The good old days before Obama cared.

United States
September 9, 2012 11:43am CST
Ah, the good old days before Obama cared. We had Michael there for us. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXkpxV7mnqY&feature=share&list=PLE9F96E21E29033A3 He accompanied a man who had been paying his insurance premiums for 7 years and Humana refused to cover his pancreas transplant. They went to Humana and invited them to his would-be funeral because they wouldn't cover the operation. Etch-a-sketch Romney is at it again. He is going to keep parts of Obamacare in place instead of repealing it in its entirity as he has been campaigning on. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/09/mitt-romney-obamacare-_n_1868385.html No one ever wanted something for nothing; they want their insurance to cover the costs when they get sick. Much like people buy fire insurance, if they have a fire, they would not expect to get dropped if they had a fire.
1 person likes this
5 responses
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
9 Sep 12
Michael Moore is a delusional freak. He claims he is the 99% but lives in a gated mansion worth millions. As for your rant about Romney, HE IS REPEALING it still. And then he will sit down with BOTH parties and REPLACE it.
2 people like this
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
9 Sep 12
Which of course is so much worse than in other government run health systems where they simply don't have transplant operations available at all. In the UK, pancreas transplantation has always been regarded as a formidable operation with a perceived misconception of significant recipient co-morbidity, high rates of re-operation, sepsis and pancreatic leaks. Per capita population, the number of patients receiving pancreas transplants has always been low compared to the US. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2645734/ Welcome back to reality. You have a better chance of getting an operation in our pay for service system, than you ever have in a government run system. If you do away with insurance companies, you'll merely end up with even lower levels of care, than we have today. At least here in the US, he can pay for the surgery himself if he chooses to. In the UK, you simply die.
1 person likes this
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
30 Sep 12
Not true. I've been to Europe. I know others who have been to Europe and shared their stories. I've been to Canada, and to the government run health care there. I have experience dealing with the US health care, both the private system which is very good, and the public system, which just like all other government run systems, is very horrible. And yes, as a matter of fact, I not only have the money, but I've paid my hospital bills. It's called being a responsible adult. And since we earn more money than you do in the UK, and at the same time, pay far lower taxes than you do in the UK, it's easier for us to pay for our good private health care, than it is for you to pay for your free awful health care. Lastly, I don't blame you for preferring your system over ours. It's called ignorance. When people don't realize how much better another system is, of course they like their own. For example, there was a woman in Canada who needed a simple knee surgery. The pain she suffered made it impossible to work, and suffered to do anything at all. She waited 3 years to get the first knee done, and had already waited 1 more year to see a specialist for the second. She was asked if she would like the America system better, and said no her system was the best. When she was told that the average wait time to see a specialist in the US was around 1 week, she simply denied it. No, it's months and months to see a specialist anywhere, she claimed, and simply didn't believe that the US system was better. Ignorance. Most people in government run health care systems are simply ignorant. An 18-week target in the UK? Are you serious? 5 months? I've never waited longer than a week to see a specialist. Never. You realize that cancer tumors can go up two stages in 5 months? Literally you can go from perfectly operable cancer, to terminal, in 5 months if you have a fast moving cancer. This is why the US 5-year survival rates, in nearly every single cancer, and nearly all life-threatening illnesses, are higher and some by a very wide margin, than in the UK. Are you really saying you'd rather save some money, but have a higher chance of dying? That your life is of less value than some cash? No, you are just ignorant that your survival rates are all lower in the UK. Not an insult. Just the truth.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
11 Sep 12
My son recently had a four wheeler accident. Concussion and broken collar bone. Required surgery to fix the bone. He has NO INSURANCE and is on unemployment. Hospital bill will be covered by a charity program run by our community. Doctor did surgery pro bono. Not so bad for us dumb American's who are greedy and selfish to the core, right? And recently, read an article on a mother who gave birth in UK to a premature baby born TWO days before the 22 week of gestation. Doctors refused to treat this baby who was struggling for each breath because it was born two days before what would have been, according to the rules, a proper time for life saving measures. I bet THIS MOM is not happy with her healthcare.
@Fatcat44 (1141)
• United States
10 Sep 12
Thanks for the info. You bring up a good little tidbit here.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Sep 12
Ok, I am very confused at your post. #1 who the crap cares about Michael Moore? he isn't even running for office. This is old news. #2 Now you are complaining because a candidate actually wants to work with the legislation that your boy wonder passed. Wants to pick out some good, solid stuff and build from there. Wow, you bet, what a demon. Are you having a bad day? Just making crap up now?
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
9 Sep 12
1 person likes this
@natliegleb (5175)
• India
9 Sep 12
obama has never ever lived up to his promise and i am certainly bored by the way he has handled the democratic and he is such a waste of time for all,i dont think he deserves next time around as well to be the president with his ineffective policies
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
9 Sep 12
As a resident of India, in this case, your opinion means .... very little.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
10 Sep 12
natliegleb, would you agree that WHO is president matters to the rest of the world as well as to America?
@Fatcat44 (1141)
• United States
10 Sep 12
Burrito, You make no sense...Why did you even post? You got to earn that penny for a post. Well, I for one is going to vote down your post.
@AidaLily (1450)
• United States
9 Sep 12
Now I am not an Obama supporter and I am really not a Romney supporter, but what I believe any right winger will miss reading your post is very simple. The fact is that Romney said he would repeal the act in its entirety and now he is saying he will keep some parts of it. I am thinking he is saying this now because he wants to get the voters that aren't so... easily led to vote for him. A lot of independents look at Romney like an idiot. The fact is he has plans but no way to pay for them since EVERY time some asks for figures or him to explain his math, he says "the American people should just be willing to vote on principal". Only less intelligent people would vote on principal with no numbers what so ever. If he wants the presidency, then he needs to appeal to the masses not just the "for this moment" or "right now" party.
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
9 Sep 12
YOu sure sound like you're supporting one over the other...just sayin.
@AidaLily (1450)
• United States
9 Sep 12
misread* I really should stop responding to posts while talking on the phone with people. I tend to accidentally spell words wrong or put in words that aren't supposed to be in there. However, the point stands that no one who is concerned enough to want actual figures on how he plans to pay for his plans is going to vote for Romney.
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
11 Sep 12
"the American people should just be willing to vote on principal" You've got that in quotes, but I looked about and couldn't find this as an actual quote. So, would you like to source that?