At a townhall meeting, former Democratic National Committee (DNC) chair Howard Dean was asked why tort reform is not included in ObamaCare. Then an amazing thing happened. Dean came very close to telling the truth. I was stunned. The truth ? Did Dean get DNC clearance for that ? I hope he doesn't get flagged as an Obama enemy. Here's Dean's answer:
“Here is why tort reform is not in the bill. When you go to pass a really enormous bill like that the more stuff you put in, the more enemies you make, right? And the reason why tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on, and that is the plain and simple truth. Now, that’s the truth.”
Bingo. Tort reform is not included in ObamaCare because the Democrats don't want to take on the trial lawyers. The only thing Dean didn't reveal was WHY the Dems don't want to take on the trial lawyers. The reason is because the trial lawyers pay the Democrats not to take on the trial lawyers. The lawyers are big-time Democratic campaign donors, so the Dems are content to only demonize the insurance companies and the doctors in order to pass ObamaCare. Trial lawyers get a pass, even if it makes YOUR health care insurance more expensive.
Health care is a right, you know, and it's evil to profit from it. That's what the Dems keep telling us, anyway.
====
Speaking of health care and flagging enemies, there is another right-wing nutjob spreading malicious myths about ObamaCare. No, not Palin. This time it's Representative Betty Markey, a Democrat from Colorado. Here's what Markey told a gathering of her constituents, from Coloradoan.com:
Some people, including Medicare recipients, will have to give up some current benefits to truly reform the nation's health-care system, Rep. Betsy Markey told a gathering of constituents in Fort Collins on Wednesday.
Markey has repeatedly said during the August congressional recess that Medicare spending needs to be reined in to help pay for reforming the broader health-care system.
"There's going to be some people who are going to have to give up some things, honestly, for all of this to work," Markey said at a Congress on Your Corner event at CSU. "But we have to do this because we're Americans."
Reduce Medicare benefits ? Uh, oh. That runs contrary to the official Dem health care narrative, which states that 47 million more people will be insured for less money than it costs now, and with absolutely no reductions in health care services or availability ever, ever, ever. Markey should be called down to Principal Obama's office real soon. Between Markey and Dean, a little too much inconvenient truth is leaking out. How's a President supposed to fundamentally transform America with such loose lips ? Did the weekly Democratic talking points memo get lost in the mail, or what ? Darn that government-run post office. The Dems should have used Federal Express instead.
===
On the crazy right-wing extremist violence front, the windows were smashed out of the Denver Democratic Party headquarters, prompting Democratic officials to immediately cast blame on Obama health care opponents (the astroturf mob, aka, regular older American citizens). From the Colorado AP News:
Democratic leaders initially said that the window shattering was an act of political vandalism, possibly by opponents of health care reform…State Democratic Chairwoman Pat Waak continued to say that it was an act of vandalism prompted by the heated debate over President Barack Obama's health care reform…"I stand by my statement that I think there are people opposed to health care reform and there has been a lot of rhetoric that has prompted an atmosphere that I don't think is constructive," Waak said Wednesday. "It's such a polarizing issue. It shouldn't be."
It turns out that the vandalism was done by one Maurice Schwenkler. The problem is, Schwenkler isn't a right-winger. Schwenkler is a former Democratic campaigner and a gay rights transgender activist who opposed Obama's anti-gay rights positions. Schwenkler is a left-winger. Darn. The facts keep getting in the way of that liberal narrative about right-wing violence over health care townhall meetings. The official score is now……Left-wing acts of violence – 2, Right-wing acts of violence – 0.
===
The lack of right-wing townhall violence doesn't stop liberals from whining about it, though. On wednesday night's Countdown With Keith Ubermoron on MSLSD, Olby named Congressman Wally Herger from California the Worst Person In The World when Herger called a man at a townhall meeting "a great American" after the man shouted out from the crowd that he was "a proud right-wing terrorist." The man is not a terrorist, of course. He's a veteran, and was openly mocking those on the left (like Olbermann) who describe townhall protesters using pejorative terms like "terrorists," a "mob," "racists," etc. Olbermann is either too stupid or too dishonest to acknowledge the difference. Btw, on the previous linked video, Olby also goes after Glenn Beck for tearing into Van Jones (an acknowledged communist and Obama's Green Jobs Czar). Olby said "Glenn Beck is crap," because Beck didn't divulge that Van Jones group, Color Of Change, is the group that is pressuring advertisers to drop Beck's show. In reality, it's Olbermann who is crap, because Beck has divulged that information, not to mention the fact that Beck went after Jones BEFORE Jones' group starting going after Beck, so Olby has his cause and effect reversed. Keith Olbermann IS the worst person in the world. Why anyone would watch Olbermann's dishonest crap show is the only thing that mystifies me (but I'd never try to pull his advertisers. That's crap too). In Olby's defense, of the three stories he brought up during his moronic Worst Person trilogy, he did get ONE factually correct, even though his snarky histrionics on that story were way overblown too. Seriously, liberal readers, do you watch that show ? If so, why ? All you are getting there is propaganda, half truths, and outright lies.
(Note to liberals – I'm not sticking up for Glenn Beck here. I'm sticking up for the facts. Note the difference. I thought Beck was wrong to call Obama a racist too, but he doesn't deserve to lose his show over it).
{ 21 comments… read them below or add one }
King, I don't mind sticking up for Beck and that utterance that gave the White House its excellent chance to go after Beck and the other "racist" conservative talkers for being racists. I guess Rush has said something they could call racist, also. I consider race to be the main reason we have Obama in that seat now because enough white people voted for him because he was a black man, and by damn it was time we had one of them as president. No studying of the words he was uttering on the campaign trail, like his words in Colorado Springs last September about the necessity of a civilian force equally funded, trained and armed to the military. I thought at the time those words means something because Obama had said earlier that words do mean something.
Beck has been after Obama all week and has asked some questions of the White House that will cause them trouble as the questions get out to the general public and have been unanswered.
Boy, am I glad that I don't get MSLSD on my DishNet program. That way I don't have to hear filtered Olbermann and can hear only the best of Keith on Fox.
Have I just opened myself up to our liberal friends? I hope so as that will give me a better opportunity to push for some answers to Beck's questions from them.
The Dean gaffe was almost equal to the one Maxine Waters made when all her Democrat friends had to lean behind her to laugh at her. That one by Waters should have told many people enough to be afraid of the left and she got re-elected after saying it. I think that Dean may be standing up all the time and sleeping on his belly from the caning his betters in the DNC had to administer on him. Isn't it something how the truth wiggles out of THEIR mouths at the most inopportune times? LOL
The Beck comment was ill-conceived and unfortunate.
What kills me about it is the double standard and hypocrisy of complaining about it. After all the promotion of every knucklehead that made the same charge against President Bush. (Not to mention Bush 41 and Reagan)
The charge of racism has lost most of its capital, it is thrown about by lefties so readily these days. It is only shocking when it is used to describe a democrat. I'm not a fan of Beck's, but he's simply using the term in the cheap and empty way dems use it all the time.
Absolutely.
In addition, that liberal group isn't really going after Beck because he said Obama was a racist. As has been pointed out, liberals call conservatives racists all the time and never suffer any consequences whatsoever. That group is going after Beck because Beck is successful. They want to shut him up. It's about censorship, not racism.
"The charge of racism has lost most of its capital…"
On conservatives, no doubt. Conservatives, the same folks who have NO blacks representing them in Congress, wear charges of racism on their sleeves as badges of honor. So, yeah, in that sick way, I guess, "the charge of racism has lost most of it's capital."
Weasel words like these…."I'm not a fan of Beck's, but he's simply using the term in the cheap and empty way dems use it all the time."…..refer to Glenny Beck's calling the president a racist. The Beckster said Obama hated white people or white culture and was a racist. To larry, that's what the Democrats do all the time so Beck was simply following their lead.
Only…see?…..they don't…and that's why there's no quote or evidence in larry's quick hitter.
Right on cue, Reverend starts calling folks racists left and right, in his cheap and empty way.
Self-awareness has never been the Rev's forte.
Rev's reply was just what one could expect from him. He has been very predictable for years now and surely won't be changing very soon.
Has Rev ever called anyone racist because they failed to vote for Obama or failed to support him on anything he has done? Well, maybe not straight out, but surely by intimation. I have been called racist by so many liberals (progs) the last few months for those two reasons that I can't remember just which ones used which excuse. They really are a name calling bunch. I wonder if Beck, who Rev couldn't even call by his real name one time in a short post, made up the names he showed Friday that THEY have called him. Name callers, all.
democrats and republicans
ENEMIES OF AMERICA
So if there is no tort reform in the bill that is a reason to not have health care reform? Is that what you are saying?
Democrats care about the minority of people who do not have rights . Health care reform is about insuring many people who cant afford it. Medical malpractice victims also don't have a voice, and medical malpractice lawyers do speak for them regardless of the motives of some. I am sure if your loved one died from a doctor who did something wrong you'd be suing too. Of course we need to control it so doesn't go out of hand. But that can lie in the hands of the judges who award .
When insurance companies are getting huge profits you are worried about a couple of rich doctors and a person who made some money because of some doctors negligence?
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=4641&type=0&sequence=3
"The majority of tort disputes never reach a trial verdict. For example, of the 41,696 tort cases that were terminated in U.S. district courts in fiscal year 2000, only 3 percent were decided in trials.(15) The NCSC similarly reports that "[t]he vast majority of all [state] tort cases are disposed through some form of settlement, with only 3 percent of all tort matters resulting in a jury trial."(16)"
So you are worried about saving maybe 3 %
Doesnt seem like tort reform will do much of anything or save you much .
Andrea please,
Because a legal action doesn't get to trial doesn't mean that the outcome doesn't affect the cost of health care. Who do you think pays for all of those settlements???
Please tell me you understand this issue better than your post indicates.
Knozzmoeking please.
Andrea was actually overstating the case. Medical malpractice suits account for 1% of total health care costs.
Tort reform has very little to do with containing costs….but I'll tell you what tort reform does have to do with……the political bashing of Democrats and liberals. Tort reform, because trial lawyers are mainly Democratic and don't usually systematically refill GOP coffers, is always a political plank of the Dinosaur Party.
No real policy…..and that's to be expected…..just politics.
Vote Libertarian, terje.
Andrea,
My father died because a doctor did something wrong (surgery that was too invasive given my father's fragile condition). The doctor certainly didn't do it on purpose. He did his best. The doctor was crying when he came out of the OR. Doctors aren't God. I could have sued, but I fail to see how that would've brought my father back.
So many malpractice lawsuits are done merely to pad a lawyer's bank account. Why do you think they advertise on television ? Tort reform could make insurance less expensive for everyone. There's no reason to exclude it from health care reform, except that trial lawyers are big Democratic campaign contributors.
Reverend please.
Malpractice insurance for surgeons in Ohio is about $100,000 per year. In Florida, it's $200,000. You don't think that affects the cost of medical care ? About one out of three surgeons have been sued. I don't think they are all that incompetent, do you ?
You're 1% figure for malpractice is way off. It doesn't include all the costs of defensive medicine that doctors do to prevent lawsuits, that drives our health care costs out of sight.
In the five states that have passed tort reform, insurance premiums have not decreased.
False.
But King, Andrea, Rev, and Tbomb are just spouting the left view of things and although they use numbers to convince they manage to twist numbers for that very reason. When numbers can be used to make something look like something that fits the old agenda they are very popular tools, especially for liberals, it seems.
That statistic the Rev uses about malpractice only accounting for 1% of health care costs just slays me. It is so bogus. Even if it was true, it amounts to billions of dollars.
1% of helath care is spent on malpractice suits. It is a minor part of cost containment.
Conservatives who defend BIG MONEY bash away at this 1%, either knowingly or unknowingly, to do their BIG MONEY buddies bidding. I don't know why conservatives do this….they just do.
While a whopping 1% of health care costs is found in malpractice suits…..31% of health care costs are attributed to administrative costs by BIG MONEY. Conservatives either can't comprehend that fact….or believe that that's how it all should be.
Defending the wasteful and greedmongered 31% is more important to conservatives then lowering overall costs and covering everyone. Majoring on minors (1%) for political reasons while totally ignoring the 31% is what I have been complaining about for years about conservatives. They are either dishonest……or they simply do not give a damn about other Americans…maybe both.
Oooh, phony figure number 2 – 31% of health care costs are administrative. I debunked that one on this blog long ago. It's more like 8-13%.
The lowest malpractice figure I've ever heard from the furthest left website was 2%, and that doesn't count the costs of defensive medicine, which is the more sizable aspect of it.