Categorized | Domestic Affairs, Healthcare, Politics
Nurses Criticize Health Bill
by kellygrrrl
Posted on 22 December 2009 | 4:11 pm 
Print This Post
“The 150,000 member National Nurses United, the nation’s largest union and professional organization of registered nurses in the U.S., today criticized the healthcare bill now advancing in the U.S. Senate saying it is deeply flawed and grants too much power to the giant insurers.”
NNU co-president Karen Higgins, RN, said today in a statement:
“It is tragic to see the promise from Washington this year for genuine, comprehensive reform ground down to a seriously flawed bill that could actually exacerbate the healthcare crisis and financial insecurity for American families, and that cedes far too much additional power to the tyranny of a callous insurance industry.
“Sadly, we have ended up with legislation that fails to meet the test of true healthcare reform, guaranteeing high quality, cost effective care for all Americans, and instead are further locking into place a system that entrenches the chokehold of the profit-making insurance giants on our health. If this bill passes, the industry will become more powerful and could be beyond the reach of reform for generations.”
NNU Co-president Deborah Burger, RN challenged arguments of legislation proponents that the bill should still be passed because of expanded coverage, new regulations on insurers, and the hope that it will be improved in the House-Senate conference committee or future years:
“Those wishful statements ignore the reality that much of the expanded coverage is based on forced purchase of private insurance without effective controls on industry pricing practices or real competition and gaping loopholes in the insurance reforms.
“Desperation to pass a bill, regardless of its flaws, has made the White House and Congress subject to the worst political extortion and new, crippling concessions every day.”
NNU Co-president Jean Ross, RN, said:
“The bill seems more likely to be eroded, not improved, in future years due to the unchecked influence of the healthcare industry lobbyists and the lessons of this year in which all the compromises have been made to the right.
“NNU and nurses will continue to work with the thousands of grassroots activists across the nation to campaign for the best reform, which would be to expand Medicare to cover everyone, the same type of system working more effectively in every other industrial country. The day of that reform will come.”
NNU cited ten significant problems in the legislation, noting many of the same flaws also exist in the House version and are likely to remain in the bill that emerges from the House-Senate reconciliation process:
1. The individual mandate forcing all those without coverage to buy private insurance, with insufficient cost controls on skyrocketing premiums and other insurance costs.
2. No challenge to insurance company monopolies, especially in the top 94 metropolitan areas where one or two companies dominate, severely limiting choice and competition.
3. An affordability mirage. Congressional Budget Office estimates say a family of four with a household income of $54,000 would be expected to pay 17 percent of their income, $9,000, on healthcare exposing too many families to grave financial risk.
4. The excise tax on comprehensive insurance plans which will encourage employers to reduce benefits, shift more costs to employees, promote proliferation of high-deductible plans, and lead to more self-rationing of care and medical bankruptcies, especially as more plans are subject to the tax every year due to the lack of adequate price controls. A Towers-Perrin survey in September found 30 percent of employers said they would reduce employment if their health costs go up, 86 percent said they’d pass the higher costs to their employees.
5. Major loopholes in the insurance reforms that promise bans on exclusion for pre-existing conditions, and no cancellations for sickness. The loopholes include:
- Provisions permitting insurers and companies to more than double charges to employees who fail “wellness” programs because they have diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol readings, or other medical conditions.
- Insurers are permitted to sell policies “across state lines”, exempting patient protections passed in other states. Insurers will thus set up in the least regulated states in a race to the bottom threatening public protections won by consumers in various states.
- Insurers can charge four times more based on age plus more for certain conditions, and continue to use marketing techniques to cherry-pick healthier, less costly enrollees.
- Insurers may continue to rescind policies for “fraud or intentional misrepresentation” – the main pretext insurance companies now use to cancel coverage.
6. Minimal oversight on insurance denials of care; a report by the California Nurses Association/NNOC in September found that six of California’s largest insurers have rejected more than one-fifth of all claims since 2002.
7. Inadequate limits on drug prices, especially after Senate rejection of an amendment, to protect a White House deal with pharmaceutical giants, allowing pharmacies and wholesalers to import lower-cost drugs.
8. New burdens for our public safety net. With a shortage of primary care physicians and a continuing fiscal crisis at the state and local level, public hospitals and clinics will be a dumping ground for those the private system doesn’t want.
9. Reduced reproductive rights for women.
10. No single standard of care. Our multi-tiered system remains with access to care still determined by ability to pay. Nothing changes in basic structure of the system; healthcare remains a privilege, not a right.
Related posts:
If you liked this article,
This post was written by:
 |
kellygrrrl - who has written 522 posts on Free Range Talk.
|
Submit your own article via this simple form and we will format it for you for publishing.
133 Responses to “Nurses Criticize Health Bill”
Jump to Leave New Comment (Anyone can post)
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
-
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by TinyTheMouse: Nurses Criticize Health Bill http://freerangetalk.com/?p=21482…
Comments
Recent Comments
- I was thinking "The Price Is Right" might be more apt.
- First of all, Democrats in power aren't liberals. Secondly, and most importantly, they cave, they do...
- Perhaps we all believed in a mirage and through the information age, we are having the wool removed ...
- Nicely done, MsD. I often wonder what happened to the brilliant promise we embraced when Obama was e...
- on MOD ThursdayGood night, y'all.
- All goes along with the corporatist viewpoint.
- on WordsmitheryBeef and venison combined in a dish. Benison
- The Democratic leadership under the Clinton "Third Way" philosophy abandoned the defense of true lib...
Posts
Tags
Authors
Categories
© 2009 Free Range Talk. Powered by your Donations.
238,529 Comments Since March 2009 
-->
(Report comment)
Excellent post Kelly.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
GO NURSES!
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) responds to Rethugs who claim they tried to work with the Dems on health care bill
[Reply]
December 24th, 2009 at 8:31 am
(Report comment)
The poor man is exhausted. He is so angry he’s almost incoherent.
[Reply]
December 24th, 2009 at 8:35 am
(Report comment)
It’s hard work, pocketing all that lobbying and insurance money.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Thanks for doing the post Kel, I remember when they approved something earlier you mentioned what a great group they are. My aunt is a nurse, and is just so sad about the loss of the public option.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:23 pm
(Report comment)
ygm
[Reply]
(Report comment)
http://www.GreenSmilies.com” rel=”nofollow”>
http://www.GreenSmilies.com” border=”0″ />
Off to see holiday lights… ta ta for now!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:38 pm
(Report comment)
Wow, crazy smiley fail.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:40 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
(Report comment)
too pissed off about this whole thing to comment right now….
hope everyone has a happy fucking holiday…..
see you next year…..
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
(Report comment)
Ah, the cheerful christmas kitty makes an appearance. Meow!
I’ve missed you, I never seem to be here when you are. Hope all is well.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:28 pm
(Report comment)
Isn’t she just THE BEST!?!?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:29 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:31 pm
(Report comment)
Best bitch ever!!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:32 pm
(Report comment)
It takes one to know one, right, Babsy?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:35 pm
(Report comment)
You should know, toots!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:17 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:27 pm
(Report comment)
FU 2, sweet kk!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:30 pm
(Report comment)
You’ve been texting Dr. Delish too much.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:34 pm
(Report comment)
Actually, can’t SMS overseas
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:36 pm
(Report comment)
so sad!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:39 pm
(Report comment)
I think he actually is happy about that.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
At the risk of sounding stupid (and it won’t be the first time), what is the next step? Are there any chanced to salvage this?
Also, is it possible that SI’s scenario (waiting until the bill is signed then doing all sorts of reconciliations that only require 51)?
I keep having this feeling. What was it that changed so that Bernie and the more liberal ones caved? I can see the compromises given to the moderates to get their votes.
But what changed on this (except for the worse) that made Bernie change his mind from last week (and several others)?
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Editorial by Eugene Robinson in WaPo:
“So this isn’t the end of a process that leads to a rational, sustainable, more efficient health-care system. It’s the beginning. But when a reform bill passes, as now seems likely, Obama and congressional leaders will have achieved a goal that progressives have sought for decades. They will have established that quality health care should be for all, not just for those who can afford it.
We have a system now in which Americans go bankrupt trying to pay doctors and hospitals to keep them alive. When you have the opportunity to change this, you take it — even if it means winning ugly.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/21/AR2009 122102488.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:15 pm
(Report comment)
Well, I must say I feel better having read that. Eugene is usually pretty good. Maybe this is the bare-bones and we will get something by going back in on individual things like SI said.
And the other thing he said that I probably should think about is “this was not a lets stick it to the insurance company” bill.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
(Report comment)
agree – also answers your first question above???
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:22 pm
(Report comment)
Ah yes! You were channeling me when you found that link! Thank you
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:21 pm
(Report comment)
This appears to be a reinforcement of the present system more than anything else. I hope I’m wrong in my interpretation, but it seems more Americans will be forced toward bankruptcy through the demands (and lack of restrictions) of this bill.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:25 pm
(Report comment)
I hear ya! I hope there is something “good” there that we haven’t grasped yet. I have decided to be a little more optimistic that the good things will manifest themselves soon.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
This is not reform. What a disappointment. The mandatory health insurance business is going to be financially impossible for some families – those insurance companies are laughing all the way to the bank.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:42 pm
(Report comment)
You said it!
How is your vacation going so far?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:45 pm
(Report comment)
Very nice, thank you! Wish we had snow, though. There’s just a little bit here.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:55 pm
(Report comment)
Should have gone east!!! heh
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:56 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Brazil high court lifts stay, allowing boy to return to U.S.
(CNN) — The chief justice of the Brazilian Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in favor of an American father in an international custody battle.
The ruling by Chief Justice Gilmar Mendes will reunite a 9-year-old boy with his father, David Goldman, who has been locked in a custody battle with the family of the boy’s deceased mother.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/12/22/brazil.custody.battle/ind ex.html
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:46 pm
(Report comment)
saw that. it’s great news. that poor man, what he’s been through. I just watched a piece about two other men going through similar thing with Italy courts.
I’m guessing no mother would have to fight this hard for custody.
[Reply]
December 24th, 2009 at 8:16 am
(Report comment)
It happens to women too. It’s more a cross border problem than it is a gender problem.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I just think this might be the most idiot thing the Dems could have done. Better to have no bill for now until after the break and blame the Repugs. Now, the Repugs can just sit back and laugh along with the teabaggers at an epic failure, I fear.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:35 pm
(Report comment)
Worse than that, we’re stuck with their self congratulatory attempt. It will take decades for them to admit they did anything less than courageous perfection.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:43 pm
(Report comment)
They will have to admit in November of next year. The repugs are laughing their asses off right now. And Scarah Palin is dusting off her crown for the 2012 pageant.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Can Congress introduce legislation for Medicare expansion five minutes after the President signs the bill into law and then pass it with reconciliation?
THAT would be playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:17 pm
(Report comment)
hmmmm, interesting question. Is BGE here?
[Reply]
December 24th, 2009 at 8:19 am
(Report comment)
This is what I can’t understand in the first place. Why didn’t he just expand Medicare under the 51 vote requirement first, and then tackle the reforms separately later? Trying to do a huge bill like this all at once, was always going to lead to more entrenchment in a broken system. Now single payer is off the table forever. It’s the only thing that works.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Now here is something DEFINITELY worth criticizing!!!
“Senate Shifts Tax to Tanning Beds”
DERMATOLOGISTS and plastic surgeons may find themselves off the hook. Last weekend, the Senate replaced a 5 percent tax on elective cosmetic procedures with one on indoor tanning services in its proposed health care bill.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/fashion/24Skin.html?hp
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:40 pm
(Report comment)
OMG, :eyeroll: But you know, maybe it will save some idiot from skin cancer.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:43 pm
(Report comment)
Let’s hope not!
http://famousdc.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/jb.jpg
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:48 pm
(Report comment)
Spray on tan causes cancer?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:14 pm
(Report comment)
Maybe tanning beds is what it’s talking about?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:46 pm
(Report comment)
Oh, never mind, I guess I should look at the link first, eh?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:16 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:06 pm
(Report comment)
so no Bo-Tax? We should tax GOLF
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:14 pm
(Report comment)
Or at least the prostitution part of golf…..
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:15 pm
(Report comment)
let’s just tax all country club amenities
[Reply]
December 24th, 2009 at 8:25 am
(Report comment)
Dick pills. Seriously, they should be taken off the Medicare drug prescription benefits list. Why the heck should taxpayers subsidize old men’s erections? Can someone please explain that to me?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:19 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:21 pm
(Report comment)
tax the drink also too — and LOL at the exercise part. driving around in a cart with a cigar and a beer is most definitely NOT exercise
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Pure, unadulterated crap.
Term limits, publically financed campaigns, true ethics reform.
Then we can get decent legislation passed by people unbeholden to the money that lines their pockets.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:03 pm
(Report comment)
Yes to the last two. Term limits just puts naive politicos in office who will be guided by the friendly lobbyists who keeps calling them.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
(Report comment)
Not if you limit the money they spend to zero. Lobbyists are okay. Lobbyists who spend money lavishly on campaigns, family memebers and junkets for politicians should be outlawed.
Most of these people who run for office are not naive. They are not first-timers. Most have worked their way up the ladder, from working on campaigns at the local level to working on larger campaigns to running for office at the local level to running for office at the state level to running for national office.
To say that they are naive is to belittle the amount of time and effort most of these people put into public service.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:26 pm
(Report comment)
I think lobbyists who spend money on extraneous activities should definitely be outlawed. I naively thought that was covered under bribery. Silly me.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:34 pm
(Report comment)
I understand your point, but as they say, “Washington, DC is Hollywood for ugly people”. Regional experience is just not the same ball game.
Also, it’s not the money which is the real threat as much as the “assistance” offered by lobbyists in areas such as interpreting and drafting legislation. These officials don’t read the bills before them because of the time involved.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:57 pm
(Report comment)
I get your point also. It’s mess all the way around.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:07 pm
(Report comment)
Oui…
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:18 pm
(Report comment)
I keep thinking about term limis, and I have to agree with EdeV. It is a waste of a hard earned education for Representatives. Now Senators are a different breed of cat. I think it would be good to make it 2 terms in then sit one out. Then you can run again for another two terms. That would give them time to listen to the folks at home.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:26 pm
(Report comment)
Two terms for Senators. Six terms for Reps. Twelve years is enough for anyone who is actually concerned with serving the public.
Then make it so they cannot work for anyone connected with the government for twelve years.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:30 pm
(Report comment)
I like that last provision a lot. That should be in force now.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:30 pm
(Report comment)
I definitely get annoyed when I hear people go directly from a job in Congress into a career as a lobbyist … many of them still getting their expenses paid by taxpayers after they’ve left office.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:32 pm
(Report comment)
Both Conrad Burns and Marc Racicot from Montana did that … though Racicot was a governor.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:08 pm
(Report comment)
here’s the latest on Dennis Hastert. we’re still paying for his travel and office and satellite t.v. while he works as a lobbyist. He gets $40K per month in perks out of our pockets
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30846.html
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=41068
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:21 pm
(Report comment)
shit…why does this not surprise me?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:22 pm
(Report comment)
why on earth would it surprise you?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:23 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:34 pm
(Report comment)
If you cut out the lobbying money, I don’t think con men would be so interested in running for the House.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:01 pm
(Report comment)
I am thinking I might like to see one six year term for Pres.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Dem Strategy Memo Says The ‘Good News’ Is That Democrats Haven’t Done Enough On Health Care Reform
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/22/dem-strategy-memo-says-th_n_4 00544.html
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:06 pm
(Report comment)
Phew! That’s a relief! Wouldn’t want anyone in gub’mint doing too much — that would be a dangerous precedent to set
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:11 pm
(Report comment)
WTF?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:25 pm
(Report comment)
I just got another email from the Dems telling me how great the bill is and lookie at all the wonderful things it does. Fourth one today, and the more they say it the more I think it is complete bullshit. I don’t need the extra help to think the bill is crap.
Like being poked in the eye and the person who did it says “at least you weren’t poked in both eyes.”
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:34 pm
(Report comment)
Yup. Now you can’t even respond as their server kicks all messages back sent to info@barackobama.com.
That’s really condescending, their information request e-mail does not accept incoming messages.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:42 pm
(Report comment)
Perhaps it is overloaded and crashed.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:45 pm
(Report comment)
I’ve tried replying almost every time I’ve received a message for the last month.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
(Report comment)
This is the Spam Firewall at smtp.barackobama.com.
I’m sorry to inform you that the message below could not be delivered.
When delivery was attempted, the following error was returned.
filterca01.rightnowtech.com[216.136.229.62] said: 550 No such user
(obamabiden@mailwc.custhelp.com) (in reply to RCPT TO command)
************
info@barackobama.com is apparently set to redirect to a nonexistent user
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:21 pm
(Report comment)
I usually reply on the WhiteHouse.gov program. You could do a copy of what you received and reply.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:45 pm
(Report comment)
I do that too, not copies, but certainly my opinions. I found the other interesting because we gave a lot of money to the Obama campaign. Fool me once shame on you…
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:12 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
(Report comment)
Nice… Well at least they are being open and honest about the fact they don’t care what we want to know or have to say.
I have never replied, but maybe I will. I bet the “Donate Now” button works just fine though.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:43 pm
(Report comment)
I read some of it, but I got distracted by the Brittany Murphy stuff. I get so shallow when I go over there now.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:03 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:33 pm
(Report comment)
They lost me at Joe Biden Must Resign™
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:46 pm
(Report comment)
I like Biden a lot myself.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Criminy! When I am seeing this bill laid out in black and white, I really am asking WTF? Oh, my lord. What was the point? And then they have the gall to MANDATE coverage?
Would someone please tell me what is GOOD about the bill, beside the clause about pre-existing conditions? Someone talk me down!
Good grief, just when I thought I might get to retire in a few years and take the early Medicare.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:56 pm
(Report comment)
Please tell me–there must be something good in there. Bernie and both Als voted for it. So did Feingold. I respect these guys. What did they see in there that we aren’t seeing?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
(Report comment)
there is a part of me that wonders if all the progressive dems aren’t just towing the party line in that they seem acutely aware that if they fail to pass something they will be lame ducks and shown the door
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:18 pm
(Report comment)
Well, they are deluding themselves. It is much worse to pass something that is going to make people mad (MANDATE–helllloooooo Mr. Senator!)! I am just hoping and praying that there must be something in there that we aren’t seeing, for Bernie and the Als and Russ to have voted for it.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:00 pm
(Report comment)
NYT has an editorial…”A Bill Well Worth Passing” maybe you can read that and delude yourself.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/22/opinion/22tue1.html?hpw
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:07 pm
(Report comment)
I think I’d rather go stare at the cute paramedics
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:08 pm
(Report comment)
not the cardiologists???
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:19 pm
(Report comment)
Keep your eyes, and hands, off the doctors, beeyotch!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
(Report comment)
but, but..they’re BROWN!!!! (and just where the hell have you been?)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:30 pm
(Report comment)
Woo is me!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:33 pm
(Report comment)
moi aussi, beeyotch
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm
(Report comment)
EP, you’re here now. Talk me down and use your ability to wade thru the legalese and tell me there is something good in the bill…Pleeeeeassssse?????
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:33 pm
(Report comment)
I would not want to be married to a cardiologist
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
(Report comment)
I’ll help!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:27 pm
(Report comment)
Pick a number and stand in line, please.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I appreciate their speaking up. But where do we go from here?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:57 pm
(Report comment)
That’s what I’m wondering. I am feeling really panicky now that I’m seeing these things in layman’s terms.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
(Report comment)
Well, calm yourself down…you certainly don’t want to make yourself sick!!!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:13 pm
(Report comment)
Are you gonna have to slap me and tell me SNAP OUT OF IT MA’AM, YOU’RE SCARING THE CHILDREN?????
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:16 pm
(Report comment)
oooo…I like it!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:26 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:29 pm
(Report comment)
Yeah! That also too!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:24 pm
(Report comment)
It’s o.k. I have insurance. I am really worried that we are sealing our fate and going to have Sarah Palin as Pres. if this keeps up–not to mention a Repug. Congress in 2010.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:26 pm
(Report comment)
SNAP OUT OF IT MA’AM, YOU’RE SCARING ME…I should SMACK you hard just for saying that.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:40 pm
(Report comment)
Now I need to talk to YOUR supervisor, missy!!!!
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
(Report comment)
good question.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:01 pm
(Report comment)
“Obama rejects criticism on health-care reform legislation”
He said the Senate legislation accomplishes “95 percent” of what he called for during his 2008 presidential campaign and in his September speech to a joint session of Congress on the need for health-care reform.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/22/AR2009 122202101.html?hpid=topnews
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:15 pm
(Report comment)
O.K., you can put me on record as saying I firmly disagree with him on this one.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:17 pm
(Report comment)
Rahm gives a shit.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
(Report comment)
bbbbbut, Bernie and Al like me….at least I think Stewart Smiley does.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
(Report comment)
My most vivid memory of Rahm is when he called a friend of mine, a Lebanese Christian woman working for the DCCC, a “sand nigger” to her face during the Clinton administration.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:23 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:25 pm
(Report comment)
She also was an American citizen born in South Carolina.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:28 pm
(Report comment)
Citizenship is not an issue when racism is concerned, imo.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:29 pm
(Report comment)
You’re right, but it makes for an interesting statement on the man’s POV.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:39 pm
(Report comment)
WTF????
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:12 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
(Report comment)
How active were the nurses while the bill was crafted?
It might just be a San Diego thing, but the nurses here keep their mouths shut until their own well-being is threatened. Do you get a similar impression in L.A., kel?
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
(Report comment)
not at all. in fact, the California Nurses Association has led the fight, and they are the ones who organized the NNU back in August, and got all the the other states nursing unions to get onboard and fight.
honestly, the nurses were shut out of the crafting of the legislation, and the CNA fought hard to get their 2 cents in.
http://www.calnurses.org/
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:19 pm
(Report comment)
That’s good to know. There have just been a few incidents at local hospitals where the nurses got very political only when it mattered for them. Of course, I appreciate the job nurses do and think they should be well-compensated.
I’m glad the state organization is doing its job.
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:34 pm
(Report comment)
That is an interesting assessment. It seems to be true of most people. For instance, we just assume that most union workers are Dems. Not at all true. Most are very unaware of political happenings. The rest are split between. It is simply because the leadership comes out Dem. The workers themselves–meh?
[Reply]