Monday, December 2, 2013
"I've not seen anything like this before."
The Rise Of Obamacare McCarthyism
" 'I've not seen anything like this before,' said Norm Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. 'It is just such an interesting phenomenon -- call it anthropological or sociological or pathological. An obsessive hatred with all things Obamacare that has infected everybody on the Republican side. They can't say anything positive about any element of a law that is based on their own fundamental ideas. It means that when anybody says something that could in any way be construed as positive regarding Obamacare it becomes fodder for attacks. ... Conservatives are eating their own.'
In a way, the phenomenon is reminiscent of McCarthyism, named after Sen. Joe McCarthy, who in the 1950s accused U.S. government officials and others of secretly sympathizing with communism. But Obamacare McCarthyism takes that to a new level, Ornstein argued."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
After a full day of visiting and exeriencing the real OBAMAFART Health Connector site and elevated BB, elevated HR, increased anxiety, and no closer to affordable health insurance I for one am definitely NOT impressed.
But hope for positive change, infinite patience, and a blinding faith will eventually get us there. I promise.
Reading right-wing sites as I do, I've seen this myself. It's no longer even about any specific problems with the law, or at least specifics aren't mentioned much. The ACA has become like Satan to them -- it's the very embodiment of evil, a symbol of evil, and any specific things it does or doesn't do are almost beside the point.
As the kinks get ironed out and the ACA starts working and winning acceptance from the non-ideological middle, they're going to face an existential crisis caused by the collapse of yet another alternate-reality bubble on which they've built a whole world-view.
.
It is a pure joy to see the RepublicanT party in this phase of their decline. The pleasure of watching them marinate in their own mendacity is exceeded only the delight of knowing that heir seething loathsomeness eats away at them; making them and their lives miserable.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
.
The ‘McCarthy Streak’ is by no means limited to ObamaCare or to the generic term “Obama Derangement Syndrome.” It has been an ugly part of American politics for a long time. There was a landmark essay written by Richard Hofstadter and first published in Harper’s Magazine (November 1964) called: The Paranoid Style in American Politics, excerpt as follows:
“The paranoid spokesman, sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms — he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization... he does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated — if not from the world, at least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention. This demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid’s sense of frustration. Even partial success leaves him with the same feeling of powerlessness with which he began, and this in turn only strengthens his awareness of the vast and terrifying quality of the enemy he opposes …
It is hard to resist the conclusion that this enemy is, on many counts, the projection of the self; both the ideal and the unacceptable aspects of the self are attributed to him.”
Sound familiar? Does the above quote remind us of certain comments left by certain visitors to this forum? Please note allusions to the psychological terms “paranoid” and “projection.” This has long been a pet theory of mine – the relationship between politics and the personality disorders of those who engage in McCarthy-style politics.
You do seem to forget that prior to the one sided enactment of obamadoom, 80% of Americans were happy with their health insurance.
Obamadoom was designed and enacted for one reason and that is to provide health insurance, in most cases free, to the 10% who wanted insurance but didn't have it. So far the majority who are signing up are for the welfare side which is what it was designed for.
How many people have reported their premiums have gone down?
The obama attack on the middle class is one thing he has been successful at.
RN, I'm sorry to hear you had so much trouble, but as I said on another thread, of the 5 people I know who tried to sign up for the A.C.A., you're the only one who did not succeed. As I'm sure you're fully aware, your frustrating experience shouldn't keep you from trying again. Question: Were you EXPECTING problems? Sometimes when you look for glitches, they somehow materialize.
Infidel753,
I, too, read right-wing blogs, and I've seen how they've approached the passage and implementation of the A.C.A. hoping for complete failure. I've never in my life read so many Americans hoping to make other Americans miserable. I hesitate to think of that attitude as "the enemy within," but how else does one view so many Americans who wish so much misery on their fellow citizens?
Ema Nymton,
The TeaPublicans are the embodiment of the old saying about hate: It's like drinking poison and hoping the one you hate dies. If you visit right wing blogs as I do from time to time, it's all there to behold. They are consumed by their hatreds and unhappiness. So sad.
(O)CT(O)PUS,
I have read Hofstadter's essay. The text you quoted fits perfectly with many people on the right who define liberals and progressives in the most hateful and apocalyptic terms. And then they turn around and tell everyone how we should avoid going at each other's throats and learn to be civil with each other.
None of that behavior makes sense unless one observes it after reading Hofstadter's essay.
Dana Milbank of the WaPo:
"But the real gauge of HealthCare.gov’s improvement was Republicans’ response — or lack thereof. When the House returned from Thanksgiving recess on Monday afternoon, the GOP speakers on the floor essentially ignored the Web site, instead returning to their earlier denunciations of Obamacare overall and President Obama in general.
Rep. Virginia Foxx (N.C.) yammered on about the employer mandate. Rep. Ted Poe (Tex.) likened the administration’s nuclear deal with Iran to the 1938 Munich pact. Rep. Michael Burgess (Tex.) complained about the health-care exchanges. And Rep. Joe Wilson (S.C.) criticized Obama’s job-creation record. The issue that had been the Republicans’ rallying cry for the previous eight weeks suddenly vanished."
Righto. if at first you don't succeed try, try, try again. Advice the administration could use.
Nope done for now. I can wait. All I have is time, and a blanket. Selecting the mountain soon.
Ema, your glee and obvious hatred, as loathsome as it is, defines you more than those your progressivism requires you hate.
You're a good soldier in the cause of hate Ema.
Skud: "You do seem to forget that prior to the one sided enactment of obamadoom, 80% of Americans were happy with their health insurance."
Shaw: And you seem to forget that approximately 35 million Americans were without health insurance prior to the A.C.A. And the millions of Americans who were thrown off of their existing insurance because of a catastrophic illness, and on and on and on...
BTW your childish labeling exposes your extremism. But I put your comment up anyway so that the adults who come here can observe the level of immaturity that exists in those who dislike the A.C.A.
Skud: "Obamadoom was designed and enacted for one reason and that is to provide health insurance, in most cases free, to the 10% who wanted insurance but didn't have it. So far the majority who are signing up are for the welfare side which is what it was designed for."
Shaw: Yes, dear. Whatever the voices in your head say, dear.
Now for actual, y'know, facts as reported by PolitiFact on premium rates:
PolitiFact
Our ruling
Americans for Prosperity produced an ad that claimed that health insurance premiums would go up under Obamacare.
To make a universal statement, the group both wants us to accept certain details about a woman, Julie, and disregard others. Chief among these is how she gets her insurance today. Statistically, she is most likely to fall into groups that are likely to do well under Obamacare.
The most detailed supporting document focuses on the group that represents just 7 percent of today’s insurance market. The individual market is the one most likely to see rate hikes but the ACA provides tax credits to cushion the impact of those hikes.
While most states have yet to announce their final rates, every expert we spoke to agreed that some people will pay more.
The message a casual viewer would take from the ad is that everyone's rates are going up. But that's not true, based on what experts told us.
The AFP ad cherry picks the facts and draws a conclusion beyond what the evidence supports, but it will prove accurate for some people. (Skudrunner, for example, who comments a Shaw Kenawe's political blog.)
I made that last sentence up, but you get the picture.
skudrunner runs around the blogs depositing half-truths and his own special brand of doomsday, anti-everything Obama opinions.
Happily, a bit of research always proves him wrong.
.
skudrunner said -
"You do seem to forget that prior to the one sided enactment of obamadoom, 80% of Americans were happy with their health insurance."
I love it when people make-up statistics on the spot to try to prove a point in a discussion. And then run off in their own delusion.
Another made-up statistic, 100% of people hated multi-nation international insurance companies before ACA; 99.99999% of people hate multi-nation international insurance companies after ACA.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
.
Incoming...
At his press conference on Monday afternoon, White House Press Secretary confirmed that over 375,000 people visited the federal health care exchange between midnight and noon ET. By the end of the day Monday, that number had surged to around 800,000. This comes on the heels of news that enrollment through the federal exchange had topped 100,000. With the deadline of Dec. 23rd approaching for enrolling in a health care plan that takes effect on Jan. 1st, expect to see huge numbers of people visiting Healthcare.gov and choosing plans.
Obviously, this makes the GOP a very sad group. They spent every waking moment since the government shutdown ended hammering the website for its flaws. They got a willing media to run a 24-hour loop about the ‘botched’ rollout of the ACA. Numerous committee hearings were held where they got to yell at HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and grandstand about the terrible implementation of Obamacare. You even had Speaker of the House John Boehner blog about his ‘frustrating’ experience enrolling on the website. Of course, his story turned out to be completely false and caused him embarrassment.
George,
You equate visits with completion and what is the enroll mix. The 1.5 million who signed up for medicaid will come short of paying for obamacare.
As Hillary is famous for saying, "What difference does it make", we will just bill the middle class. Throughout history the rich take care of themselves, the poor are taken care and the middle class pays for both.
As ms shaw states there were 35 million people W/O health insurance. How many of that number didn't want health insurance and isn't that 13% of the population. Punish 87% to reward 13%, makes sense to me.
There is no argument that health insurance be fixed but this is not a fix. The republicans have put forth no answer and the democrats are for government takeover, what a surprise democrats thinking the government can run you life better than you can.
Could this have happened to your friend who found the A.C.A. site unresponsive?
CNN Employee's Own Mistake Crashes Healthcare.gov Site
Perhaps the site should have an alert.
The damn site takes so long it would be undertstandable how one could become impatient. Any business in America this inefficient and user unfriendly would go out of business in one quick business cycle.
Time for popcorn. Have lots of it if you're hitting tghe OBAMAFART site.
to the people that are hoping for the failure of Obamacare. Good luck with that. It's not gonna fail no matter how hard you wish for that outcome. It will enroll millions and millions of Americans. Yep. Some glitches will happen. A huge glitch happened to me today while I was trying to order something online .
It's probably a good bet that the people coming here to trash Obamacare never wanted it to suceed in the first place.
Les, you nailed it when you called out the hate. Humorous if it were not so sad.
To bad we will never hear from our great grandchildren on the success or ultimate failure of tge ACA 100 years hence.
That's the beauty for "us", we git to git er done and future generations reap the unintenteded consequences.
Perhaps they will be smarter.
Shaw Kenawe, thanks. It is a shame when discussions degrade and there is no exchange of ideas.
My view: insurance without access to healthcare will be a shock to many in the middle class.
Patients need access. Waiting months or a year to see a primary care physician is not healthcare.
My eyes are wide open. I am willing to get a lower level of medical care in order to insure the uninsured.
Let’s tell the truth and be clear about what is coming. Readers, raise your hand if you are personally willing to have less care to provide care for the poor. That is the truth and that is how this law should have been sold into law.
Forget the political ideology. Are you willing to have less care when you need more care to help those who have less, right now? I am, but I don’t want to be lied to about it. That will affect how I vote.
Lastly, if employers stop providing insurance options in the next 12-24 months and over-burdened physicians say no to the expanded Medicaid crush and low re-imbursement; all hell is going to break lose. That is not doom and gloom or hate. It is something we ought to discuss.
There are some great things that Obamacare tries to accomplish and some great things already accomplished. But it is a poor law. I am not talking about the website fiasco; I mean the law.
The rich get richer and the middle class get jacked around -- again.
Full disclosure: I have a daughter, 26, unemployed and a survivor of stage for cancer. I have another daughter, 23, on my insurance. So, while I think the bill sucks rotten eggs, I am willing to swallow them.
Why build a junk to replace a Buick when with more thought and critical thinking a Cadillac might have been built.
But it is what it is now. A clunker for lots of cash.
Yes, the CNN employee refreshed his page during an active transaction and terminated the transaction.
Pretty standard with any online processing. No?
Maybe the "liberal media" is just trying to keep folks stirred up.
.
Let us put a stop to the lowering of the medical standard lie, shall we?!
KP wrote:
"I am willing to get a lower level of medical care in order to insure the uninsured.
Let’s tell the truth and be clear about what is coming. Readers, raise your hand if you are personally willing to have less care to provide care for the poor. That is the truth and that is how this law should have been sold into law.
Forget the political ideology. Are you willing to have less care when you need more care to help those who have less, right now?"
__________~
People live, work, and prosper in regulated work places throughout the world. Industry standards for service industries as well as manufacturing industries help protect the people by setting rules, regulations, definitions, and standards of conduct.
Automobile industry (as an example) must meet different national, federal and state regulations to do business in USA and throughout the world. Cars sold in Europe are built to a different standard than those in USA. This does not mean either standard is substandard.
ACA is USA government regulation over private insurance markets and insurance corporations. ACA sets federal level, minimum quality/industry standards/requirements for international insurance corporations for doing business in USA. ACA mandates how insurance companies have to conduct business in USA! At the same time, ACA expands insurance company access to people and improves coverage.
"... over-burdened physicians say no to the expanded Medicaid crush and low re-imbursement;..." then other doctors will step in and take the business.
Yes ACA is a poor law. But it will be changed and improved over time. Social Security laws have changed, improved, and expanded since its inception. And the people of USA are better off because of it. ACA is just another step along the way to improving life in USA.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
All theses Swamis and their negative predictions, should be on David Letterman. We had a glitch starting up a huge new program, big surprise. Save this page and check it a year from now and lets see.
ACA equals Clunker.
Or put another way, that pig is gonna need a lot of makeovers and lots of lipstick.
Consumer Reports on healthcare site: ‘It’s terrific’
Whateva. Been there, like I said it SUCKS.
Where will you get these new doctors you refer to?
"As frustration and anger with healthcare intensify among physicians, more and more doctors believe that they are ready to quit the system and start practicing off the grid: They are considering a switch to a cash-only or concierge practice."
"These doctors are receiving plenty of positive reinforcement. Most recently, a survey of 14,000 physicians found that 1 in 10 practice owners are planning to transition from traditional to concierge practices in the next 1-3 years.[1]
References
1. Physicians Foundation. A survey of America’s physicians: practice patterns and perspectives. September 2012. http://www.physiciansfoundation.org/uploads/default/Physicians_Foundation_2012_Biennial_Survey.pdf Accessed June 27, 2013.
More …..
Over half of physicians surveyed have reached a tipping point and plan to make changes to their practices. Many intend to take one or more steps likely to reduce patient access to their services, limiting physician availability at a time when doctors already are in short supply.
Over three quarters of physicians – 77.4 percent – are somewhat pessimistic or very pessimistic about the future of the medical profession.
Over 84 percent of physicians agree that the medical profession is in decline.
The majority of physicians – 57.9 percent — would not recommend medicine as a career to their children or other young people.
Over one third of physicians would not choose medicine if they had their careers to do over.
Physicians are working 5.9% fewer hours than they did in 2008, resulting in a loss of 44,250 full-time-equivalents (FTEs) from the physician workforce.
Over 60 percent of physicians would retire today if they had the means.
Over 52 percent of physicians have limited the access Medicare patients have to their practices or are planning to do so.
Over 26 percent of physicians have closed their practices to Medicaid patients.
Over 59 percent of physicians indicate passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (i.e., “health reform”) has made them less positive about the future of healthcare in America.
“Let us put a stop to the lowering of the medical standard lie, shall we?!”
Ema, perhaps you can help shed some light on the lie? I am in favor of the ACA succeeding.
So far what you have said that doctors will just deal with it, or be replaced. I said many will move off the grid.
You are correct in one aspect, doctors will deal with it in one way or another.
And I am correct; middle class health care will suffer.
Primary care physicians cannot handled the combination of an increased patient load, the time it takes to fight to get paid and the increased medical legal risk; not effectively (ie, healthfully, financially, medical/legally). Most doc offices spend almost as much time on patients after they are gone as they do when present.
And lets not forget who sues a physician most often. It’s not the Platinum Plan patients. Docs have always known the largest risk is the pro bono cases they treat. The mix of less face time and less money is a real concern to physicians.
Many medical practices and their business models are going to change. Good or bad, the ACA exacerbates that.
What does it all mean for our healthcare delivery and quality is? (1) business as usual for the rich at an increased cost (2) care for the poor or very ill who had little or none before the ACA (3)less care for the middle class.
Like I said earlier, I am willing to have less care to care for the most needy and very ill. But don't lie to me about it to pass a bad bill.
KP: “My view: insurance without access to healthcare will be a shock to many in the middle class. ”
In many respects, your statement sums up the current and pre-Obamacare state of affairs: Arbitrary decisions made, not by medical doctors, but by insurance carriers that force subscribers to chose between timely treatment or bankruptcy, living or dying.
To read your commentary is to enter a Universe of reverse polarity where private health insurers are the angels, and the devil by default is government. You offer dire predictions of service shortages and “Death Panels” run by bureaucrats who will eat your baby or kill your grandmother; but I hear nothing about the Death Panels of private insurers who have killed people or bankrupted their families … while pocketing their insurance premiums with a crocodile smile.
Here is a snapshot of our current situation:
Total US healthcare spending represents 17% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By 2017, healthcare spending will climb to 20% GDP.
How does our current healthcare system compare with other countries? At 17% GDP, we spend far more than Switzerland (10.9%), Germany (10.7%), Canada (9.7%), and France (9.5%).
Since 1999, health insurance premium costs have risen 120%. In contrast, cumulative inflation rose 44%, and cumulative wage growth rose 29%. When adjusted for inflation and runaway healthcare costs, real wages have fallen.
Has the most expensive healthcare system in the world reduced infant mortality? Not according to the 2009 World Factbook, published by our own CIA. The USA ranks below 45 nations: USA 6.26, Cuba 5.82, European Union 5.72, Canada 5.04, Switzerland 4.18, Germany 3.99, and France 3.33, as examples.
Bankruptcies: Medical bills account for 62.1% of personal insolvencies, an increase of 50% in six years.
In short, the most expensive healthcare system in the world is not making us healthy, wealthy, or wise. To maximize earnings, private insurers ‘cherry pick’ the most profitable subscribers, reject high-risk applicants, eliminate those with “pre-existing” conditions, limit benefits, drop customers, and charge higher premiums. One inevitable consequence of a profit-driven system is a large pool of “medically uninsurable” applicants who are denied access to affordable, quality healthcare.
Another consequence are high premium costs that partition our people into ‘haves’ and ‘have nots.’ An estimated 47 million people lack healthcare coverage, and medical debts will drive a million people each year into bankruptcy. In an anti-Universe, there are those who proclaim: “The U.S. has the best damn healthcare system in the world.” The real Universe knows otherwise.
KP,
I have a better than average knowledge of research study design and methodology from both academic and regulatory viewpoints and know how the phrasing of study questions can bias a study result. Your reference offers an illustrative example: It assumes low levels of professional morale and delivers on this result. Nevertheless, I have little reason to doubt anxieties during an era of change. In your comment, you dutifully report the results of this survey but fail to ask the obvious question: What accounts for low morale within the ranks of the profession? At least the survey offers clues for further study:
“ Medicare and private insurance companies paid physicians retroactively for “usual, customary and reasonable charges,” meaning doctors typically received what they invoiced. This system has been repeatedly modified since, in an effort to reduce costs and manage care, often creating a disconnect between the services physicians provide or believe is appropriate and the services for which they are compensated.” (page 23).
“In addition, physicians today often must obtain “pre-authorization” from third party payers before they can order tests or treatments for patients. Sometimes, payers will decline to reimburse for services physicians believe are necessary, further eroding the physician’s autonomy over clinical decision making. The survey underscores that many physicians believe their powerlessness to use their training and judgment on their patients’ behalf is a key contributor to the decline of their profession” (page 26).
Furthermore, I found the following anecdotal comments of respondents to be especially interesting:
“I am quickly burning out on private insurance formularies, being reimbursed the exact same amount as someone who graduated last week, being told by insurance companies how much I will get paid …” (page 50).
“Why are insurance companies allowed to make medical decisions? They recommend to patients changes in medication / treatments. They discern whether or not patients should receive certain therapies (ex: physical therapy). They are not trained, licensed, nor insured to provide these services. So why are they allowed to continue to make medical decisions and foster medical care? This is what I do for a living. This is my training. This is why patients see me and not the insurance representative” (pages 52-53).
“Too many professionals have taken advantage of healthcare and use the pain, disease and suffering of others to make a profit (i.e. pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, hospital administrators, lawyers). I think the best single thing that could help the state of medicine and health is to remove the money from medicine. I cannot, and will not come to, understanding how a health insurance executive can make millions of dollars, when a compassionate and competent Family Medicine doctor and his staff cannot keep their clinic open to take of care patients. Medicine has been hijacked by greed and profits. It was never intended to be a business, and cannot be looked at as one” (page 53).
“All insurance companies and HMOs should be abolished. National healthcare, as in England, France, Germany, Australia, etc should be implemented” (page 59).
“30% of medical costs go to insurance companies; almost any not-for-profit entity could parse healthcare cheaper and perhaps more fairly” (page 59).
These anecdotal comments buried within the report are far more revealing than the study results.
(O)CT(O)PUS ... thanks for the thoughtful responses. I don't think I disagree with much of anything you said. And I appreciate the time you invested the discussion. I read the morale part of the study and I think you make solid points there. Cheers.
Except this part:
"You offer dire predictions of service shortages and “Death Panels” run by bureaucrats who will eat your baby or kill your grandmother; but I hear nothing about the Death Panels of private insurers who have killed people or bankrupted their families … while pocketing their insurance premiums with a crocodile smile."
I didn't do that and I don't believe that.
As a point if interest, I am in favor of a single payer system; something like Medicare.
The thrust of my posts were that through the ACA we eventually shift _some_ quality and quantity of care from the middle class to the poor, uninsurable and financially strapped. It wasn't meant as a dire prediction; wasn't even emotional; more a matter of fact (in my mind). The numbers and maths and trends in medicine will likely make it so.
Like I said, I am okay with it. But do appreciate a honest conversation (thank you) and expect a bit more truth from those pushing the law and those fighting the law.
"but I hear nothing about the Death Panels of private insurers who have killed people or bankrupted their families … while pocketing their insurance premiums with a crocodile smile."
Here's a tid bit for you on that. Big insurance companies are at the top of my list of medical/legal enemies. I closed my office and walked away from over six figures of accounts receivable they refused to pay. My brother is a plaintiff attorney and has spent over twenty years at war with them. That's over fifty years between the two of us. I understand the issues medically and legally. I have testified in court as an expert witness for the plaintiffs and as an agreed upon expert. I have personally experienced nearly every kind of insurance abuse imaginable.
KP: “ I didn't do that and I don't believe that.”
I know you didn’t do that. I was riffing the hyperbolic, hyper-partisan Tea Party types with their own caricatures – a grave (no pun intended) disservice to you, to the profession, to me, and to the American public.
Cheers, my friend.
It's all good. Thanks for clarification and cheers.
"...he reflexive need to describe anything that this president has done as pure evil has become a kind of sickness of the mind and soul on the right. It has abandoned any connection to the real world. It lives in a narcissistic, warped, ideological echo-chamber of victimhood and utter obliviousness to the real tragedies of human history.?
Post a Comment