Calling out companies by Government
 

I may be wrong and this won't be the first time but I don't recall previous administrations calling out specific market segments.

What I am referring to is all the shots being taken at health insurance companies by those that don't need their services.

Is this an old practice that I never noticed or is this new because of government wanting to take over health care?

This is not a debate on the way I worded this either, we're already doing that in other threads :p

Do you have some examples of what you are asking about?
Off the top of my head it seems all administrations take sides.
Look how Nixon started this assault on the media. He was a media darling when he came up but expected that his actions should not change the favorable reporting.

I know what you mean. I think it may end up biting them though.

I am referring to the administration, from the top down, saying just how terrible health insurers are.

I don't see them saying how bad car insurers are, or tile makers, or mechanics are for instance. Only something they want to take over, for the time being.

Seems pretty standard political "sales."

I think you'd be hard pressed to attribute this to just the new president.

Any examples off the top of your head?

Auto companies, Banks media......

Let me rephrase the criteria then. Can you give me examples of slander by another administration?

The ones you listed all have one thing in common, this administration. And, I don't recall them talking crap about the auto companies or banks. The auto folks got sympathy, the banks that were liked got prop up money, the ones that weren't were let to wither on the vine.

Ok,

Obama is the Devil

Palin is swell (you betcha)

We need a revolution so the wing nuts can shove this country back to the stone age.



Better?


I believe you are trying to make a distinction between this administrations sale of health care to all other administrations sales of everything. It's just what you want to see, IMHO.

So tell me something, why skirt my question? I've seen this tactic before. Hmmm....something about a playbook :D

If you cannot answer it that's fine, just say so. As I mentioned in the OP I ask this as a legit question, not to infer anything beyond.

I did. plaese review the thread.

I listed allot more examples than you. :confused:

You mean here?

And just which Speaker of the House or President aside from the current offerings have maligned these offerings. I say take the media right out of the mix since they are about as soverign as mud to water and dirt.

I honestly don't recall any cabinet or Presidents doing this and if you say it's happened I'd like my memory jogged.

Many thanks :D

An increase in their profits over the last five years in excess of 400% should get them a good citizen medal?

No Sir, Rob. I don't believe they deserve anything of the sort. Believe it or not I don't personally care for insurance companies but it doesn't matter whether they be for autos, homes, or health. They all suck and charge too much for my liking. :D

This was a straight up question. It has nothing to do with health insurer's profits. It has only to do with condemnation by our government towards individuals or companies. That's all.

I think we've all figured out noone's tactics. Either skirt the question, make accusations of right wing extremism, or refer to an above post (which has nothing to refer too). I got burned out on it, and moved on.;)

Dog, you excel at submitting baseless opinion as fact and then you cast stones at me when I clearly offered examples?
I swear, Hannity would be very proud of you.
No one has been sidestepped on this site more than I and you my friend are by far the most egregious of all posters when it comes to partisan non substantive even racist posts.

IMHO of course. :D


and don't lie, I know you have the hots for Maddow.

This started with me requesting a link to what you are speaking about as I have noticed nothing out of the ordinary.
Then I mentioned several industries that have been attacked over the years, banking, saving and loans, tobacco, auto makers, the media...........and you dismiss them as if only your discover is new and unique. (My guess is that some right wing idiot told you it was)
clearly you dislike this administration and as a result only see their sins and they are the first to sin. (if they are sins at all)

I don't recall what was said about the industrialists by politicians but I am willing to bet it was a tad more forcefully than your claimed sin of Obama.

Open your eyes!, I am not even defending Obama as I don't even know what the hell you are SPECIFICALLY talking about.

I am guessing you like Maddow too. :eek:

Is that her name? Man, is she one scary chick or what? I always wondered about the guy who was married to Judge Judy too.:eek: We are all racists, I just admit it and deal with it.:)

Seriously, I don't think Maddow will marry a man.

Not that there is anything wrong with that. ;)

My opinion on this matter.

If they was a politician, an insurance exec, and a rattler laying in the floor besides my feet...I'd stomp the rattler in the head LAST.

Chas

Nope. This started with ME asking the question. I guess the difference that I can't get to you is that the politicians in your replies had no intention of running tobacco, or the media(anymore than they do now from both sides), or the auto business.

Here's a link I found when I searched Google for Speaker of House attacks business:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090804/...ma_health_care

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other congressional Democrats have noticeably heightened their attacks on the health insurance industry, with Pelosi accusing insurers last week of making "obscene" and "immoral" profits."


Tried running Bush attacks business but didn't find anything.
President attacks business: nothing

I guess I'm just reading too much into this mess. BTW, no idea who Maddow is, sorry.

Excellent point. My Union tried a variation of this. They increased the drug test one year to 10 different types of drugs. When asked what 10 drugs, they wouldn't answer (I couldn't think of 10 different illicit drugs). They eventually changed it back to 5, and rumor was, they had been testing for BP meds and such then letting contractors know. Can you imagine being 50 years old with 12 years to go for retirement, then not being able to get work because you were on BP medications. Patient info is very private stuff, and should remain that way. I keep a power of attorney signed for my wife to have access if need be.

I would just step back and let the rattler do the job.:D

My employer back in Canada never got any information from the government and I trusted them enough to use the company medical staff on occasion. Once when I had pains in my ankle the doctor diagnosed it as my walking on cobblestone roads. She said she had no sympathy for me as I got to spend a week in Geneva where she would loved to have gone. I am not in the least as sanguine about companies here and the health insurance industry.

Clearly the sky is falling you say? :(

If the government wants info about you it gets it already.

next

It must be nice being such a smart a**. I may be a 70 year old but I've learned how the system worked and should work.
It was a mistake posting it here...I'll put it where it belongs and you can have a larger venue for your asinine comments. :rolleyes:

I take issue with you. There is nothing asinine about my comment. You are clearly scared of change and there is no reason to be.
Just because I disagree with you is not reason to call me a smart ass and gather up your marbles and go home.
my honest opinion is that the GOP in you has accomplished exactly what it wanted to and the reason it wanted to was to keep corporate donors happy with no regard for your welfare.
I no longer support this legislation either but I am not blind to why so many are now turning away and why.

Whoa Nelly, wait just a minute. First you say there is no reason to be scared of change then turn around and say that "I am not blind to why so many are turning away and why."

Which is it? You can't have it both ways. Either you're not scared of the unknown change and support this bill OR you're scared and don't.

Which bill is it that you both dislike? Near as I can tell there are at least three versions, not counting all the lies Dr.No and his ilk are spreading around.

I'll be honest enough to say that I don't want anything run by the government on my behalf. It doesn't matter WHO dreamt up the bill with all of it's intricate details that only lawyers could decipher, I'm not interested.

The only way I'd sing onto any of these bills is if, like Charles said, EVERYONE was to be covered. No specials for Congress, Senators, House members, or the President and his family.

No need to stop Nelly, I do not support any health care bill at present but not out of fear. Most people who in earnest do not support the current bills do not out of needless fear inspired by the GOP/Fox.

Don't know what you mean by I can't have it both ways?:confused:

What? You do not support any health care bill at present...but do not out of fear? Yet JUDGE those who also do not support it as needless fear?
Perhaps you could tell us in advance how it's going to turn out?
:confused:

First I judge no one. Judging is strictly for the radical right who somehow are endowed with a brilliance to know that living in the 1800s is what is best for everyone.

Now, I suspect 90% of the opponents of health care base there lack of support on fear of a government run heath care system. I think this is sad as we currently have Medicare which is a tremendous success.

How what will what turn out?
The debate?
The program if passed?
I don't know as I cannot tell the future.
I will say that this is the wrong time for this and that the what this debate has showed is that as long as the GOP exists in the form it is today American will not advance.

First I judge no one. Judging is strictly for the radical right who somehow are endowed with a brilliance to know that living in the 1800s is what is best for everyone.

I don't think your argument supports your premise.

Chas

I made no argument, I simply posted some facts and asked a bunch of questions.
;)

Go back and read your origional statement. Look pretty judgmental to me.

Opinions and facts are not the same.

Chas

Chas, I don't know what you are referring to.
highlight it and ask me your question and I will respond.

First I judge no one. Judging is strictly for the radical right who somehow are endowed with a brilliance to know that living in the 1800s is what is best for everyone.

Go easy on me, highlighting and things of this nature using a computer are foreign to me.

Your first sentence says that you judge no one.

Your second sentence not only sounds judgmental to me, but biased as well. At best ,it is strictly opinion. Perhaps even snide.

Hell, I went to skool, for awhile. I was even a philosophy major...shows just how clueless I was when I was young.

Now, I want everyone to have a laugh at my expense...I certainly deserve it.

Chas

psych was my early "major...shows how clueless I was " wound up with a degree in Economic/Finance

oh yeah about my post, I don't see pointing out a truth to be judgmental, I guess it depends how you look at it