Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you can assure me that any time I need healthcare it will not be denied me because I am older and have health issues? I want to see that in writing and signed by the president that we can sue the government and have a choice of our own healthcare any time we choose to buy a health policy after the health plan goes into practice as it probably will since the Democrats have the votes to do so and they care nothing what the public wants.
Well if the only thing that will convince you, would have to be signed by the president, I'm afraid I can't help you, since he hasn't signed anything yet.
All I can tell you is that there are no provisions in any of the versions of any of the bills that are currently under consideration, that would limit the benefits one can receive, based on the age of the recipient.
And President Obama has said he will not sign a bill that has language to that effect in it.
I would only ask you to consider that as the current system stands, you're already in danger of being denied the benefit of coverage if your insurance carrier decides they won't approve coverage for any procedure or medication at their whim, and/or cancels your policy because you get too costly for them to continue covering, which they have no legal restrictions preventing them from doing. Especially for someone of your apparent age, I would think that the establishment of guidelines that require private carriers to provide at least a minimum level of coverage, and not allow them to cancel your policy, would be something you'd like to see happen. Instead, you're letting the scaremongers get to you.
I'd like to recommend that you take a deep breath.
Well if the only thing that will convince you, would have to be signed by the president, I'm afraid I can't help you, since he hasn't signed anything yet.
All I can tell you is that there are no provisions in any of the versions of any of the bills that are currently under consideration, that would limit the benefits one can receive, based on the age of the recipient.
And President Obama has said he will not sign a bill that has language to that effect in it.
I would only ask you to consider that as the current system stands, you're already in danger of being denied the benefit of coverage if your insurance carrier decides they won't approve coverage for any procedure or medication at their whim, and/or cancels your policy because you get too costly for them to continue covering, which they have no legal restrictions preventing them from doing. Especially for someone of your apparent age, I would think that the establishment of guidelines that require private carriers to provide at least a minimum level of coverage, and not allow them to cancel your policy, would be something you'd like to see happen. Instead, you're letting the scaremongers get to you.
I'd like to recommend that you take a deep breath.
I have gotten e-mails with chapter and verse that say differently and your word means nothing to me. For that matter neither does the word of the president unless it is in writing and signed. I learned in a real estate class that if someone will not put it in writing and sign it, not to believe it. I think that was very good advice.
I think the things warning about seniors are true, but we are not about to let that happen, so I will keep on saying what I am saying until I get the signed law that says differently. As for age, I am more than 20 years younger than my mother was when she went to be with the Lord, so don't try to judge me according to the average person. That is one of the reasons I voted for McCain. Have you noticed how old his mother is. Of course my mother was allowed to have a hip replacement when she was 80 years old. You might want to think about the health of a president that smokes.
We certainly hope they do a better job than they did with Bush. It is a little scary to see your president duck to keep away from a flying shoe, that could have killed him if it had hit just right. I didn't see anybody jumping in front of that shoe, so it would miss him.
All I know is that if I was Biden..I wouldn't stand too close...
As for Americans protesting, I recall many signs calling to impeach President Bush, but none to kill him. Overseas, it was a different story. I don't expect someone in India or Pakistan to have the same degree of respect for American Presidents that Americans should have.
And there may have been some American extremists, probably on the left, who might have entertained the notion of killing President Bush, but can you find any stories or photos about Americans waving "Death to Bush" signs?
What do these words say?
Since President Obama took office, the rate of threats against the president has increased 400 per cent from the 3,000 a year or so under President George W. Bush, according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President's Secret Service.
It seems that in his book about the Secret Service Kessler said that most of these threats are kept unreported to keep copycats from jumping in. However, it does say that 3,000 threats against Bush was average for a year. There may be 4 times as many against Obama now but the Secret Service did investigate 3000 per year for Bush.
Would it not be a good idea, then, to actually read the section in question? I'll highlight the relevant portions.
SEC. 440. HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
‘(a) Purpose- The purpose of this section is to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children.
‘(b) Grant Application- A State that desires to receive a grant under this section shall submit to the Secretary for approval, at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may require, an application for the grant that includes the following:
‘(1) DESCRIPTION OF HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS- A description of the high quality programs of home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children that will be supported by a grant made to the State under this section, the outcomes the programs are intended to achieve, and the evidence supporting the effectiveness of the programs.
‘(2) RESULTS OF NEEDS ASSESSMENT- The results of a statewide needs assessment that describes--
‘(A) the number, quality, and capacity of home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children in the State;
‘(B) the number and types of families who are receiving services under the programs;
‘(C) the sources and amount of funding provided to the programs;
‘(D) the gaps in home visitation in the State, including identification of communities that are in high need of the services; and
‘(E) training and technical assistance activities designed to achieve or support the goals of the programs.
‘(3) ASSURANCES- Assurances from the State that--
‘(A) in supporting home visitation programs using funds provided under this section, the State shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families or a high incidence of child maltreatment;
‘(B) the State will reserve 5 percent of the grant funds for training and technical assistance to the home visitation programs using such funds;
‘(C) in supporting home visitation programs using funds provided under this section, the State will promote coordination and collaboration with other home visitation programs (including programs funded under title XIX) and with other child and family services, health services, income supports, and other related assistance;
‘(D) home visitation programs supported using such funds will, when appropriate, provide referrals to other programs serving children and families; and
‘(E) the State will comply with subsection (i), and cooperate with any evaluation conducted under subsection (j).
Not one single word of that implies that the government is going to send agents marching into your home to tell you how to raise your children. In fact, states don't even have to participate, but if they do, they must apply for a grant to be used in conjunction with programs already in place, or show that they need a new or additional program in their state.
So the states will be administering the services outlined in this section, not the federal government. The federal government just decides whether or not the states qualify for the grants to run their programs.
And participation is VOLUNTARY.
Thanks, I didn't have time to dig up the specific reference to debunk Mr Norris. I appreciate you taking the time to post this.
Since President Obama took office, the rate of threats against the president has increased 400 per cent from the 3,000 a year or so under President George W. Bush, according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President's Secret Service.
It seems that in his book about the Secret Service Kessler said that most of these threats are kept unreported to keep copycats from jumping in. However, it does say that 3,000 threats against Bush was average for a year. There may be 4 times as many against Obama now but the Secret Service did investigate 3000 per year for Bush.
Do you need a link?
Thank you. But we were discussing individuals, Americans, waving signs that actually threaten the life of the President. I specifically did say that I was sure there were extremists who contemplated killing President Bush, but did they wave signs to that effect? Signs at public venues? Do you have any links of people in the United States, American citizens, calling for the death of President Bush or to his family (though how anyone could threaten Laura Bush would be beyond me)?
I have gotten e-mails with chapter and verse that say differently and your word means nothing to me. For that matter neither does the word of the president unless it is in writing and signed. I learned in a real estate class that if someone will not put it in writing and sign it, not to believe it. I think that was very good advice.
I think the things warning about seniors are true, but we are not about to let that happen, so I will keep on saying what I am saying until I get the signed law that says differently.
Wow. And emails never lie.
I implore you to read the section of the bill that this brewhaha is all about. Then, come back and ask any questions you have about what something in it might mean. I will be more than happy to engage in a reasonable discussion with you about this, in the hopes that I can allay your fears and concerns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCN
As for age, I am more than 20 years younger than my mother was when she went to be with the Lord, so don't try to judge me according to the average person. That is one of the reasons I voted for McCain. Have you noticed how old his mother is. Of course my mother was allowed to have a hip replacement when she was 80 years old. You might want to think about the health of a president that smokes.
I wasn't judging you, but responding to your concerns based on the impression you give of your age in your posts. I really don't understand what McCain's mother's age has to do with anything. If you were comparing candidates based on the likelihood of their death given their medical history, I contend that a 4-time melanoma sufferer at any age is a greater risk than a part-time smoker. (Not that I'm condoning his smoking. I know the dangers all too well, thanks.)
You responded about like I thought you would from seeing Human Events and the name, Chuck Norris. I don't normally read things by him but it appears that he has read that section and I don't doubt that he interpreted it pretty near what was intended. You can't establish a Big Brother system without throwing things like this in for later use. I have not read the section he refers to but any of the areas conservatives have referred me to have proven to be very much as they said. NO, I don't read Norris often but when I do I don't go in with a negative mindset because of who he is. How did you go into that?
You said:
"You can't establish a Big Brother system without throwing things like this in for later use"....
Establish a "Big Brother system"...........lol lol lol. You guys are just toooo paranoid.
This is sick and disgusting. I hope the Secret Services sees this.
I don't think this is worth hoping for the President to die.
Sad thing is that some people think it is ok to think this. I bet some right winger people on this forum will jump up and agree that it is ok to assassinate Obama. Sad sad.
I cannot wait to see the right defending this sick minded man.
I don't think there is any reason to support this man. I am all for free speech, but occurences like this cause the wrong sort of attention and end up causing all people opposed to the healthcare bill to be labeled and ridiculed and compared to this one stupid individual. My question is, why wasn't he detained? This was a threat to life of our president. If this was a genuine event, how did he manage to stand there with that sign, and then leave unscathed. It doesn't really make sense. At the very least, I would expect this man to be questioned by local authorities and possibly detained for questioning by the FBI or the Secret Service.
To tell you the truth, any thinking person would atleast consider the chance that this man was a plant, put there to cause just this sort of publicity. Not saying that is definately the case people. It is just a possibility. You are all for this sort of suggestion when it comes to right wing plants at town meetings. Atleast have a broad enough range of free thought to consider the possibility that the other side can and would use the same tactics. This is politics, and both sides use the same play book.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You guys are just toooo paranoid.
