partisan hack statements which you yourself know are bullshiat but advance your political agenda in the short term. Live (or die) with your rhetoric

So gamma knives for some and no medical treatment at all for others?

Medicare costs cannot continue to rise or the program will collapse, I know you believe that somehow that is Obama's fault, but it isn't. Also quit wearing your faith on your sleeve, Jesus warned against that. Probably because he knew only assholes would do it. "I'm christian, screw all those without healthcare"

"Remember your partisan hack statements which you yourself know are bullshiat but advance your political agenda in the short term. Live (or die) with your rhetoric"

I hope you do.


kapso, you're an idiot.

Medicare gets the lin acc. Faith on my sleeve, really. I am telling you what the Bishop has stated to me why there is the health system I work for. Have you ever thought about why there are so many hospitals with religious designations. They exist to follow the example set by christ, his church, his belief, our mission. You know kinda like the mission of the company you work for, that's your mission also, right. I mean, your mission at work is always to make a good cup of coffee for the customer but don't you some times screw up the coffee at home.

Yeah, I will live or die by what I say because I don't spout bullshiat like you do for you own petty political purposes.

No one said we should not look to improve healthcare in this country. Obamacare is not the way to do it, squeezing healthcare providers is not the way to do it. Stripping out 1/3 of the projecedt medicare budget in the next 10 years to pay for part of Obamacare is not the way to do, and lying about the fact that it is occurring is partisan hack bullshiat that if you had half a brain you would realize is happening. Dont be a useful idiot to the libs.
 
2012-08-16 06:44:20 PM
sprawl15 and Mtraveler01. You guys are awesome.

That is all.
 
2012-08-16 06:45:41 PM

max_pooper:
For now, she's a lone wolf defending her candidate in limited company slapping down blatant lies.

There are not many people in the media today that challenge people on their bullshiat. Thankfully here are fark there are many people who can and will slap down your stupidity.


Bullshiat. If you don't already know that any reduction in planned future expenditures is always called a "cut", then you're too stupid to comment in this thread.
 
2012-08-16 06:47:42 PM

sprawl15



Buffalo77: We have a gamma knife Cyberknife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife Cyberknife.

Which is still bullshiat.

"While Accuray cannot guarantee reimbursement from any third-party payer, data collected from US-based CyberKnife centers indicate that Medicare has covered the CyberKnife treatment, and over 100 unique commercial, private payers are reimbursing the related codes, and any or all portions of CyberKnife services. Patients should always consult with a physician in connection with any and all treatment options, and if required, obtain prior authorization from their insurance companies once a treatment option is determined."


Wow things change in the health field all the time. That is good to know.

Does that invalidate the fact that the reimbursement from medicare does not cover the cost to provide the service in this 12 million dollar facility.
 
2012-08-16 06:49:37 PM

Buffalo77: Does that invalidate the fact that the reimbursement from medicare does not cover the cost to provide the service in this 12 million dollar facility.


Either you're using it for stupid reasons or you need to fire whoever is dealing with Medicare.

Your company's employees being retarded is not the government's problem.
 
2012-08-16 06:49:58 PM

Buffalo77: Yeah, I will live or die by what I say because I don't spout bullshiat like you do for you own petty political purposes.


It takes balls to make such an obviously false claim directly underneath the posts that show that you were just spouting bullshiat.
 
2012-08-16 06:50:41 PM
Thrag


Here's a help page on getting medicare or private insurance to pay for cyberknife treatments.

Thx I only build and buy the facilities and equipment but still have to listen to the clinicians and senior management biatch about medicare reimbursements for new facilities we are trying to build.
 
2012-08-16 06:51:00 PM

Buffalo77: Does that invalidate the fact that the reimbursement from medicare does not cover the cost to provide the service in this 12 million dollar facility.


As someone in the medial field you should know that goalposts can be heavy and moving them like this can put one at risk of a hernia.
 
2012-08-16 06:56:20 PM
Thrag


Buffalo77: Yeah, I will live or die by what I say because I don't spout bullshiat like you do for you own petty political purposes.

It takes balls to make such an obviously false claim directly underneath the posts that show that you were just spouting bullshiat.


Let me ask you something Thrag, you seem like you have some knowledge about medicare reimbursement. Since the point of my original post was to point out that Medicare/medicaid does not reimburse to cover the actual cost of a procedure and that cutting 1/3 of the medicare budget will further cut reimbusements to healthcare providers thereby affecting service, How is that bullshiat.

I may have been using year old data on Cyberknife reimbursement but the fact is if it cost $10,000 for the treatment and medicare reimburses $1,500, do you not believe service will be impacted.
 
2012-08-16 06:58:13 PM

Buffalo77: Since the point of my original post was to point out that Medicare/medicaid does not reimburse to cover the actual cost of a procedure and that cutting 1/3 of the medicare budget will further cut reimbusements to healthcare providers thereby affecting service, How is that bullshiat.


You seem to be assuming a lot of things about the nature of these reimbursement cuts. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you haven't looked at the CBO report linked upthread that details what exactly is being cut?
 
2012-08-16 07:02:41 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Wow. I just watched the initial video and my god, the man really didn't have anything other than a talking point to continue repeating. He's clearly not used to having them debunked right in his face. You can see him looking dejected while she tears into him.


He did, too. He just couldn't fathom that a journalist would call him on his b/s, and had no canned response to counter her questions.

I love Soledad O'Brien.
 
2012-08-16 07:07:33 PM
sprawl15


Buffalo77: Since the point of my original post was to point out that Medicare/medicaid does not reimburse to cover the actual cost of a procedure and that cutting 1/3 of the medicare budget will further cut reimbusements to healthcare providers thereby affecting service, How is that bullshiat.

You seem to be assuming a lot of things about the nature of these reimbursement cuts. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you haven't looked at the CBO report linked upthread that details what exactly is being cut?


CBO scores exactly what you give them. It takes the your assumptions and follows it thru to the end. It is dangerous to rely on that type of analysis and the assumptions are made to fulfill a political purpose.

For example, If you told the CBO to score your retirement plan and you said. Assume I am 30 years old and assume I will put 10,000 per year in my retirement account every year and assume my rate of return in 30%, how much money will I have when I retire at 65 years old.

CBO might say you will have $3 million based on those assumptions. Reality is you may not afford 10K a year and you won't earn 30%.
 
2012-08-16 07:09:57 PM

Buffalo77: CBO scores exactly what you give them. It takes the your assumptions and follows it thru to the end. It is dangerous to rely on that type of analysis and the assumptions are made to fulfill a political purpose.


Which would only be relevant if you were contesting the values, rather than the areas of concern.
 
2012-08-16 07:22:16 PM
So maybe I don't understand your point, I am contesting the values of the assumptions given to the CBO to score.
 
2012-08-16 07:25:22 PM
Lay it out because I believe the premise if false that you can realize saving thru squeezing medicare reimbursements.

If you transfer $700 billion from Medicare budget to cover the cost of the ACA then spending hasnt decreased. Now with a reduced budget, provide the same level of service currently in place. How does that work?
 
2012-08-16 07:25:41 PM

Buffalo77: So maybe I don't understand your point, I am contesting the values of the assumptions given to the CBO to score.


You gave the example of the stent, with the assumption that when people mention cuts in payments to providers, they're talking reduction in how much you would be reimbursed for the stent.

There are many other possible vectors to reduce Medicare payments. Perhaps you could read the CBO report and learn which ones are applicable, because the amount you are reimbursed for the stent will not change.
 
2012-08-16 07:29:50 PM

Buffalo77: If you transfer $700 billion from Medicare budget to cover the cost of the ACA then spending hasnt decreased. Now with a reduced budget, provide the same level of service currently in place. How does that work?


One of the vectors of reducing Medicare payouts is reducing payouts to hospitals that have a very high patient re-admittance rate.
 
2012-08-16 07:31:54 PM

Buffalo77: My mistake, I had Gamma Knife on the brain, I meant Cyberknife.


Maybe you meant Lightsaber.
 
2012-08-16 07:32:52 PM

Buffalo77: Lay it out because I believe the premise if false that you can realize saving thru squeezing medicare reimbursements.

If you transfer $700 billion from Medicare budget to cover the cost of the ACA then spending hasnt decreased. Now with a reduced budget, provide the same level of service currently in place. How does that work?


By covering the costs of ACA for preventive care, you reduce the number of Medicare payments needed for lengthy hospital stays for maladies that could have been treated before they required lengthy hospital stays.

Howabout that?
 
2012-08-16 07:36:32 PM
Holy farking shait!! Facts, figures, reports, news!

That's a hell of a god-dammed concept. I like it.
 
2012-08-16 07:40:56 PM

Buffalo77: If you transfer $700 billion from Medicare budget to cover the cost of the ACA then spending hasnt decreased. Now with a reduced budget, provide the same level of service currently in place. How does that work?


Do you have rocks for brains? The spending reduction is removal of waste, redundancy, and a more efficient system.

** That the entire point of Obamacare! **
 

No, Obamacare is not around to kill your grandmother.
 
2012-08-16 07:54:40 PM

Buffalo77: Thrag


Buffalo77: Yeah, I will live or die by what I say because I don't spout bullshiat like you do for you own petty political purposes.

It takes balls to make such an obviously false claim directly underneath the posts that show that you were just spouting bullshiat.


Let me ask you something Thrag, you seem like you have some knowledge about medicare reimbursement. Since the point of my original post was to point out that Medicare/medicaid does not reimburse to cover the actual cost of a procedure and that cutting 1/3 of the medicare budget will further cut reimbusements to healthcare providers thereby affecting service, How is that bullshiat..


Because when I go to the hospital and get treated, I get charged twice as much as it should actually cost. This isn't because hospitals are greedy, it's because so many unisnsured people go to the ER and can't pay. The price for my treatment includes their share.

The theory of the ACA is, hospitals now won't have many uninsured patients, and those that remain will be covered by a government non-insured fund. Imagine if every person that walked through the doors that was uninsured had insurance or Medicaid instead. Think about how much money that would bring in. Think about how much less you would have to charge your patients who were already paying. The ACA estimate is that you'd see the same number of patients and the same total revenue. However, instead of Medicaid and insured patients being charged a staggering amount, their charges would be 2/3 of what they would be if not for ACA.

You shouldn't have to guess. Your or the Bishop should be able to see how much was written off due to inability to pay. See if it exceeds the amount of the cuts Medicare would make. I'm willing to wager that it does.
 
2012-08-16 08:24:44 PM

CommieTaoist: dletter: anyone not toeing the line is a filthy commie.

Personally, as a filthy commie I hate being bunched together with those Democratic twat-waffles.


Well, I'm kind of on the fence about moving from 'Democrat' to 'outright commie'...I've heard you guys have free healthcare.
 
2012-08-16 08:28:08 PM
Wtf is up with all of these grocery store examples? Brenda Warner is that you?
 
2012-08-16 08:35:00 PM
Thrag (favorite: Needs no citations; already provides them): Buffalo77: My mistake, I had Gamma Knife on the brain, I meant Cyberknife.

Here's a help page on getting medicare or private insurance to pay for cyberknife treatments.

Then there's this:

Is CyberKnife® covered by insurance?

Similar to other forms of radiotherapy and surgical treatment, stereotactic radiosurgery treatments, including CyberKnife®, are usually covered by Medicare and most private insurances. However, in some instances, CyberKnife may be viewed as a "new," "novel" or "unproven" treatment compared with existing "standard" treatments, and as such, may not be covered by insurance. If insurance denial occurs, our staff will work diligently to educate the insurance company and reverse their decision, though unfortunately, success in reversing their decision is not guaranteed.

Or this article about the how the cyberknife was recently cleared for medicare in CO. Medicare Coverage for Cyberknife Prostate Cancer Treatment in Colorado

Medicare Patients With Prostate Cancer Living In Any State Treated In Colorado With CyberKnife Are Now Covered.

Here's an article from Texas As of January 30, 2012, TrailBlazer Health Enterprises, the contracted administrator of the Medicare program in Texas, will begin covering CyberKnife treatment of prostate cancer.


[NEEDS CITA... errr,

CITATION P0WNAGE!
 
2012-08-16 08:36:52 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Buffalo77: My mistake, I had Gamma Knife on the brain, I meant Cyberknife.

Maybe you meant Lightsaber.


Trust me... I'm hitting my Funny button as hard as I can.
 
2012-08-16 08:55:29 PM
I less-than-3 this woman.
Go gettem Soledad.
 
2012-08-16 09:20:45 PM

pwned.
 
2012-08-16 09:27:14 PM

Pincy: mrshowrules: I called it right when this first came up

1) Boehner asks CBO what would happen if Obamacare was repealed
2) CBO says Medicare costs would increase by $716B
3) derpasphere: Obama cut Medicare by $716B

Pretty much this.

I still don't get how Republicans are trying to create this false outrage over lies about Obama cutting Medicare when Ryan's own budget plan would have really cut Medicare. I guess they are relying on the willful ignorance of their base not to want to notice the hypocrisy.


Apparently it's "complicated" and we should just take Richie Richs' word for it.
 
2012-08-16 09:51:10 PM

firefly212: Buffalo77: Lay it out because I believe the premise if false that you can realize saving thru squeezing medicare reimbursements.

If you transfer $700 billion from Medicare budget to cover the cost of the ACA then spending hasnt decreased. Now with a reduced budget, provide the same level of service currently in place. How does that work?

What we need to do is go back to paying 30 dollars per ibuprofen pill and reinstate hundreds of billions of dollars of waste, because that's what makes services "better" in Republican economics. How do you provide the same level of service when charging only ten bucks for an ibuprofen pill... cut shareholder dividend payments.


And we can't have that.
 
2012-08-16 10:36:07 PM
Wonder if Sununu's fired now

/palindrome
 
2012-08-16 10:36:28 PM
Looks like Soledad snu-snued Sununu.
 
2012-08-16 10:49:02 PM
I think the media is just getting sick of Republican bullshiat. Think about it: for all the pandering the media does, they'll always be the 'mainstream liberal media.' They're always going to be demonized and made fun of, then told to kiss the asses of bags of shiat like John Snuwhatever. It's the lousiest job in the world. You're a sucker no matter if you play ball with the Republicans or not.

At this point, the media should just bury the Republicans and report the lies. Why the hell do they have to lose? More access to stuff that can't be told? More lies that will just be written off as shiatty reporting by wealthy motherfarkers who don't like being held accountable? Honestly, the media has a lot of healing to do on their own behalf and kowtowing to a bunch of no-necked and dickless asshats like the Republicans does them no favors. You want ratings? Gut the Republican Party as a real media should have done years ago.
 
2012-08-16 10:50:59 PM

beta_plus: I'm sure she thinks that she is so smart because of what TPM told her.

[cdn.pjmedia.com image 371x433]


It didn't take long for someone to step up to the "gotcha journalism" line.
 
2012-08-16 11:21:54 PM
Dear GOP:

You probably should NOT have, a guy who is arguably one of the highest ranking federal employees to ever be fired specifically for wasting the taxpayer's money, lecturing people on fiscal conservativism.

-Sgt O.
 
2012-08-16 11:29:14 PM

Guntram Shatterhand: I think the media is just getting sick of Republican bullshiat. Think about it: for all the pandering the media does, they'll always be the 'mainstream liberal media.' They're always going to be demonized and made fun of, then told to kiss the asses of bags of shiat like John Snuwhatever. It's the lousiest job in the world. You're a sucker no matter if you play ball with the Republicans or not.

At this point, the media should just bury the Republicans and report the lies. Why the hell do they have to lose? More access to stuff that can't be told? More lies that will just be written off as shiatty reporting by wealthy motherfarkers who don't like being held accountable? Honestly, the media has a lot of healing to do on their own behalf and kowtowing to a bunch of no-necked and dickless asshats like the Republicans does them no favors. You want ratings? Gut the Republican Party as a real media should have done years ago.


You obviously haven't been watching weeknight MSNBC (Chris Matthews onward). Especially Rachel Maddow. What do they get for it? Being accused of being ultra-liberal. They aren't. It's just that the truth has a liberal bias. Even when they criticize the President over drone attacks, misleading attack ads (not nearly as many as the Republican side, but still), etc., MSNBC and folks get attacked and accused of being so far to the left.

Does it help? Not really, as it's not enough to encourage the rest of the media to report actual news. Fox certainly isn't going to give up its yellow journalism and acting as the Republican mouthpiece. Nor is the rest of Citizen Kane's newspapers. The other sources of media are owned by rich guys who are probably Republicans, anyway, so the status quo is actually good for them.

But, it has to be done, anyway. Actual fact-based journalism has to start somewhere. It's what separates us from dictatorship-run news organizations.
 
2012-08-17 12:20:39 AM

Buffalo77: sprawl15


Buffalo77: Since the point of my original post was to point out that Medicare/medicaid does not reimburse to cover the actual cost of a procedure and that cutting 1/3 of the medicare budget will further cut reimbusements to healthcare providers thereby affecting service, How is that bullshiat.

You seem to be assuming a lot of things about the nature of these reimbursement cuts. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you haven't looked at the CBO report linked upthread that details what exactly is being cut?

CBO scores exactly what you give them. It takes the your assumptions and follows it thru to the end. It is dangerous to rely on that type of analysis and the assumptions are made to fulfill a political purpose.

For example, If you told the CBO to score your retirement plan and you said. Assume I am 30 years old and assume I will put 10,000 per year in my retirement account every year and assume my rate of return in 30%, how much money will I have when I retire at 65 years old.

CBO might say you will have $3 million based on those assumptions. Reality is you may not afford 10K a year and you won't earn 30%.


No, the CBO would say you would have over $300 million at retirement given those assumptions, but they would also tell you that of course a 30% return is a huge pipe dream. They would also tell you that a more realistic 8% would yield about $1.7 million, and they would also helpfully calculated the expected rate of inflation for you. The CBO isn't quite as incompetent as you think.

\farking math, how does it work?
 
2012-08-17 12:35:35 AM
beta_plus: ... TPM ...

and if John Sununu and the rest of the Romney group used their brains, they would have goneto FactCheck, TPM, etc, seen what was written and been prepared to give a response to what was posted on those sites (if they actually had a response), rather than repeat their own lie point over and over.

Buffalo77: ... Bishop ...
My apologies if I make a bad assumption but does "Bishop" == "Catholic hospital"? Because the Catholic hierarchy has their issues with Obamacare over birth control issues, and might be using the Medicare issue to chip away at Obamacare over the non-Medicare issue.

Thx I only build and buy the facilities and equipment but still have to listen to the clinicians and senior management biatch about medicare reimbursements for new facilities we are trying to build.

And if the management is religious-based, they might be using "financial" arguments to carry out a religious agenda.

Again, I know that Anglican/Episcopals have Bishops too, but I don't know what is their position on Obamacare in general; I am only speak from my experience as a nominal Catholic, and what I've observed about the Catholic hierarchy's efforts to do away with Obamacare just because of the birth-control issue.

/I believe the saying is, "throwing out the baby with the bathwater"
 
2012-08-17 12:39:34 AM

Buffalo77: As some one in the healthcare industry, I know most of you have no clue what you are talking about.

Give you example. We have a rainmaker doctor who invented a stent used in the brain to treat aneurysms and other blockages. Real cutting edge stuff. Stent costs $4500 to buy. Medicare reimburses 800 for the device during a procedure. If you need 1, medicare gives 800, if you need 5 medicare gives 800.

We have a gamma knife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife.

We take medicare/medicaid patients because it is our mission to provide care in the name of Jesus Christ just as he healed the sick. We honor him in doing so. Most institutions do not. And the doctors, well the doctors are independent contractors and the best ones won't take on medicare/ medicaid patients because of the reduced payments medicare makes.

So you actually believe that reducing further payments to healthcare providers will work at reducing costs. Think about that when you or your parent is on an operating table being cut into by the doctor who doesn't mind being paid reduced fees because that's all he can get. Or when you or your parent are recovering in a ward instead of a private room with 1 nurse looking over 20 patients. Drugs yeah no new innovations there. Welcome to socialized medicine.

Remember your partisan hack statements which you yourself know are bullshiat but advance your political agenda in the short term. Live (or die) with your rhetoric


You know, you can spout this bullshiat all you want but all you have to do is look at the comparisons of major health indicators between the US and other countries and you'll realize that "socialized" medicine kicks our ass most of the time. But please, do go on telling us about how people in other countries with "socialized" medicine, who overall have much better health care at far lower costs, are so much worse off than we are.
 
2012-08-17 01:01:25 AM

I Said: Good. For. Her.

Every news org should be treating lies in this fashion.


I said, this.
 
2012-08-17 01:28:03 AM

Buffalo77: Thrag


Buffalo77: We have a gamma knife that is used for treatment of brain tumors. Its like a laser that precisely target the tumor and is the most advanced method for treating the tumor. It literally targets only the diseased tissue. This is in contrast to the linear accelerator which throws a wide beam of radiation at the tumor and you use lead shielding around the head to block the radiation to healthy tissue. Yeah, medicare don't pay for the gamma knife.

The Gamma Knife is not an experimental procedure. More than 100,000 procedures have been performed and it is recognized by most insurance carriers including Medicare.

Medicare will definitely cover Gamma Knife radiosurgery for patients with brain metastasis.

Gamma Knife radiosurgery is reimbursed by most insurance companies, PPOs, HMOs and Medicare.

My mistake, I had Gamma Knife on the brain, I meant Cyberknife.


lh5.ggpht.com
 
2012-08-17 01:30:39 AM
Dear Governor Sunununununu,

I am sorry. Sorry that you are a bag of shiat.
 
2012-08-17 03:12:44 AM
Wow, way back when she first started I couldn't stand her and thought she was just a pretty face with no brains.

I give her a lot more credit now for being a pretty face with enough brains (and balls) to call a Republicon on their bullshiat.
 
2012-08-17 07:33:31 AM
"They aren't. It's just that the truth has a liberal bias. "

Oh good lord's sake, that's what you guys are stooping to now? It still smells in here
 
2012-08-17 08:25:13 AM

Death_Poot: "They aren't. It's just that the truth has a liberal bias. "

Oh good lord's sake, that's what you guys are stooping to now? It still smells in here


Am I wrong? Given the amount of falsehoods and bullshiat on the right side, yes, the truth has a liberal bias. Liberals have always been in pursuit of figuring out what is "The Truth" and what are lies. Conservatives don't really care, as long as they back up their candidate and win. Why do you think so many people watch Faux News? Or Rush Limbaugh? Or Glenn Beck?

I mean Rush recently reported that The Dark Knight Rises is about Bain Capital. I can't make this shiat up. Completely sane people actually listen to this guy. I think they just pretend it's the truth and stick their fingers in their ears when they hear something that contradicts it.
 
2012-08-17 08:37:50 AM

SineSwiper: Completely sane people actually listen to this guy.


Some completely sane people listen to him as a joke, because it is funny.

Anyone who is a "dittohead" I wouldn't classify as "sane".
 
2012-08-17 08:47:41 AM

rewind2846: I less-than-3 this woman.
Go gettem Soledad.


I'm going to name my daughter Soledad.
 
2012-08-17 09:21:31 AM

Buffalo77: As some one in the healthcare industry, I know most of you have no clue what you are talking about.


Buffalo77: I only build and buy the facilities and equipment


So your entire opinion is based on secondhand knowledge and hearsay and is easily demonstrated to be flat wrong with 30 seconds on Google regardless of how many times you "correct" it. But you just "know" that we're the ones who have no idea what we're talking about
 
2012-08-17 10:37:45 AM
Actually, as someone who works with the healthcare industry, I can tell you cutting medicaid isnt a bad idea if it means reinvesting in an infrastructure that will mean more people are legitimately insured. The facility I am currently working with treats everyone, on paper. In reality they bend over backward to avoid medicaid patients because not only is it a loss for them in reimbursements, the sheer amount of redtape you have to wade through to get your money just makes them avoid it at all costs. If there are less medicaid and more legit insured patients, everyone is happier.
 
Displayed 227 of 227 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report