Religion.. and why I am I don't Believe In It

Okay. . so lets get into taboo #2 on what not to speak about when out and about (the first one being politics.. ). .. Religion.

Some background. I grew up Lutheran and attended Ascension Lutheran Church in my hometown on L.I. My father took us to church religiously (pun intended) every weekend. We all, my two brothers and I, had communion and confirmation. We all went to Sunday School. We all complained sometimes along the way at having to go. My mother never went to church and only attended on "special" occasions like Easter , Christmas or when we each received communion for the first time and our confirmations. I have to say, I was very impressed with our pastor because even though my mom maybe attended church once a year, he always remembered her. Our pastor was one cool dude.

I did enjoy the church we attended and the people who attended with us. I remember thinking, whenever I did anything wrong, how god was going to "punish" me. I kind of fretted about it from time to time now that I think about it. I never told anyone that, not even my parents , and it's the first time that I'm actually saying it "out loud" so to speak (in this case I'm obviously typing it, but you get the point). For some reason whenever I got to sit in church with the other adults and go through the motions I was never quite comfortable. I never really understood why. It was almost like I was embarrassed by the entire experience of church. I always wondered why I felt that way.

For the most part, once we each became older and were allowed to have a choice as to whether to attend church or not, we all elected (accept my father, who I believe still attended after we stopped) not to attend church. As it turns out my brothers, who are both of scientific minds, consider themselves "atheists". At least my baby brother does (okay, he's not that much of a baby. .he is now 30).

Oddly enough, as I got older I explored more of my spirituality. You know, our reasons for being here , God and all of it. In my belief both science and God can and do coexist. They are not mutually exclusive. I learned to put into words why I was so uncomfortable in church. And that reason was because a person relationship with God is so personal that to stand in church with others and share that is like allowing someone into your most intimate of moments. I'm just not comfortable vocalizing my conversations, or lack thereof , with God in front of others. I get uncomfortable whenever someone just starts praying in my presence. It puts me at unease. I also figured out that while not one religion is "wrong" neither are they all 100% correct. In other words, the common thread is there and it's intent is good but it boxes the believer in and prevents them from seeing the entire picture.

I've also always had a problem with a perfect being, like God , that is supposed to love us being so angry all the time with his "wrath". Just didn't seem to fit.

While I don't believe that religion is a bad thing, it can be. Because those that are so tied to their own religions seems to think that the rest of us, who aren't, are damned to hell. So much so that they feel compelled to knock on your door on a random weekend afternoon (hence the scramble to silence the TV, any children or pets in the house and play the "we're not home" game..LOL) and try to convert you to their way of thinking.

Speaking of.. I remember one time I actually got into a mini debate with a Jehovah Witness about religion when they came to me. LOL. No joke.. I enjoyed the back and forth. I had her trying to get rid of me. LOL

Then, you have the Muslim extremists who feel that the rest of us, who are NOT Muslim, are infidels and we must be killed because we don't believe in their loving and peaceful god. HUH?? isn't that a complete oxymoron?

Yes, I know that these Muslims are not TRUE Muslim, because the Muslim religion is all about peace. But then I'm confused about how a religion can treat woman as inferior to men? Huh? Did not god create me, a woman , just as he created you? Why do I deserve any less or more respect? Does not god create us all with free will, yet I as a woman must bend to a man's will and not my own?

See what I mean about how religion can get things twisted and while it is right in some respects (peace , love etc) it is so totally wrong in other respects.

So, some may say that I'm religious because I am spiritual. While in one respect that may be the case, in reality being spiritual simply means that I do not subscribe, believe or follow any one specific set of rules in regards to how or why I worship God etc. I am gnostic, always seeking the truth and how I do that is by looking within to find the answers.. guided by my inner godliness (No.. I"m not saying that I am GOD or like him/her but that God lives within me because I am , as you are, a part of what makes up God). If it doesn't feel right, it isn't right for me. If I lie, I do not fear the wrath of God , for I know that he loves me no matter what, but rather I'm disappointed in myself for not living the truth that resides in me (hence why I am a terrible liar.. because I just hate doing it). I also believe more in Karma, which is not the wrath of GOD, but the rule of the universe... that what you put out is what you get back. So, if you cheat, rob, steal you will be cheated, robbed from etc. Like attracts like. In other words, if you are a good, honest person, you will attract and be surrounded by good honest people with the same good energy. And if there is someone that you "feel" is not "good" for you, then perhaps that person does not have the energy you require around you.

Tying this all into politics, I can never understand why people can not separate religion from politics. We probably do a pretty good job of it compared to other nations, but we still have a long way to go. For example, in regards to gay marriage many claim that it is because of religious reasons that they feel that gays should not be allowed to share the same legal union as a straight couple. Well, okay YOU don't believe in it.. but I, for example, believe that if you don't believe in it..then don't practice it. If it's against YOUR religion, than live YOUR truth and NOT live a gay lifestyle. But why should I or anyone else be subjected to the limitations put upon yourself for your religious beliefs? Same thing goes for abortion. While I would never make the choice for myself for many reasons, who am I to tell someone else that they have to limit themselves to the choice I would make?


So, while I may be spending my Sunday morning out jogging or on the Internet blogging rather than in Church reciting the same stuff every week, it doesn't mean that I do not believe in God, that I do not have spirituality. I live my spirituality every day, not just on a day of worship. I know of people who go to church on a regular basis, claim to be religious or practicing their religion, yet their daily lives are full of contradictions of what they are supposed to be practicing. I find this extremely hypocritical. I wonder if some people feel that going to church every week excuses their bad attitudes , bad behaviors of others? If going to church then gives them the right to judge others.

And don't get it wrong. I'm not saying that I am right, and anyone practicing a religion is wrong. I'm saying there is no real right or wrong for each individual. Because what you are or aren't practicing may be right for you and not for someone else. I do not feel that I am morally superior, nor do I have the right to judge anyone else (although there is a difference between judging and questioning)

I don't know.. I'm just saying.

Wow.. It Doesn't Get Any Loonier Than This.

True and funny story.

My husband was at our local post office and while on line he met a gentleman that seemed nice enough. He started a conversation with my husband that quickly turned political. My hubby, not being very much the political type nor not really caring anything about it, quickly deferred to me (well I wasn't there, but he told him about me). He obviously knows how political I am and tend to be. The gentleman handed him the literature, then asked for my phone number. Husband gave it to him.

When he came home he handed me the literature and told him that he had given him my information. I didn't really look at it and put it aside. A few days later I as outside doing my gardening and my cell phone rang. It was a volunteer from this political group. She told me that they were an offshoot of the democratic party. She then started talking about health care... and then she mentioned Obama and Hitler...

Okay.. she lost me there a little. I brushed it off and really didn't have time to talk. I told them I'd read there stuff..

Mind you.. this was BEFORE all this crap on the news. Had they called me this week.. boy they would have gotten an ear full.

So , about a week or two later I had some free time and so I figured I'd pick up the literature and read it. I couldn't believe what I was reading.

According to this political group, the British rule the world and the Queen of England is their evil ruler pulling the strings of the world. I kid you not. I made it to the second paragraph or so and realized that these people were completely and utterly insane.

By the way. I'm also on their email list. According to an email I received today, the British , for opportunistic reasons, may assassinate the president (insert roll eye emotioncon here).

Wow..these people are lunatics. And, on their website they have a picture of Obama with a Hitler beard on his face.

Oh my ... LOL. I just had to share. I can't believe that there are people out there this crazy!! I conjure up images of people sitting in their house with foil over there heads because the government might be reading their minds.

God help America if people buy the crap they are selling.

LaRouchPac is the name of this crazy group!!

In the End of it All, It's NOT your Party that Matters.. It's the TRUTH

The health care reform debate has become extremely heated in the last few days. Both sides are spitting angry. Party lines have been drawn. Battles have ensued amongst Facebook friends regarding the health care bill, the rumors, what is truth and what is not truth. But, in the end it does not matter your party affiliation. What matters is knowing the facts and deciphering between what is truth and what are complete exaggerations or interpretation and what is an outright lie.

I have been debating health care on several forums like city-data.com/forum for well over a year now. I have vehemently studied the facts and figures to make sure that I understand what the problem is, why it is and how it can be fixed and changed. That having been said, the arguments I usually hear about health care reform, to me, is usually an objection based on a lack of understanding of the issues at hand and the consequences of our current system.

The arguments I hear over and over again are; Why should I pay for someone else's health care? ; If you are sick you can get treated if you go to an ER so everyone has health care. ; People who do not have health insurance can afford it, they just chose not to have insurance. ; I don't want our country to go the way of Socialism; You just want a free lunch; I don't want government making decisions on my health care. Let's tackle each and every one of those objections.

Why should I pay for someone else's health care?

This response shows a lack of knowledge or understanding of how health insurance actually works. The thing is, you and your employer are already paying for someone else's health care. For example, you and your fellow employees are considered a "group". Now, lets take two single individuals who have the same plan with that insurance company in that group. Their premiums are exactly the same. Employee A has a pre-existing condition that requires more regular check ups and prescriptions every month. Employee B is healthy with no pre-existing conditions or medications beyond what may be needed for short illnesses. Employee B, as a result, barely uses the insurance he has and maybe has 1 claim for his yearly physical while Employee A most likely had more claims filed that equaled a higher amount than is actually contributed per employee into the plan. The insurance company, however is not too concerned because Employee B's contribution has offset Employees A's use. In other words Employee B has paid for Employee A. If someone within that group suffers a serious catastrophic illness or medical event that costs a large amount of money (an example would be a fellow employee giving birth to a preemie.. usually dubbed "million dollar babies" in the business). You can bet that when that companies premiums are reviewed at the yearly mark the company, across the board, is going to see an increase in premiums for having had the policy used in such a manner.

But, that is not the only way that you are paying for someone else's health care. Hospital stays are extremely expensive. if someone is uninsured and shows up to an ER they will have to be treated and life saving treatment must be rendered. If that means that the patient requires emergency surgery to save their life at that moment, then they will receive it irregardless of whether they are insured or not. Of course that patient is then responsible for the full bill . If you are not aware of the costs you can simply do a google search on the cost of a hospital stay and you will find that the average cost is approx $3,000 - $5,000 a day depending on the services rendered. This figure includes the cost of nurses, meds, any tests etc. A weeks stay at the hospital could end up costing you $50,000 again depending on what services you required while at the hospital.

Here are some facts you need to know about medical bills and bankruptcy. A 2005 Harvard study found that over 50% of bankruptcies in this country were caused by overwhelming medical bills. A large percentage of those individuals actually HAD insurance. So, while you are paying excessive amounts of money for your premiums you are still not guaranteed protection from financial ruin should a serious illness befall any member of your household. This article, from CNN in June of this year now puts that figure at 60% and 3/4 of those individuals had health insurance. Some more facts and figures; hospitals lose approx 37 billion a year in uncompensated care.

But, when someone fails to pay their bill and files bankruptcy that bill doesn't go "poof". The cost isn't just eaten by the providers of the uncompensated care. Instead that cost is passed on to the rest of us in raised charges for everything down to an aspirin. That results in higher charges to individuals without insurance AND insurance companies who then , obviously, pass that cost on when they raise insurance premium rates yearly. As a result, while income in the U.S has risen at a 2.5% yearly rate , insurance premium rates have risen at an alarming 12% a year. Is it any wonder that a vast majority of the uninsured are middle income working families?

In addition, if someone doesn't have insurance they are least likely to have a primary physician for whom they can see when they are sick or injured. Picking up the yellow pages and calling a physician you have never seen before is not as easy as it may sound and usually new patients can not be seen on the fly. There are no openings for an appointment for weeks (if you've ever changed insurance and needed to change Dr's you have experienced this. I have). So, if something is seriously wrong that uninsured individual will the go the the local ER to be seen. More often times than not the patient puts off care because they didn't have insurance and by doing so their condition , which would have been otherwise treated and nipped in the bud earlier, tends to become a more complicated and costly situation. What could have taken only a couple hundred dollars to address has now become a couple of thousands of dollars.

So, you see how not only are you paying for someone else's health care, but you are paying for it at 2 or 3 times the price. Doesn't it make sense that everyone has access to a physician so that a problem can be tackled at a couple of hundred dollars BEFORE it grows into one that would costs $1,000 of dollars and require more aggressive action?

If you are Sick You can Go to the ER and Get Treated. You Will Not Be Left to Die.

While this statement is true, there is more to it than that. As illustrated in my example above, it makes much more sense for a person to have a regular Dr. to treat a patient before the illness or problem is allowed to fester into something far more costly.

A few months ago, I met a woman in the park. She was a single mom that was raising 2 kids on her own and she worked two jobs. It was obvious to me that looking at her she was undergoing or had just completed some sort of Chemotherapy because she was wearing a scarf on her naked head. I started a conversation with her and I asked her how she was doing. She said fine. She then told me that she had just completed treatment for breast cancer. This led to further conversation. As it turned out, she didn't have health insurance when she discovered a lump under her arm. Instead of going to a Dr. she ignored the lump. A year later she had finally found a job that offered health insurance and after waiting the customary 3 month period she became enrolled in her employer plan. The lump, in the meantime, had grown larger and was now beginning to hurt. She couldn't ignore it anymore nor did she really have to because she was insured. AS it turned out she had breast cancer that had progressed to a later stage. Had she sought treatment when she first noticed that lump her treatments may not have had to be so aggressive and she would have had an increase chance of survival. However, at the same time, had she actually found the breast cancer when she was uninsured, well she wouldn't have been able to afford the treatments without insurance and her insurance would not have covered her condition for 12 months because it was pre-existing.

But let's say that she did end up going to an ER to investigate that lump. Yes, the ER would have treated her, diagnosed her, advised her to see an oncologist and/or her primary physician ( of which she doesn't have one). If the patient required medication the doctor would send the patient home with a script that needs to be filled. The hospital is not under any obligation to start cancer treatment regimens. Their only obligation is to administer emergency life saving treatment that tackles the immediate needs, not the long term care of the diagnosis.

So what does that patient without insurance do? Without money to pay for medications prescribed (which could be a very expensive endeavor on the individual without the negotiating power of an insurance company) they are left, well nowhere. Drug stores are under no obligation to fill prescriptions and they don't take IOU's. The patient most likely does not qualify for medicaid because they make too much money, yet they have not enough to afford monthly insurance premiums and/ or medications. The diagnosis also now puts them in the pre existing condition category, which we all know disqualifies them from enrolling in most plans or subjects them to even higher premiums, deductibles and out of pocket costs beyond the already high priced premium market. A diagnosis of this sort could make a family/ individual lose everything ; their home, their savings and in the end they still wouldn't have enough to cover the very high cost of treatments. Here is the opening line to an article on USA Today from 2006.

Spiraling prices for new cancer therapies — up to $10,000 a month for a single drug — are causing alarm among patients and insurance companies.

As a result many do not get treatment and or they get "spotty" treatment. In other words, they skip doses or half the dose of their meds to stretch it out further so the cost is less. In the end, the person will end up dying of either complications from poor treatment or no treatment at all.

PBS did a special Sick Around America that you can watch online. In it you'll learn the story of a 31 year old woman with Lupus that died because she could not afford her medications, nor could she obtain insurance. Lupus is an otherwise manageable disease one from which she did not have to die from.

People that do not have insurance can afford it, they just chose not to have it.


This one argument made really irks me. While 16M of the 47M uninsured are what they call the "young invicibles" it does not mean that they simply pass it up. While I'm sure some do you have to look at the cost. If you look at the statistics of the uninsured it is obvious that it follows income lines. In other words a much older co-worker in the same position will be making a higher income than their younger co-worker and thereby are more able to afford the high costs.

Alarmingly the highest segment of the uninsured population is the middle income families of this country. The average income in the U.S per household is $56K a year. The average employer cost of covering a family of 4 is $12K a year. That is approx 22% of the average American income. It is practically equal to a mortgage/rent payment. How many middle income families does anyone know that can afford to pay rent or mortgage on a second home? In addition, as I mentioned above, income has risen at only a 2.5% uptick a year while out of pocket medical costs and premiums have risen at almost 4x's that, or 12% a year. It's easy to see how insurance is now out of reach for so many.

Another thing to remember is that if you are unfortunate enough to have a pre-existing condition it may be very difficult or near impossible for you to obtain health insurance. If you do you could end up paying 3x's the rate with a higher out of pocket than your counterparts. In addition, if you have lapsed in coverage for longer than 60 days in most states, the first 12 months of your coverage will not cover anything related to your pre-existing condition. This is the infamous pre-existing condition clause.

I don't want our country to become a Socialistic or Communistic nation.

First I wholeheartedly agree. I'm not a fan of communism, I'm not a fan of Socialism BUT I'm also not in favor of an entirely Capitalistic nation either. I'm about balance and balance is what life is all about.

If adopting socialistic policies is so "evil" then our guess our education system would qualify, as that is a based on socialistic principles. In this country ALL Americans are guaranteed an education regardless of ability to pay. (As an aside, to all those that then say where in the Constitution is health Care a given right, the same can be said for education yet we have had a public education system in place for 100's of years). You might not know this, but the first person to ever propose a public education system was one of our founding fathers Thomas Jefferson.

Here is the link to where the following quote can be found

Jefferson believed that education should be under the control of the government, free from religious biases, and available to all people irrespective of their status in society. Others who vouched for public education around the same time were Benjamin Rush, Noah Webster, Robert Coram and George Washington.

Our founding fathers recognized that an educated population was important to the growth of our nation and that everyone deserved the equal ability to attain such an education and move themselves up in life. By the same token , a healthy population is a productive population. Should not something as important as health care be accessible to all Americans, so that we may be a healthier society (and at this point, a healthier economy).?

Having a socialistic policy in place does not, by itself, make us a socialistic or even communistic country. True socialism in it's purest form is when everyone in society receives everything the same regardless of what they contribute. Socialism means no money and mutual ownership. In other words we'd all be living in the same equal house, driving the same equal automobile etc. America will NEVER, nor should it EVER be such a society. Anything in it's pure form, including Capitalism is never a healthy thing. The fact that we manage to have socialistic type programs amidst our democracy makes us a stronger , smarter more balanced nation. Having our public education has not made us a communist or socialistic nation.

But if you don't want to take my word for it that's fine. So then you must look at countries like France, Switzerland, the U.K and Germany . They are all democratic nations, part of the "free world". They all operate with the same MIXED economy as we do..having a balance between some socialistic policies and capitalistic free market policies. They all managed to have a Universal type health system without becoming what we all fear America would become. So the argument that we will be headed toward Communism or full blown socialism does not really have any evidence to support it. As a matter of fact, more evidence to support the argument that having such a policy does not compromise democracy exists.

I don't want the government making decisions regarding my health care.

Who do you think is in control of your health care now? Do you think you are? Do you think your Dr. is? No, they are not. The insurance companies have complete control of your health care. They can deny claims for such silly things like you having left out a very minor detail on your medical record by claiming that you falsified your application.

But let's say that you do not believe me and that you do not feel that it does happen (denials based on trivial omissions on application). Fine. Let me share my experience with you then.

My doctor had determined that the BEST course of action for me regarding management of my pre-existing condition was for me to have a device that needed approval from the insurance company (back when I actually had insurance). He submitted it to my insurance, and of course they denied it. I appealed and sent them all the literature including my own personal records to show the amazing results I had had that would conclude that this tool was the best to manage my situation. They denied it. I then submitted an outside appeal to a State Government Board that consisted of Dr's. Two of the three doctors on the panel overturned the insurance companies decision. These doctors looked at the evidence and ruled that indeed this was the best medical decision I and my Dr. could make. They had received the same information as was sent on my first internal appeal to the insurance company. The difference was, the insurance company was looking at profit margins. The state panel doesn't care about profit margins and looked at the factual evidence to support the claim.

Ultimately , in a perfect world, all decisions would be in the hands of the patient and the Dr's with no outside interference of any kind. However, this isn't a perfect world. But, at the end of the day who do you want making decisions for you and about you and your life? Do you want someone who is watching the profit margins over the actual medicine ? I'd much rather have my health care in the hands of those without the agenda of profit over everything else.

You want a Free Lunch.

This couldn't be further from the truth. Look, those who you would claim want a free lunch are already getting it. They are the poor receiving medicaid. The rest of us just want to be able to receive treatment when we are sick and know that if and/or when we meet with a medical problem that we would not loose everything we have and then some, or worse, not be able to receive treatment at all. I would be paying a premium right now (at 3x's the price a healthy person would be paying) if I didn't have the issue of a pre-existing condition (I can not afford to pay both for my treatments and the premium out of my pocket for the next year. It has then become a choice between insurance and medications).

I know that in the end, Universal Health Care would probably end up costing me and everyone else slightly more in taxes. But then it comes down to a question of conscience and it's why I feel there is such a deep line of divide in the issue. The taxes saved by NOT having a Universal health Care.. is it really worth it? I mean could I really lay down and sleep at night knowing that I have a few extra bucks in my pocket if those extra bucks came at the expense of peoples lives? I couldn't. I'd rather pay more knowing that I and everyone else can receive the treatment they need when they need it.

I think there is something that many miss or do not think about when they think of Universal Health Care. If you look at the Canadian system, which most American's will refer to and use as an argument against such a policy, you need to keep something into consideration. The Canadian system of health care is the government and only the government. But, if you look at the UK system of health care, which has a co-existing relationship between private insurance AND an underlying government run system you see a difference.

Let's just consider the NHS in the UK the "no frills" policy that every citizen gets ( and it's very extensive in it's coverage, by the way) It is the primary source of health care for most of the citizens of the UK. However, in that country you could buy a private policy to supplement the NHS, so that should something arise that the government would deem as "not covered" your private supplemental insurance (which is cheaper by far than American insurance because most of everyone's needs are already met by the NHS) would then kick in, so to speak. There are Dr's in the UK that take both the NHS and private insurance plans. What I see here is that at least everyone, regardless of financial status or standing, receives some form of health care while the rest that have the ability to purchase more, can always do so. If American's would just look at the Universal type plan as the bottom line entry level of health care, then purchase supplemental to pick up where they feel they may be left short by the government, then I do not see where the objection would lies. I just don't think that people think of it that way and feel it's this way (the government controlled plan) or nothing. As it is now the current legislation that is the subject of such heated debate, does not even propose such a thing. Being a part of the Government option is just that.. an option and is not the forced standard policy.

There are many more arguments that I could cover in this blog, but it could take me days to finish if I went into every one of them. The bottom line simply is this; you need to arm yourself with the information. You need to REALLY understand what the impact of our current health care system is having on you , your family, our economy and ultimately the health and status of our nation. Once you understand these things, the idea of socialized medicine becomes less of a demon and more of a viable solution to a huge and mounting problem, one that will surely lead to our economic fall from grace if we simply can not find a solution to it.

If you take a deep breath and think rationally and thoughtfully do you really really think that the government wants to 'kill granny" and control everything that you do? I understand being weary of government, but there is a point where caution becomes paranoid which leads to fear. Fear just leaves you frozen and unable to move forward. Do we really want to keep our health care system going down the tubes.

If you want to look up some information for yourself you can visit the following site that has a lot of useful detailed information including information on how other countries system of health care operate. If you really care about the issue then you should arm yourself with the knowledge so that you can make an informed intelligent decision based on rational thought and NOT based on fears, distortions and lies.

Sites to visit
Kaiser Family Foundation
National Coalition on Health Care
U.S Census Bureau

Breaking Down the Lies of the Right Wing Line by Line in the HC Bill

Okay everyone. Some that know me know how passionate I am about Health Care Reform. You also know that I am so because I am currently uninsured and trapped in an uninsurance cycle due to a pre-existing condition (Type I Diabetes).

For the first time in a very long time, REAL reform is on the horizon. We are closer than we have ever been. It stands a really good chance. It's no wonder the opposition is coming out so aggressively and , well with such desperation, against the Health Care Reform Bill that is currently being put through. What upsets me is NOT that they are asking questions about the bill, not that they are challenging the authority of it, so to speak. BUT.. what they are doing is preying on the vulnerabilities of the American public. The public they KNOW will not actually READ the bill, so what they SAY it says will be taken as .. well gospel , to those that follow them on the TV, in News and on the Radio. They know that they'll toss around words like "rationed" care and "government control"' and socialism and each and every one of you will gasp in horror and believe every word they are saying of it.

I can't take it anymore.. the lies, the mistruths. They are so blatant, so obvious to anyone who has actually taken the time to READ it.. even SKIM it. It's SO obvious. Please, don't get me wrong. It isn't only the "stupid" people that are falling in line with the Right wing lies. Very intelligent people.. people I know to be intelligent people are just eating it up hook line and sinker! These people are not, in general, ignorant. That is what makes me so damned sad about the entire thing.

So, the other day on city-data.com/forum, on the Politics and Other Controversy forum that I participate in, I saw a post by a person that, ironically enough, encouraged people and urged people on the importance of reading the bill because of the "horrors" that were in it. He or She proceeded to put down the comments made by Peter Fleckstein who claimed to have gone through the Obama Plan line by line. He/She gave the page and in some cases the section and line along with the "explanation" given by this Peter Fleckstein on what it says. Well, I couldn't resist. I knew that once I saw it, I had to see if what Mr. Fleckstein was actually saying was actually there in the bill. It immediately became apparent to me that the poster, the one urging everyone to read it for themselves, didn't even bother to read it for themselves and were just regurgitating what Fleckstein had said. Let me tell you, the outright blatant falsehoods in his statements were glaring. I can not believe that people like this actually get on the radio and are allowed to do such damage with their lies. I know, freedom of speech and I'm all for that. I don't know how these people sleep at night knowing that they are causing such damage with their lies.

What I've done, in this very long blog, is put the comments Fleckstein made about that page and section (which are reference for you to read for yourself) and then what it ACTUALLY says, opposed to what Fleckstein claims it says. And again. I encourage you to actually read it yourself. In some cases I actually cut and paste that section for you to read right here in the blog. It's long, but it is well worth the read.

You have to ask yourself, if they are lying about this (those trusted right wing people you listen to, or don't ) then what the hell us do they lie to you about. I didn't take the Presidents word for it either. I READ it and saw for myself. It's astonishing.

Enjoy it and leave your comments or questions for me. I'd be happy to answer them.

Pg 22 of the Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!

Page 22 talks about a government STUDY on different forms of health care coverage. .. Particularly Large group insured and self insured employer based health markets.

The study is meant to learn and illustrate the difference between them and the risks faced by the self insured being able to pay obligations or otherwise becoming financially insolvent. Etc. NOWHERE on that page does it talk about auditing self insured businesses books.

Pg 30 Sec 123 of bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you receive.

This talks about a government ADVISORY committee for both private and public options to RECOMMEND covered benefits and essential , enhanced and Premium (in other words, to advise what level certain things falls under etc.. ) all of which is meant to establish MINIMUM standers of insurance/care. It also goes on to further illustrate who makes up such a panel. It is a well rounded panel consisting of physicians and health care professionals.. It consists of 9 members who are not federal employees who are appointed by the President, 9 members who are not federal employees and who will be appointed by the Comptroller General similar to the manner in which he /she appoints members to the Medicare Payment Advisory committee and "such even number of members not to exceed 8 who are federal employees and officers , as the President may appoint.

Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED.

Rationed? NO. .this sets a STANDARD of CARE for the ESSENTIAL BENEFITS Package as defined in another section.. in other words.. a level of insurance that is the MINIMUM acceptable to be considered GOOD coverage and NOT under insurance. As a matter of fact.. here is a line from the previous page under that section

10 does not impose any annual or lifetime limit
11 on the coverage of covered health care items and
12 services;

The subsequent sections also talk about what insurance has to cover MINIMALLY.. and INCLUDES maternity.. WHICH .. BTW. Is not ALWAYS covered under every plan available NOW!

It limits cost sharing.. in other words.. out of pocket expenses for the insured individual so as not to be exorbitant and therefore overly expensive making insurance at the MINIMUM level much more expensive BEYOND the monthly premiums for the insured.

And.. those lines he was referring to.. talk about MAXIMUMS that cost sharing.. ie: money out of the insureds pocket CAN NOT EXCEED.. NOWHERE in there does it mention ANYTHING about rationing care!!!

Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your Health care Benefits for you. You have no choice in the decision.

WOW.. they really know how to twist things don’t they?

The job of the commissioner, as laid out in the bill is to make sure that INSURANCE PLANS THAT ARE OUT THERE AND OFFERED ON THE EXCHANGE MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARD SET FORTH AND AS MENTIONED ABOVE.

Again.. this is in response to plans that basically offer NOTHING.. THIS is so that ALL OF US who purchase insurance can be CONFIDENT that there is a MINIMUM STANDARD with things SET OUT that we KNOW will be covered at the very BASIC standard level!!!

He is also in charge of setting up the exchange of plans.. in other words.. all those submitted into the exchange comply with the law in regards to cost sharing/ standards/etc.

PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - Healthcare will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

NO.. it says that INSURANCE on the exchange can not be denied for discriminatory reasons.. in other words an illegal immigrant CAN purchase insurance. NOWHERE in there does it even USE the words illegal and immigrant. It is talking about the ability to obtain insurance.. NOT about the ability to obtain health care.

Pg 58 - Govt will have real-time access to individual finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued.

Here is the text he is referring to cut and pasted from the bill itself:

6 enable the real-time (or near real6
time) determination of an individual’s financial
7 responsibility at the point of service and, to the
8 extent possible, prior to service, including
9 whether the individual is eligible for a specific
10 service with a specific physician at a specific fa11
cility, which may include utilization of a ma12
chine-readable health plan beneficiary identi13
fication card;

Nowhere in there does it say ANYTHING About a National health Care CARD.. ONLY a BENEFITS CARD..which is basically your insurance ID card and talks about REAL TIME availability of information right there about what you are covered for and what your charges are. It cuts down on the paperwork.. and mistakes.

Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for direct funds transfers.

NO.. it talks about standardized electronic Administrative Transactions.. in other words the Dr.s office and/or insurance company will automatically deduct your copay from your card. It is basically referring to a standards across private and public options of being able to receive payments at point of transaction.

BTW.. the DR. is the one who collects the copays NOT the insurance company be it a private or public company. AND. FYI .. most likely any insurance company ALREADY knows your bank account numbers etc… because it is there whenever you pay your bill, with a check, debit or visa /MC debit card!!

PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).

Here is the actual text;
19 to provide reim19
bursement to assist participating employment-based
20 plans with the cost of providing health benefits to
21 retirees and to eligible spouses, surviving spouses
22 and dependents of such retirees.
23 (

Huh? Acorn.. so Acorn is the only employer, employee group out there that provides insurance to retirees?? Yeah.. okay.. not one mention of ACORN in there AT ALL.

P

g 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating a Healthcare Exchange to bring private healthcare plans under Govt control.

No.. it’s setting up the exchange to make sure that plans SOLD to consumers meets the MINIMUM STANDARD of insurance.. Do you know how many people have insurance that is basically WORTHLESS and covers absolutely NOTHING of any substance?? And then that person thinking they were “insured” is actually NOT!! Not really?

It’s basically acting as a HUB of choices for individuals and businesses. AND in order to BE in that “exchange” you MUST meet quality standards set forth by the government. Simple to understand and it makes much sense!!

PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private Healthcare plans in the Exchange

No.. once again.. it sets STANDARDS for the different levels.. so that you are getting a Basic if you pay for basic and aren't’ thinking you are paying for Premium when you are not getting the “level” deemed PREMIUM. Or buying basic and finding out certain BASIC things aren't really covered. STANDARS PEOPLE.. it's setting STANDARDS.. !! THAT is ALL.

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics for Benefit Levels of Plans = The Government rations Healt hcare based on cost benefits to government.

Rations.. LOL.. does he know what rationing is?? NO. .it just sets the quality level for each level.. it doesn’t say that each person only gets X amount of dollars allotted to them or x amount of procedures.. Obviously the lame brain who made these comments does not know what they are talking about.. or they are really perverting what it actually says to scare people.. most of whom would not even do what I’m doing now.. actually READ each section. Geez.. it just blows my mind how ridiculous this is.

PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic appropriation services or translation services for illegal aliens.

Hmm.. there are plenty people here legally for whom English language is not their first language.. Are they not entitled to fully understand their doctors, nurses or the medical forms they are given? We are the “melting pot” of the world are we not? Which means that there are many people that live here legally and otherwise who do not speak fluent English nor would understand more complex language involved in forms and it would be more comfortable reading it in their own language. Says NOTHING about illegal immigrants. Heck there are people here illegally that speak English better than some people who are here legally!! This assertion is just ridiculous and meant to appeal to the right wingers who want to throw out health care reform for their own citizens , who far outnumber illegals, because of their stance on immigration or animosity toward illegals.

Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups like ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt Health care plan

What is wrong with this? It talks about these groups REACHING OUT to the most vulnerable of the population.. the ones most likely unable to afford a private plan and teaching them about their OPTION of a public plan AND all those that will be part of the exchange. They are utilizing group/ groups that already have the ability and who are already working in an outreach capacity to reach people that need to be reached in order to pull them from the ranks of the uninsured INTO the ranks of the insured. And remember, the public option plan is not FREE. It's PURCHASED. Only MEDICAID is free.

PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid.

Yeah.. what’s wrong with this. They haven’t elected to role and they qualify for FREE healthcare under Medicaid because of their income levels. .. which means that they can’t afford any of the private or even the public option in the exchange. Medicaid is FREE!! They do nothing and are enrolled in it automatically!! If they get ill or need to be treated for something.. .they are COVERED!! They would get it anyway because..they are POOR . So .. what is the problem?

pg 124 lines 24-25 No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" allowed against Govt monopoly

yeah.. so? . basically other insurance companies can’t sue the government because they offer cheaper plans.. .which, btw, is the point of offering a “cheaper” plan.. so that people can afford it.

Hey.. if someone can afford to pay more and is truly afraid of the government.. then they won’t chose the public option and will choose the private. Given how there are many that “fear’ government health care, I’m sure the higher cost private companies will not have any problems attracting buyers for a little more. Plus.. the lower cost government option may actually encourage some price competition within the private sector. How? Well for one they’ll have to forgo corporate excess in order to compete.. in other words.. they won’t be able to pay one executive an excessive salary of 14M… not really a bad thing AT ALL.

It protects the governments ability to actually PROVIDE an alternative affordable option to the public should they chose to

pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ AMA - The Govt will dictate what wage you are allowed to make. (Wage limits).

NO.. .. here it is as written in the bill;

PHYSICIANS.—The Secretary shall provide
2 for the annual participation of physicians under the
3 public health insurance option, for which payment
4 may be made for services furnished during the year,
5 in one of 2 classes:
6 (A) PREFERRED PHYSICIANS.—Those phy7
sicians who agree to accept the payment rate
8 established under section 223 (without regard
9 to cost-sharing) as the payment in full.
10 (B) PARTICIPATING, NON-PREFERRED
11 PHYSICIANS.—Those physicians who agree not
12 to impose charges (in relation to the payment
13 rate described in section 223 for such physi14
cians) that exceed the ratio permitted under
15 section 1848(g)(2)(C) of the Social Security
16 Act.


It talks about Doctors that CHOOSE to Accept the FEES are basically IN the public plan network!!!

How is this any different than a doctor that agrees to accept the “fees” set forth and negotiated by the private insurance companies? It doesn’t dictate by any means a cap on a Dr’s income or any other health care service income.. ONLY the FEES that will be paid for the covered patient under the PUBLIC OPTION Plan! Doctors take more than one plan. It does not say a doctor can only make.. oh $200k a year. Doctors also take many forms of insurance.. including medicaid/medicare and other private insurance. This section does not in any way prevent or limit a Dr. from doing just that.

Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employers MUST enroll their employees into the public option plan. THEY HAVE NO CHOICE, and neither do the employees.

NO.. it says that an employer MUST provide coverage to its employers AND must do so from one of the insurance companies/plans offered in the Exchange.. again.. the exchange sets up STANDARDS… MINIMUM standards so as to eliminate sub standard insurance and coverage which basically is crap. And it makes sure that employers are offering adequate coverage to their employees AND it states that the employer must AUTOMATICALLY ENROLL employee in the plans that they select from the exchange..

It also states that an employer can not contribute less than a set amount (75% individual / 65% family) meaning that an individual will pay no more than 25% of the premium and a family 35% of the premium.

Yes.. it appears in this section that insurance is MANDATE. but we all knew that.. No surprise. And there is a section that assess fines for those not in compliance with the mandate. I believe for individuals it’s a 2% of income.

I have no problem with mandating of insurance. Car insurance is mandated the same way. You can’t lift pre-existing condition clauses without mandating coverage.

Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay premiums for every employee, part time employees AND their families as well.

I think this is referencing the wrong page .. no such thing there.

Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll of $400,000 will have an 8% tax levied on all payroll.

Again.. this is the option if a company does not want to provide insurance.. and yes, it means either buy insurance or pay what amounts to a fine. Mandating of coverage…

pg 150 Lines 9-13 Employers with payroll between $251,000 & 400,000 who does not provide in full, the public option, will have a 6% tax on all payroll levied.

Yes.. they do not have to buy insurance, but because they are smaller they pay a slightly lower fine.. Mandatory insurance coverage.

Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC coverage according to Govt mandate, will be taxed at 2.5% of their income for healthcare. So, you will have government healthcare coverage, or you will be punished.

No. you don’t have to HAVE the government option or be punished…you have your choices of different options INCLUDING a public one. You are not forced to take the public one or even private. If you chose not to enroll in any plan.. private or public option, you will be assessed a fine of 2.5%. It’s not like they are automatically enrolling you in the government plan and deducting the money or adding the premium to your tax bill.You are simply paying a fine for being uninsured.. and rightfully so. Because if you get ill and sick, who do you think is going to pick up your bill? Tax payers. At least the fines you pay will help alleviate that bill paid by the rest of us should that uninsured person fall ill.

Remember.. those uninsured cost hospitals 37B in unpaid bills a year and the government much more. If people decide they still don’t want coverage, they SHOULD pay a fine to the government who will end up picking up their bill later. Nothing wrong with this. People will decide what is cheaper.. buying insurance or paying the 2.5% fine. Lets say you make $30K a year.. that is $780 dollar you’ll be paying. Maybe a person making that much will elect to pay that cheaper fine than paying for the premiums offered on the exchange (including the government one). OR.. if they qualify for Medicaid they don’t’ have to worry.. they’ll have Medicaid at no cost AND no fine to boot.

Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay)

Non resident aliens does not mean illegal aliens. However, since illegals don’t really file tax returns anyway I don’t understand what hte objection is..LOL.they NEVER pay taxes.. Illegals are undocumented in all sense of the word.

Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Administration (GOVT) will have total and complete access to ALL your personal financial, bank and investment information.

They basically have access to your tax return (which the government already has) to determine whether you qualify for health exchange subsidies. Um.. the government already has access to all that information.. Who do you think you are submitting your tax returns to? Some privately owned corporation???

PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that.

You need to finish that sentence.. because it then goes on to say for a certain purpose.. under a certain section.. text below

The tax im15
posed under this section shall not be treated as tax
16 imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining
17 the amount of any credit under this chapter or for
18 purposes of section 55.’’.
19 (

Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid, Seniors, low income, and poor.

No… it talks about FEES Paid to physicians NOT actual services.

Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Wages for all doctors will be made the same. Specialists like Brain Surgeons will make the same money a General Practitioner makes.

No.. it talks about under the following categories of service provided the fees will be the same.. NOT over EVERYTHING provided by the specialists.. read the complete section below that that paragraph refers to;

9 ‘‘(5) SERVICE CATEGORIES.—For services fur10
nished on or after January 1, 2009, each of the fol11
lowing categories of physicians’ services (as defined
12 in paragraph (3)) shall be treated as a separate
13 ‘service category’:
14 ‘‘(A) Evaluation and management services
15 that are procedure codes (for services covered
16 under this title) for—
17 ‘‘(i) services in the category des18
ignated Evaluation and Management in the
19 Health Care Common Procedure Coding
20 System (established by the Secretary under
21 subsection (c)(5) as of December 31, 2009,
22 and as subsequently modified by the Sec23
retary); and
VerDate Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00240 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
241
HR 3200 IH
1 ‘‘(ii) preventive services (as defined in
2 section 1861(iii)) for which payment is
3 made under this section.
4 ‘‘(B) All other services not described in
5 subparagraph (A).
6 Service categories established under this paragraph
7 shall apply without regard to the specialty of the
8 physician furnishing the service.’’.

PG 253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of Doctor's time. Govt. decides value of humans

.

It talks about the work and services of the DOCTOR.. NOT the value of the people the Doctor treats.. WOW.. how far the right will stretch!!!

PG 265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries.

This pertains to the government in medicare/Medicaid arena.. NOT between private insurance and those companies, doctors etc. The government has every right to do just that…as private industry does just those things when pertaining to quality, cost, etc.

PG 268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs

Under Medicaid/medicare..no different than a private negotiates with each entity. This is NOT across the board.. this all falls under Medicaid/medicare.

PG 272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

Rationing.. NO.. it talks about determining if some hospitals in the Medicaid/medicare network cost more than others that are just as effective is all. Nothing about limits on who gets what care or rationing.. Again.. a stretch and absurd accusation.

Page 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals for what Govt deems preventable re-admissions.

Again.. as related to medicare.. NOT as related to anything else other than who they pay for what.. that is the right of Medicaid/medicare.

Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors that treat a patient during initial admission will be penalized.

Under medicare.. in other words, the Dr. that treated is responsible for that treatment. If his work is sloppy.. he’ll get a reduced payment for not doing it right the first time..

Pg 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government dictates what Doctors can make and how much they can own.

Ah.. this is talking about when a Dr. under medicare refers a patient to a specific hospital. This is to prevent Dr’s from referring patients to a hospital based on monetary compensation above and beyond their fees by referring them to a hospital in which they have an “ownership” stake. In otherwords, what if a Dr. could have referred the patient to an equally affective hospital that costs medicaid/Medicare less, but that Dr. referred him to a hospital in which he has personal ownership in. He costs Medicaid/Medicare more so that he could profit more. It’s a conflict of interest of sorts.. kind of like a “kickback”. Makes sense. Again.. this is under MEDICARE/Medicaid section and NOT section dealing with the entire medical field.

Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt mandates hospitals cannot expand without government approval.

Again.. only pertains to hospitals that qualify as providers under Medicaid/Medicare.. NOT across the boards.

Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 - Govt mandates establishment of outcome based measures. Rationing

It’s going to make sure that patients utilizing services are actually having a good outcome of said service. In other words.. what doesn’t work will be thrown out in favor of what does. Makes sense. And again. . this is all under the Medicaid/medicare section .. NOT the section pertaining to private insurance and public insurance option, exchange etc.

Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing people into the Govt plan.

If the plans do not meet the standards set forth under the criteria that they set up of MINIMUM standards in order to be a medicare/Medicaid provider, than they will not be a medicare/Medicaid provider. NOWHERE in that section does it say anything about then being pushed INTO the public option plan!!! THAT is a BOLD FACED LIE

Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs persons for care. Can euthanasia be far behind for "undesirables"?

It means that someone can not enroll until the open enrollment period.. NOT that they can’t EVER enroll. Read the section.. it's right there and speaks only of ability to enroll during open enrollment periods.

Pg 379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Committee. Can you say HC by phone?

It’s an EXPANSION of the telehealth.. meant to help those in RURAL areas.. as the title of that section indicates ; Medicare Rural Access Protections.

PG 425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consultation. Euthanasia and Doctor-Assisted Suicide.

Mandates.. NO it provides seniors with counseling on setting up living wills, health care proxies and so on so that they along with their families, are prepared for what may come. It says nothing about killing off old people or Assisted Suicide. It counsels families about PALATIVE care and HOSPICE!!! It counsels on why it’s important to SET YOUR DIRECTIVE of what actions YOU want your family to take FOR YOU in the event you are unable to make decisions for yourself.. like.. do you want to be on life support if that is the only way to sustain your life..etc. Many people are not even aware of what these things are.. do you have ANY idea the turmoil of a family member not knowing what you may or may not want in the event of complete incapacitation has on people.

Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, and assume power of attorney of all enrollees. Mandatory!

NOWHERE does it say that the State will then make the decision . And if someone hasn’t designated someone to make the decision, then what? Who does if the person can’t. Is it so wrong that if you are enrolled in medicare you have someone to make decision for you should you not be able to so that YOUR OWN WISHES are carried out? It says right there the PERSONS OWN WISHES.. NOT that of the state.

PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death decisions to end your life.

Here it is.. it’s basically just saying that the practitioner will provide a list of resources..RESOURCES!! All of which will help a person make the decisions THEY WANT!!!

An explanation by the practitioner of the
20 continuum of end-of-life services and supports avail21
able, including palliative care and hospice, and bene22
fits for such services and supports that are available
23 under this title.

The government doesn’t mandate anything. It provides you with all your options!!

Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "advance care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates

PG 429 Lines 10-12 "advance care consultation" may include an ORDER to initiate end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV to terminate a life.

No. .it talks about what constitutes a legal form of action set out by the patient for what THE PATIENT wants done as far as measures at the end of their life WHEN their health deteriorates.

Here is a line from it:

effectively communicates the individual’s
18 preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, in19
cluding an indication of the treatment and care de20
sired by the individual;

Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.

is signed and dated by a physician (as de9
fined in subsection (r)(1)) or another health care
10 professional (as specified by the Secretary and who
11 is acting within the scope of the professional’s au12
thority under State law in signing such an order, in13
cluding a nurse practitioner or physician assistant)
14 and is in a form that permits it to stay with the in15
dividual and be followed by health care professionals
16 and providers across the continuum of care

Clearly they are talking about a physician that is well a legal physician.. not just any Joe Schmo on the street people.. LOL Come on..

PG 430 Lines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life

NO .. it talks about conditions in which the directive SET FORTH by the patient is carried out! NOT what the Government wants.. but what YOU, the person on medicare, set forth in your health proxy and living will.

Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?

ACORN?? Well unless ACORN meets all the medical criteria with their facilities set out in this section than Acorn won’t be doing ANYTHING regarding end of life. You know “community” “not for profit” could also include..oh CATHOLIC HOSPICES too you know!!!

Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org.

See my statement above.

PG 489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means government will now be involved in marriage and family decisions.

LOL. No.. it talks about how it will cover marriage counseling and mental health services.. same as it covers any medical condition it covers. Unless you think Senators are going to be sitting in the room telling you what to do?? Are these people aware of what therapy/counseling actually is? Another stretch and false information put forth by the right wingers.. and it’s ridiculous

From the bill:
The term ‘marriage and family therapist
9 services’ means services performed by a marriage and
10 family therapist (as defined in paragraph (2)) for the diag11
nosis and treatment of mental illnesses, which the mar12
riage and family therapist is legally authorized to perform
13 under State law

Pg 494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services.

No.. it will provide coverage for mental illness..and just like anything else negotiated fees and approved physicians that comply with medicare/Medicaid standards.. no rationing. There isn’t a set amount of dollars for a set amount of people and no where does it even allude to that in the slightest.

Here's the full Health Care bill that sits in the House.

Do you see now how things get twisted. How the right wants you to think the government is killing off granny, when in actuality it is PROVIDING service TO the family to help them set up all they need to in the event of end of life decisions being made. Can you not see how the right is twising and lying their faces off about this? Doesn't it not upset you that they lied so blatantly and worse yet, the people are buying it hook line and sinker!

Next time you hear something from any commentator.. on the left or on the right, in regards to this bill, go READ that section that it was referring to. LOOK IT UP YOURSELF. You'll be amazed. I was!

Who the Hell am I , Why this Blog and What Is It All About!!

A "Liberal". That is what I've been labeled by..well right wing "conservatives" here on the net. But what exactly is a "liberal"? Well, if being a liberal means that I am the complete opposite of a conservative Republican... then I am PROUD to be a labeled LIBERAL. (FYI. .found this funny image through google.. )

To first define what a liberal is I used google.. of course. I google EVERYTHING don't you know? Here is what I found;

• broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant ...
• having political or social views favoring reform and progress
• tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
• a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
• big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "the bounteous goodness of God"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
• a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
• free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"

Yeah.. that sounds about right.. Most every one of those sounds like me with exception of the second to last one. Self regulating my ass!! The Corporate pigs and greedy mo fo's who run them are NOT very good at self regulating which has been completely obvious the last 8 years. But, we'll save that for another day.

I found this definition for conservative;

• Disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

Yeah.. that sounds about right..and sounds just the opposite of me.

I find conservatism a complete oxymoron? Actually there "values" are a complete conflict and , well are quite hypocritical. But I'll delve into that in another post at another time. Don't want to give it all away in the first blog, now do we?

So, who am I and what am I about? Well, I'm a 35 year old mother and , well , yes wife (as the title implies). I'm a self employed Gen X generation, the child of a baby boomers. I was born and raised in NY, which may have predisposed me to being a "liberal", although there are a few conservatives I know also born and raised in NY. One of which happens to be someone that was really close friend once upon a time. We grew apart, although at the time I didn't realize just how apart we would grow. Let's just say she is on the other side of the spectrum. I'm not really that surprised though. She is good people and so is her family, even though they are conservative (that is a joke folks)

There was a time when I could give two monkey's butts about politics. Yeah, I was one of those who only voted in one election THE Election, who never really watched the news nor cared to. I was more concerned with the nightlife section of the local newspaper to figure out which club/bar/scene to hit that weekend.

Of my other half, he really has no opinions that I know of. He thinks the stupid, religion is stupid because all it does is cause wars (he has a point). For the record, I believe in God but not religion. I'm a "spiritualist" or a gnostic..which is one that is always seeking the truth. That too, is probably a trait of a "liberal". Thank god he doesn't have too many opinions and if he does he usually agrees with mine (and most definitely on the most important one to me, health care). What a nightmare if I married him and he turned out to be a right wing republican and I just didn't see it. Don't laugh, it can happen. Met a nice woman this week who had that happen to her. Had no idea her now ex husband was so conservative on her political views. She is liberal like me (accept she didn't want Hillary as President, but that is okay.. I forgave her..LOL). She now has one child that is liberal like herself and another that is conservative like his father. Boy, get Thanksgiving and family dinners must be interesting in that family.

But back to what I was previously discussing. My lack of any political knowledge or care. I have a confession to make that will make my fellow labeled "liberals" shutter. Are you ready for this.. I was stupid enough to have voted for Bush in the second election ( I voted Gore in the first). Yup.. you read it right. Why, you might ask. Pretty stupid reason in hindsight but I felt changing presidents mid war (Iraq) was a bad idea. Turns out that war was a bad idea and the premise a lie. I decided I will never make that mistake again and so I have become more involved, shall we say, in the process. I was also tired of living with consequences of others votes but knew I couldn't complain unless I used mine (and not just every 4 years) and made the smart choice for the smart and right reasons. After having been an independent I finally registered with a party. I'm sure you can guess which one (Democrats.. the third one really just messes up elections and swings it in the wrong direction, IMO). I always identified more with that parties ideologies anyway. And, I lost any respect I had for the Republican party over the last 4 years of Bush's presidency.

Please enjoy the blog, leave your comments but try to keep it clean. Now.. in the liberal spirit I will not be close minded in listening to "your side" after all, we are an open minded bunch. I will lose it , however, when your "side"or argument against something is a lie you heard from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and many of the other idiot right wing nutso's out there. Come at me with REAL facts and information even if that means you'd have to find it and read it for yourself. Don't just regurgitate someone else's opinion you heard on a radio show, tv show or what have you. That reminds me, I'm seriously thinking about de-friending a FB person (not a former close friend, but a former classmate) who keeps posting clips and news bits about all these conspiracy theories.. like the infamous Obama Birth Certificate thing for one, and many others. I've seen stuff that equates Obama to a Nazi for crying out loud. I think some, not all , conservatives are like conspiracy theory nuts who walk around the house with foil on their heads for fear the government is reading your mind with their special satelite. LOL. (Hey.. kudos to the person who can tell me what movie the foil on the head reference I just made is from ;) )

But in all seriousness..I don't think all conservative people are mean, greedy or selfish.. I really don't. There are a few that I do. One particular jerk from AZ really gets my goose on a political forum I participate in when I have some time. He's such an arrogant (insert expletive here) . There are some that swing right that I do admire and respect, so do not take offense. My tirade is not meant to offend, but just to vent my frustrations of the GENERAL and not the specific individuals of that "group". So, if you are one and we are friends..we'll just be sure never to discuss politics and you'll be sure never to read my blog and we'll get a long just fine. I promise. I'm sure there are a few people I'm friendly with whom I've never spoken politics with that , if I ever did, I would find they were more "conservative" and that's just fine. We're all entitled to our opinions right?

But I won't only go into politics.. I promise. I'll talk about the news, the weather and my adventures with my 3 year old... raising him, disciplining him.. the sleepless nights of being up during hacking post nasal drip coughs (like last night..I'm sooo tired) and other things that end up really frustrating me. It's like great therapy. Hopefully you'll find it amusing.