Cheney would "probably be dead by now" if not for his federally funded health care

[pickledpepperRN]

December 7, 2007, 2:58 pm

Nurses' Health-Care Ad Takes Aim at Cheney

Susan Davis reports on health care.

Vice President Dick Cheney would "probably be dead by now" if not for his federally funded health care, according to an eye-catching ad calling for universal health care that will run Monday in ten Iowa newspapers. The ad is union-funded by the California Nurses Association and its national arm, the National Nurses Organizing Committee, which represents 75,000 nurses.

"The patient's history and prognosis were grim: four heart attacks, quadruple bypass surgery, angioplasty, an implanted defibrillator and now an emergency procedure to treat an irregular heartbeat," the ad states, referencing Cheney's lengthy medical chart. "For millions of Americans, this might be a death sentence. For the vice president, it was just another medical treatment. And it cost him very little."

The group is calling on the presidential candidates to support a single-payer government-run health-care bill introduced in Congress by Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.) that has 88 co-sponsors, including long-shot Democratic candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio.

The three Democratic front-runners have all proposed sweeping plans to cover all or nearly all uninsured. Republicans have offered more modest plans and none advocate a single-payer system. The nurses group opposes the plans of Sens. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards because they argue that each plan will "continue to rely upon the wasteful inclusion of private insurance companies." The single-payer plan would take insurance companies out of the equation altogether. ...

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/12/07/nurses-health-care-ad-takes-aim-at-cheney/

[BBFRN, BSN, PhD]

The whole premise of insurance was built on 'What Ifs' in the first place.

[ZASHAGALKA, RN]

You mean it wasn't my friend when it gave me the right to vote??

The framers were justly afraid of gov't, having witnessed firsthand its tyrannical ability and proclivity.

They were also afraid of mob rule.

THAT is why your right to vote does NOT INCLUDE a right to take from my earnings and give it, unearned, to somebody undeserved. For the record, NOBODY deserves the right to my labor but me. EVERYBODY else is undeserving of my earnings, unless I individually choose to give it away. To compel me to labor for somebody else's benefit, there is a term for that. . .

AND SO, your right to vote was limited by the Constitution to only vote into power those that would only have limited, enumerated powers that would prevent them from allowing a majority mob rule and mob claim to my earnings.

Also, I disagree with the concept that the gov't 'GAVE' you the right to vote. My rights do NOT come from gov't. My rights come from God. It is the gov't that depends upon ME for its rights, not the other way around. I GAVE (Our social contract, the Constitution gave) the gov't the right to exist by my vote and by no other means. The gov't wasn't my friend here, at all. My vote is an essential tenet of its empowerment, and that empowerment is very limited, and enumerated.

~faith,

Timothy.

[ZASHAGALKA, RN]

It should be a constitutional right for all to have equal access to health care.

Maybe, but, it's not.

In fact, the Constitution's enumerated powers specifically FORBID such a gov't expenditure.

So, you've hit the nail on the head: to do this would require a Constitutional Amendment. Nothing less.

And there is a growing strict constructionist majority on the Cabal that might just rule any legislated gov't restricted healthcare plan as UnConstitutional, because, without an amendment, it would be.

~faith,

Timothy.

[ZASHAGALKA, RN]

If publicly funded schools are not considered a socialist plot, than neither is government provided medical care, or a single payer government health care system.

I think gov't funded schools are a socialist plot. Libertarian Neil Boortz, on the radio, says that sending your child to a gov't indoctrination school is the most frequent form of child abuse that occurs in this nation.

Look at how fully those schools have taught the religion of secular humanism, an essential tenet of socialism.

The solution to the abysmal schooling of our kids: vouchers that get the gov't out of dictating/interfering with your child's education. Washington simply DOESN'T always have the better ideas. Same issue here: the PROBLEM is gov't interference; the gov't can't also be the solution.

Gov't collusion with the TEA has brought predictable gov't results: monopolistic mediocrity. THIS is the example for ruining our healthcare, too?

Once again, I'm not opposed to universal education anymore than I am opposed to universal healthcare. I AM opposed to gov't restricted mediocrity for both. A fair share in a dismal gov't outcome is neither fair nor compassionate, for anybody.

Don't you find it somewhat ironic that it is only the unabashed capitalist here arguing against a monopoly and the predictable results of a monopoly?

~faith,

Timothy.

[MBANurse]

Nobody is advocating 'stormtroopers.' I'm not asking to go back to the USSR.

I doubt that people in the UK, New Zealand, and numerous other countries would appreciate the comparison. And, maybe your goals are different from mine, but my goal for my country is not prosperity, at least not the main one. Do I love my country and want the best for her? Of course.

But, when you have a system where rich people tend have both access and affordability and poor people usually have neither, there is a problem.

And again, I will ask, why is ok for my tax dollars to subsidize Dick Cheney's existence and not average Joe's?

We are going to have to agree to disagree, Tim.

I doubt that many of your tax dollars subsidized Cheney. Even if he werent the VP he is a multi millionare many times over and can afford anything he wants to have done.

I hate the fact that I have to pay for others' housing; foodstamps, childcare etc... and they have to give absolutely nothing back. NOTHING.

[tntrn, ASN, RN]

I hate the fact that I have to pay for others' housing; foodstamps, childcare etc... and they have to give absolutely nothing back. NOTHING.

You said it! And they think it's "free." Well, maybe free to them, but certainly not free to the rest of us. I get pretty irritated when I move patient belongings, knowing the people are on welfare or worse yet, illegals, and they've got the newest, shiniest everything. Can't let it show, of course, but some things are just not right.

[MBANurse]

People are dying NOW!

We have to act!

We cannot wait for a "pie in the sky" unregulated pure "free market" system to fix everything.

Actually... we can.

Unregulate the market TODAY. Let it run. It will correct "faster" than any government implemented program.

[pickledpepperRN]

Actually... we can.

Unregulate the market TODAY. Let it run. It will correct "faster" than any government implemented program.

:rotfl: Me? :rotfl: You? :rotfl: Who?

[MBANurse]

You mean it wasn't my friend when it gave me the right to vote??

Government did not give you the right to vote. Individuals that wrote the constitution did. Individuals who fought and paid with blood, sweat and tears gave you that right. Government gives us nothing.

Everything is paid for by someone. People who freeload off the government the most are the ones who contribute the least and the folks that contribute the most use the government the least.

Universal health care is just one more thing that would reinforce the entitlement mantra.

[MBANurse]

Isn't the reason for public schools, that every citizen is entitled to, an should receive, an education, and it is the "public good" to have an educated citizen, and that benefits EVERYONE, not just the educated individual.

Everyone pays for our public schools. It doesn't matter if you have no kids, never had kids, have kids who are grown, you still pay taxes that support our public schools. If publicly funded schools are not considered a socialist plot, than neither is government provided medical care, or a single payer government health care system. We have a "single payer" education system, while it has its faults, it does work, and we are not any worse off for having it than if we had all private schools, that 40% of the public could not afford.

Lindarn, RN ,BSN, CCRN

Spokane, Washington

Actually, our public education sucks. It panders to the middle and ignores the exceptionally gifted and those with special needs. Like everything else that the government runs mediocrity is the standard.

You want to emulate the Europeans... model their education system.. perform or get taught a trade and go to work.

[MBANurse]

:rotfl: Me? :rotfl: You? :rotfl: Who?

Its the same "we" that YOU refer too when you say "we" have to act. "We" can't wait.

That "we."

The collective "we."

[HeyJude]

Government did not give you the right to vote. Individuals that wrote the constitution did. Individuals who fought and paid with blood, sweat and tears gave you that right.

Ok...lemme rephrase that. So you mean the government was not my friend when it recognized my God-given right as a woman to vote? That only happened in the last 100 years or so. The government is made up of individuals...so when I say the government, I am referring to those individuals, and vice versa.

People who freeload off the government the most are the ones who contribute the least and the folks that contribute the most use the government the least.

Source, please.

Universal health care is just one more thing that would reinforce the entitlement mantra.

I have dozens of European friends from various places who've been benefited with universal health care their entire lives...and they aren't at all members of the entitlement crowd.

You want to emulate the Europeans... model their education system.. perform or get taught a trade and go to work.

That's already been talked about, and most of us think it's a dang good idea.