I generally agree in regards to quality, but my point is that if the government uses privatized insurance, there's a high likelihood that they'll pay more in premiums than they ever did before and there's still no guarantee that the quality will improve. I'm not sure they fully understand the ramifications of what would happen if they moved it to privatized insurance. It could easily add more levels of management and costs rather than reduce the cost to the taxpayers.

I don't know if that's it. The VA does pretty good work and is going to get a sizable increase in funding if the current budget passes. It's such a small total amount of money that I'm not sure what the rational might be. When some more details get released to clarify the intent it might make more sense.

For now I'll resist the urge to get really peeved and wait for some information.

I don't think I can agree with that -- moving it to privatized insurance would add more levels of management and costs than having the government pay for it, in your opinion? If you say so. :)

Commie.

what are you politically? - Front Office Football Central

Pretty old poll, but most of the people posting in the thread are still here, and I doubt things on this board have changed so much that it's now a "left-leaning board by a heavy margin".

I always thought this board to be pretty evenly mixed. Lots of republicans, lots of democrats, some independents and even a few representatives of the extreme.

Enjoy Boise :p:D

SI

Fixed.

So... I already assumed that. Clearly making private insurance companies pay will only result in higher premiums - I think that's fairly straightforward.

I guess my question, which the article 100% didn't address, is why the Obama Administration is pursuing this as a possibility. I mean, there has to be a reason, even if it's a dumb one, but the article doesn't touch on this. Anyone know?

That's what I was trying to get at. It seems like such a poor move, just politically speaking, that I'm wondering what more there might be to the story. Unless Obama just wants to stick it to vets for some personal reason.

This is exactly why I object to posting a press release and calling it a news story. Clearly the American Legion has an agenda they're trying to push.

Based on my brother's experience, I can say that once you beat their beancounters into submission, the VA does do pretty good work. The treatment he eventually got at their speciality center in the Twin Cities has been excellent, and put to rest a number of his lingering physiological issues.

Of course, it was a long road to get there, and included a few spots of getting the VA (using their own policies against them) to pay for private care he received (when no VA care was forthcoming).

Unfortunately not everyone can speak to the specific merits of a very large plan. Is it so wrong for someone to say "It got screwed up and I hope it gets fixed"? That does not mean they are playing partisan politics.

It's not the best comparison since one is asking for political leaning and the other who you're going to vote for/probably going to vote for, but there has been a shift:

March 2004


October 2008 FOFC Presidential Election Poll


Repubs - 37% -> 23%
Dems - 24% -> 58%
Indy/Lib/Other third party 31% -> 9%

Not the best comparison as I said due to independents often choosing the guy they hate least in an election but still the shift is too big to dismiss IMO. It'd be interesting to see the results of a poll with the same parameters as the 2004 one.

That was also 2004. I think a lot of people have adjusted their political beliefs over the last 4-5 years.

I'm not in the party fight, but there are more Democrats registered than Republicans. They hold heavy majorities in the House and Senate and had states like Georgia and Montana in play this election.

Where's Kodos?! :D

the polls arent rolling averages so theyre bunk anyways :)

Dude, don't wear out that meme before the midterm elections.

its important to keep garbage rhetoric at the tip of the spear for when it is attempted to be hammered out again :)

:rant:

I didn't address the core issue of whether Obama's change is an improvement because frankly in that press release there weren't enough details for me to be able to tell if it'd be an improvement. It was just "oh this is what they want to do and they say it'd save this much money." No details about how it would potentially work to enable me to evaluate the policy. But from what I read in there, it doesn't sound promising and if it's not I'll take him to task for it.

I know we've been down this road before (at least I think we have) but my cousin went to West Point and him and his friends are active-duty right now. Some of them (a large #) are in Iraq. I thank god everyday that he's in Japan (although he'd rather be in Iraq). So when I say "Bush & co. really screwed vets healthcare up bigtime" it's not to take a partisan shot at Bush. It's because the VA, which my cousin will be depending on for healthcare at some point, is a pile of dogshit right now. A steaming turd. And I honestly don't know enough about the intricacies of the issue to know when it started. I know that by the time the first Gulf War was over it was a mess, and I know that Clinton didn't fix it. All I know about the specifics of the situation is that there was major media outrage for a short time there during Bush's last presidency (due of course to the existence of significant armed conflict) about just how bad it had gotten. That's not taking a partisan-shot. That's taking a non-partisan shot at a douchebag who deserves it (and if a Dem deserves it I'll call them a douchebag too). On this issue with me it's not about left or right. It's about supporting the soldiers.

DT: This is OT, but prior to your cousin/friends coming back to the States, you might want to get some advice from Raiders Army about how to handle the transition vis-a-vis the VA, especially if any are injured. He gave me some useful advice that was relevant for Ben. Given the way the VA works, and the potential complexity of injuries (including psychological - don't forget these), one can't be too armed with knowledge.

I seriously give Bush a ton of credit for this:

Bush refuses to criticize Obama in Canada

Bush looking good in the post season.

Dubya has honestly been very respectful of Obama in the transition and afterwards. They started the transition early and got a lot of stuff out of the way. He's clear of politics now and wants it to stay that way.

I would note that Cheney has been the exact opposite since leaving office, but he's always been a know-it-all and never avoided a shot when he had one (yeah, the jokes are plentiful in that regard).

My memory is poor, but most presidents seem to disengage from the muck after leaving. I know Clinton has been back (and one could argue that he was pulled back in, but knowing Bill...) and Truman said some not-so-nice-things about Nixon. Can't really think of many others, and that's a good thing. Slinging mud after you've been president is not very becoming.

I give Bush all the credit in the world for the way he handled the transition. By all accounts this was one of the smoothest transitions on record, and that's something considering the issues on the table. Apparently Bush told his staff, the day after the election, that Obama was going to be President now and he wanted to do everything in their power to make him able to hit the ground running.

I think history will look back on the Bush Administration and focus more on Cheney, to be honest, maybe even to the point of calling it a de facto Cheney Administration. Bush clearly opened up a number of doors for Cheney with his decisions, and then didn't realize how much he (and others) were being played by Cheney until his second term, by which time it was far too late.

This is not to say I think he was a good president. I basically think he was incompetent and a detriment to the country. But with every day it's more and more clear that most of the real active damage that was done by this Administration originated from the Office of the Vice President.

flere, I had been saying that for many years. I am somewhat neutral on Bush but he did open the door for abuse - and the Cheney Cabal (with Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al) took full advantage of it.

Wrong President at the wrong time with the absolute worst possible Vice President for him. That's my call.

We talking about the election of Gore or Bush here? :)

Gore was much less effectual than Cheney so whether positive or negative there is no question that Cheney did more than Gore.

I was referring to Gore's win in 2000 when he became president. :D

As always, lively, fun, educational, and respectful as you said in the Recession thread a few minutes ago

SI

why are you dragging partisanship into this

I'll refrain from attempting bad political humor moving forward. :D

when convenient

This little sidebar reminds me of one of my favorite Onion articles:

Supreme Court Overturns Bush v. Gore

Hadn't seen that before :)

SI

Sick people are going to be able to smoke their dope in states that allow it:

Link

A step in the right direction. That's about all we'll see this term, I'm guessing. Can't use political capital on dope, as much as it pains me to say so.

dola

sick people, or people that have doctors that will give out pot prescriptions for next to nothing :)

I am seriously thinking about emailing Obama and telling him that the presidency is for 4 years - not 100 fucking days. He and his administration need to quit acting like everything is on internet time and actually think about each actions. Instead he acts like everything needs to be "solved" RIGHT THIS FUCKING SECOND.

An email! Next thing you know you'll make a sternly worded phone call.

If the big things were to take place more locally, then I would meet face to face. But since people like you and many others prefer to give most of the power to people sitting up to 3000 miles away in their marbled towers, that's the best us little peasants can do.

I saw that. The feds will only go after people in violation of both federal and state law. Meaning they respect the rights of the states to make the decision. Meaning there is no need for a federal drug policy. What am I missing with my logic?

You're not thinking of the children!

Everything is bizzare now. Republicans are upset with Obama for decreasing federal power and giving it to the states. They are also on the same side as Code Pink when it comes to Geithner.

I think the war on drugs is going to end really soon. Not saying drugs will be legal but we won't spend the money on operations in South America and as much on the DEA. I don't rule out them legalizing pot for tax purposes if things get really desperate.

And drastically reducing drug sentences- I see that happening sooner rather than later. Housing prisoners for carrying around a little bit of pot is too damn expensive.

SI

Sadly then there will be some statistically irrelavent crime that causes the sentencing guidelines to go back to the previous out of whack ones. Like 200,000 people will get early parole and one guy will rape a 10-year old or shoot somebody selling drugs and that will explain why we need to waste the money on the other 199,999.

They have been doing that for decades. Parade a few poor families and you get $billions for the War on Poverty (I know there are more than a few but couldn't there have been smarter ways of tackling this instead?). Have a singular act of terrorism (plus a few copycats) and you get $billions for the War on Terror. Have a bad druggie committing a bad crime and you get $billions for the War on Drugs. You get some statistical evidence for man-made causes and you get $billions for War on Climate Change. Have a handful of really bad, greedy financial institutions and you get $trillions for Bailouts. You get some circumstantial evidence for WMD and you get $billions for War on Iraq.

In Congress, you get the Laws of the Bad Apple that must be applied as an expensive one-size-fits-all solution. Yet people keep encouraging this.

I don't know what you're talking about, it's like 15 blocks away. ;)

I thought everybody within 20 blocks of the White House smoked crack?