It's been a while since I last posted on this site, or any other site for that matter. I got caught up both in doing my taxes (Obama's tax cuts saved me over $3000), and dealing with numerous and expensive home repairs mandated upon me by my homeowners insurance underwriter. I switched insurance companies, which took a fair amount of my time, with some time of what remained assigned to those repairs I deemed necessary and not merely cosmetic.
But the biggest issue impeding my output is that I have had a relapse in my health. I first wrote about this back in February, and expanded upon the topic since here on Blogcritics. Things have not gotten better since I was last able to write. Testing still has produced no meaningful results, but my symptoms are worsening. If my research is accurate (I can't know without certain tests being conducted - and you just KNOW the lab will act just on my asking!) I think I have to get my doctor focused on treating my illness and not my symptoms. I'm tired of being a Guinea Pig for the latest barely-tested but profitable pharmaceuticals which cause more problems than they solve.
I had to go the ER one day due to the sort of head pain for which Bret Michaels still gets so much coverage for suffering, even though I didn't come near to having a hemorrhage like he did. But it took some powerful drugs to get me back to having a merely bad headache. I have had to watch my activities ever since as "Too much stress" was deemed to be the cause of that immediate ailment, and having a headache is now a constant in my life. Only the intensity varies.
I also didn't have it as bad as did the mother of blogger Jack Jodell, author of The Saturday Afternoon Post, who was hustled out of necessary medical care by a "hospitalist". Said "hospitalist" is apparently intended both to save the hospital some money on "unnecessary" treatment and to "ease the workload" of the primary care physician. Jodell relates on how they had this "hospitalist" replaced with another, who discovered that cancer was the reason for the serious symptoms his mother was suffering. But who -on an official level- is really going to care about that when there is big money involved? Clearly her own physician doesn't, or there would be no "hospitalist" taking over the rounds.
I got the feeling when I was in the ER that they were in a hurry to move me along as well. Shortly after I was given the powerful painkiller which reduced my agony, I passed out. The attending physician came to release me, but as I was out cold he "allowed" me one hour to nap before awakening me and sending me on my way. I really was in no shape to go anywhere, and I didn't get off the unit before I was hit with a hard wave of nausea. I vomited messily in their only restroom. But I know when someone thinks it's time for me to leave. Despite the continued nausea and vertigo, I allowed my son Bookseller to drive me home to complete what recuperation I would have.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - roger nowosielski
My dear friend, you're up for a tirade from our liberal friends, Handy and Glenn.
Be prepared for it.
2 - roger nowosielski
If I understand it correctly, not one physician was a privy to drafting the Obamacare legislation.
I'm not certain how accurate this is, but so says my sister and my brother-in-law, both physicians with over thirty years of practice.
3 - John Wilson
Indeed, physicians wanting to testify before Baucus's committee were handcuffed and jailed.
It's a put-up deal, and no political party is free of complicity.
Our Masters have revealed the iron 'invisible hand' within the velvet glove of the Ownership Society.
4 - Glenn Contrarian
Realist -
I'm sorry for the situation you're in. As I understand it, your situation has not improved one whit because of 'Obamacare'. So I have to ask you the first of three questions: Has your personal access to health care gotten worse specifically because of 'Obamacare'? (and do you really think it would have gotten better if the Republicans had had their way?)
Right now, my oldest son is napping on the couch. He just drove back in from Las Vegas last night, after several months of finding out that the job market down there really sucks. But we told him something today that made him really happy. You see, because of 'Obamacare', next month I'm going to be able to add him back on to my insurance (Tricare)...if only for one year until he turns 27.
Why is this such a big deal? Because (thanks to rheumatic fever and ongoing heart problems he's had since he was 15) once he became an adult and was no longer eligible to be covered by my insurance, nobody, but NObody would cover him. But thanks to the 'Obamacare' that you hate so much, next month my son will have health coverage that he couldn't get otherwise.
That brings me to the second question - do you realize that the health care law is a work in progress, that the benefits are gradually added over years? It would be nice if we could've had everything we want right now, and not everyone will live to see all these benefits...but they're coming. It is law.
Lastly, do you know everything that is included in the health reform law? Check out this site, where you can find out what it DOES do (and when) for your particularly state.
I know I've gone further than three questions, but do you really think the status quo we had for so long was better? Do you really think that the Republicans would have pushed through reform of ANY type?
And one more thing - do you really understand WHY Obama allowed the compromises he did? Because of a little something called DEMOCRACY. You see, the Republicans were voting as a solid bloc against ANY reform...and there were more than a few Blue Dog Democrats (DINO's, really), and in order to get their votes Obama had to make compromises.
Whether you like it or not, that is how democracy works. Nobody gets everything they want, nor do they get it right away. That's why it's referred to sausage-making - it's really ugly, but when you finally get to bite into the final product, it can be really, really good.
Like watching my oldest son's face light up when he found out that yes, he WILL have access to health insurance.
5 - Realist
Has your personal access to health care gotten worse specifically because of 'Obamacare'? (and do you really think it would have gotten better if the Republicans had had their way?)
You miss the point about my mentioning Obamacare. What I was pointing out was that there is little discussion in the media now that the bill was passed. It isn't going to affect me and mine until at least 2014. And no, the GOP would not have done better. All both parties are doing is attempting to smear their specific color of lipstick on the Obamacare pig.
But thanks to the 'Obamacare' that you hate so much, next month my son will have health coverage that he couldn't get otherwise.
This is of course a good thing for him, but this provision doesn't affect me and mine.
That brings me to the second question - do you realize that the health care law is a work in progress, that the benefits are gradually added over years? It would be nice if we could've had everything we want right now, and not everyone will live to see all these benefits...but they're coming. It is law.
Until the Republicans regain the majority and reverse as much as they can get away with. Obama's record with reform is terrible. We who are to benefit have to wait months and years while those to be "reformed" get away with murder until the regulations go into effect. Look at consumer credit and student loans in particular.
Lastly, do you know everything that is included in the health reform law?
No. I have been too busy trying to get health care as it currently exists.
But do you really think the status quo we had for so long was better?
Please, Glen, be serious! My gripes are both with the shoddy status quo as well as the lame "reform" Obama was willing to settle for.
Do you really think that the Republicans would have pushed through reform of ANY type?
Please, Glen, be serious! We all know that the Republicans only care about the unborn. I have not been in that group for many decades.
And one more thing - do you really understand WHY Obama allowed the compromises he did? Because of a little something called DEMOCRACY. You see, the Republicans were voting as a solid bloc against ANY reform...and there were more than a few Blue Dog Democrats (DINO's, really), and in order to get their votes Obama had to make compromises.
And sold out any hope of real reform. If Obama wasn't such a sellout, we might have gotten something meaningful that the Republicans won't reverse the first chance they get.
If you are done putting words in my post that I didn't write, we can yield the floor to other commenters.
6 - Ruvy
Hell, Realist, every time I read your articles, I become more and more grateful that we left America for a land with real socialized medicine that it can afford. That you should have to think of dying rather than impoverishing your loved ones is a sickening comment on how far the country I once loved and called home has slid from being a quality place to live. America sounds more and more like Central Asia daily. I keep wondering when the men are going to start to pull down their pants and defecate in public?
I have to wonder if Jeannie Danna (you remember her, don't you - the hot Obama-momma waving the pom-poms for "Obamacare"?) will be along to commiserate with you, at least. It's less even than an aspirin or a bandaid - but it is something.
I wish I knew of a way to help you. When we've been in trouble, help has come through for us from the most unexpected of sources. But I don't know, my friend. That hurts to write more than anything else.
7 - Cindy
But thanks to the 'Obamacare' that you hate so much, next month my son will have health coverage that he couldn't get otherwise.
For a year?
Listen to yourself. You're defending Obama when your son gets a crumb. Your son is only getting a year of coverage. Listen to yourself. Doesn't he deserve complete coverage?
I heard Obama's speech patting himself on the back for such a good job. I am not sure what he's even talking about. The change for seniors seems to be that when they fall into the (what $5000?) gap, Obama might send them a check for something like $300?
I know our situation has not changed an iota. My husband is insured. Our business has lost its largest customer and now we are awaiting our fate. My husband needs a heart transplant. That he has MRSA (This is the latest antibiotic-resistant form of staph--known as the superbug--that is guarantees him maximal problems once his immune system is lowered.)
Will he opt for death or for the heart transplant? If he opts for the transplant will the business crash leaving us with no insurance and him with the fate of needing $5k worth of drugs /month and no way to pay for them?
If I divorce him will his social security be low enough to get him some kind of gov't medical coverage as a single person? Or will he miss the mark because he makes $200 too much?
Thanks Obama, your plan may kill my husband. Oh, I see when you were elected you didn't really mean ALL seniors would be okay. Hope your son doesn't end up having anything that takes longer than a year to treat, Glenn. You know he will. You should be outraged.
8 - Ruvy
Cindy,
I was rather harsh to you in a comment elsewhere, a comment on another article. I had no idea you were going through this hell, and apologize for hurting your feelings if I did....
9 - Joanne Huspek
Realist, sorry to hear about your health and your ongoing problems. I'm still reserving my opinion of Obamacare for when the you know what really hits the fan.
Will it really help some people? Will it really hurt? I don't know. My son will have the ability to come back to our plan but doesn't want to. Our plan covers very little and San Francisco has their own health care, as long as you work a part time job.
As a small business, the verdict is up on how much this is going to hurt. Obviously with the big businesses like AT & T, they are probably going to make something if they choose not to provide health care. We're not in the same ball park. It is unclear if 20 hour a week workers are going to be counted, and those who already have plans with their other jobs, we don't know if they will be counted with our employees or not.
Any way you slice it, this is a huge mess, and I feel it's going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better.
10 - Glenn Contrarian
Cindy and Realist -
Both of you are in very, very tough situations and I don't envy what you're both going through - but what neither of you are understanding is that this 'Obamacare' that both of you revile so much is the best we could get for NOW.
Why? Because if either of you had paid attention, you'd know already that because the Republicans were ALL - repeat, ALL - against health care reform, Obama could not spare even a single vote on the Democratic side in the Senate.
What this meant is that the "Blue Dog" Democrats effectively held a sword over the bill...and the president cannot ORDER those in Congress to vote how he wants them to vote.
We liberals hated this, too. We wanted single-payer right now...and we couldn't get it, thanks to the DINO's. We wanted a public option (which the House DID pass)...and we couldn't get it, thanks to the DINO's in the Senate. Thanks to DINO's like Blanche Lincoln and Ben Nelson and Max Baucus.
No, President Obama could NOT 'order' these people to accept what HE wanted...and the Republicans gave him NO room to maneuver. So he had to compromise, and we're stuck with 'Obamacare'.
Did he have a choice? No. And never mind that he had no real choice, you're both pillorying him for not giving you everything you wanted right away.
What you both need to understand is that this was the best we could get right now. Hopefully, 'Obamacare' will take the same path that Social Security did when it was first passed by FDR, and that Welfare did when it was first passed by LBJ...for in both cases, they both covered much more than they originally did as the years went by.
No, 'Obamacare' is not everything that ANY of us want, including me - and the ones you can blame for us not having all the coverage we needed right away is NOT Obama, but (1) the Republicans who opposed HCR in lockstep and gave him absolutely NO room to maneuver, and (2) the 'Blue Dog' DINO's who held the program hostage until they got their respective pounds of flesh. I've heard several political commentators mention that it's a minor miracle that Obama was even able to accomplish this much, what with the opposition he faced from the bloc-opposition form the Republicans and the obstinacy of the DINO's.
Benjamin Franklin said it best - "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Right now, we've got a bird in our hands. It's not as filling as having the two we really wanted, but it's a hell of a lot better than having none at all.
My oldest son will have coverage for about 15 months...which is 15 months more than he would've had otherwise. If he's able to survive until 2014, he'll have coverage for the rest of his life. I hate the fact that there's a gap of no coverage...but I am deeply grateful for the coverage that he WILL have, despite the best efforts of Republicans, DINO's, and the trillion-dollar health-insurance industry to fight it.
11 - Dr Dreadful
"I got the feeling when I was in the ER that they were in a hurry to move me along as well."
Unusual ER. The usual approach is to stick you in a corner and forget about you for hours.
12 - Ruvy
Glenn,
You are good with the hand-spreading routine - but what you need to get straight is that Obama-care will not last more than a few years before it breaks the bank - and even then, its bureaucracy will be so hated that people will attack the buildings they are in.
Enjoy it while it lasts - and find yourself a good Philippine doctor for when you finally make the big move.
As you can see, not everybody else will be able to enjoy this pathetic "health plan".
13 - handyguy
The tendency of writers to overstate and exaggerate makes it difficult to discuss this issue with anything approaching fairness. This has applied frequently to the right-wingers on here, but in the current case it applies to Realist and Cindy.
The current health system is full of bad incentives and very undesirable consequences. The compromise legislation that was passed improves some but not all of those elements.
To focus on individual holes/shortcomings in the bill [which are in every bill, always] and use that as the basis for blistering accusations of lying and murder against the president...well, that's venting, that's not a real argument/discussion.
If 32 million more people have health insurance five years from now, people who have no current coverage, that is some kind of progress. Health coverage will still not be as cheap as we prefer, and 32 million newly covered is still not universal care.
But there's nothing to prevent additional legislation in the coming years to improve the bill.
14 - John Wilson
The USA needs UHC. Every American should have easy access to competent medical care for little cost.
The appropriate insurance pool is the entire population.
Using withheld medical care to bludgeon people into higher financial achievement is perverse.
15 - Ruvy
And, Glenn,
For your sake, I hope the Filipinos clean up their act with selling kids as sex slaves for your sake. Otherwise, a Divine Judgment will destroy the place.
16 - handyguy
If I understand it correctly, not one physician was a privy to drafting the Obamacare legislation.
Well, the American Medical Association supported the bill, if not with great enthusiasm. And there are 16 physicians in Congress: 11 are Republicans and 5 are Democrats. Two serve in the Senate and 14 in the House, 7 of whom are on the three committees who worked on the preliminary health care bill.
Not sure whether your own relatives are Republicans or Democrats, but I'm not sure you yourself would much like a health bill written entirely by doctors, many of whom are conservative.
But many doctors apparently supported the "public option" that was floated during negotiations on the bill. I would have liked that too. But it couldn't pass the Senate! So how could it happen?
17 - handyguy
Realist devotes a significant part of his article to speculation that companies may drop insurance coverage. This would indeed be a disaster, but it will be no more likely under the Obama plan than it is right now. Both of the articles he link to emphasize that this is all speculative.
Currently, no employer has to offer insurance and they face no penalty other than workers choosing to work somewhere else.
Under the new law, they will face stiff government fines. So how does the new law make it more likely that they will drop coverage? Doesn't make sense.
Employee health coverage still provides a huge tax deduction for large companies, so I can't see this as likely.
18 - Glenn Contrarian
Handy -
It's grown apparent to me over the year or so on this site that those who are conservative tend to focus on their own personal situation and not pay much attention to the big picture.
19 - Glenn Contrarian
Ruvy -
I may criticize the actions of the nation of Israel, but I do not disparage the conduct of the Jewish people. While I am not by any means Filipino, I do take some offense at your disparaging remarks and unsavory implications concerning the Philippines...because they are people like any other, and you'd be surprised how much they have in common with the Jews e.g. they tend to be downtrodden by the other 'great peoples' of the world, and they've had a diaspora of sorts and can be found in almost any country. In fact, like the Jews, the second-greatest number of Filipinos is found in America (only Mexico has more immigrants in America).
If you'd learn to appreciate the challenges other people face, and learn to appreciate their cultures, you wouldn't be so quick to disparage other peoples.
20 - roger nowosielski
Why would you assume, Handy, that Realist's position is more subjective than yours simply because he speaks from personal concerns and you don't? Is this a relevant criterion, and if so, I fail to see why. The truth is, no one really know how Obamacare is going to unfold, and we all going to have to see how it does guess what? - in invididual cases. I think it rather interesting that you stay at the level of statistics and derive a great deal of comfort from that. It's individual human lives that we should be talking about, and dismissing individual concerns just isn't very convincing to me. Besides, the last I check, Realist is far from being a conservative, so perhaps you ought to amend your nomenclature.
As to the question you raised earlier, most physicians are dropping Medicare patients like hot potatoes and certainly refuse to take new ones. Not only are the Medicare reimbursements being cut; there is a climate of uncertaintly, as Medicare reimbursement rates can now be adjusted and readjusted every two months or so.
21 - handyguy
1. I didn't call Realist a conservative; I specifically contrasted his and Cindy's comments with right-wingers'. And I often like his articles.
2. He takes a pretty negative position toward the health bill, and I responded, on the merits. What does subjectivity have to do with it?
3. My comments on this thread have not been statistic-heavy. And I care a lot about the human costs, both of the current awful system and the compromise health bill. Why do you think otherwise? But I care about real human costs, not hypothetical ones based on false assumptions or worst-case scenarios. What purpose does that serve?
4. What does your second paragraph have to do with the health reform bill? Real universal health care would be "Medicare for all." The health bill just passed is not that, and it isn't Medicare. At any rate, "Most physicians are dropping Medicare patients like hot potatoes" is a false statement. Prove otherwise.
For the record, a France or UK type of government health system, which I would support as much as you would, might still not help cases like Realist's or like Cindy's husband's. And a government-run system was never in the cards for the US, under this or any other president.
Sometimes you just type a lot of words, without actually saying anything.
22 - roger nowosielski
And you're too impressed with your own content, Handy, haven't you noticed?
As to Realist's charecterization, your compadre did and you did not bother to correct him.
You really ought to apply for an anchor person on MSNBC, Handy, because all I hear from you is the same old talking points - a rehash of the old spiel. And that's no better than what the people at Fox do as far as their methods are concerned. You're just as ideological as they are.
Again, it's really tiresome. Try to think for yourself, and outside the box, if possible, than constantly be recounting the mantra.
I gave you an assignment to listen to Wolff's video lecture (as per Cindy's link). I bet you haven't done it. Yet, you find it more profitable to keep on repeating yourself ad nauseum trying to convince all and sundry how blue the sky really is.
Well, I'm not convinced. And if this is your idea of the kind of progress we need -because that's how things get done and there is no other way - than indeed we have nothing to talk about.
23 - handyguy
Fine, no problem, bye.
24 - rogernowosielski
I was being rhetorical, Handy, just trying to make my point. I don't believe in constant valorizing of this administration as though it was manna from heaven. Let be a bit critical of it - of what it fails to do, of how little people's lives are improved.
Not to say I necessarily blame them; I blame the system. So do try to stumble through Wolff's lecture, and let's talk.
I wouldn't be saying that if I didn't think it could benefit both of us.
I apologize for having gone over the top, but it was only to shake you up.
25 - Franco
4 - Glenn Contrarian
Right now, my oldest son is napping on the couch. He just drove back in from Las Vegas last night, after several months of finding out that the job market down there really sucks. But we told him something today that made him really happy. You see, because of 'Obamacare', next month I'm going to be able to add him back on to my insurance (Tricare)...if only for one year until he turns 27.
Why is this such a big deal? Because (thanks to rheumatic fever and ongoing heart problems he's had since he was 15) once he became an adult and was no longer eligible to be covered by my insurance, nobody, but NObody would cover him. But thanks to the 'Obamacare' that you hate so much, next month my son will have health coverage that he couldn't get otherwise.
What you are asserting is misleading and untrue.
Your son my not have been eligible to be covered by your existing insurance, but he could have gotten other insurance coverage, it just would have cost more. That’s the part you are being dishonest about.
I had rheumatic fever and the associated heart problems that go with it. What I could not get from Insurance companies was the same cheaper coverage as those who did not have rheumatic fever, I had to pay more.
Why? Because the chances of my needing health care for my condition is clearly higher then for someone without this condition. If I did not pay more for my insurance then that extra risk and cost associated with me would have had to be added to the less expensive insurance policies of those who did not posse such risks. So they would then have become responsive for something they are not even responsible for. How is that fare to all those people?
When you assert “You see, because of 'Obamacare', next month I'm going to be able to add him back on to my insurance (Tricare)...if only for one year until he turns 27.” You are failing to account for the once added costs you would have had to pay without Obamacare. Those costs do not just magically disappear as you seem to belive.
What your saying is you are going to be able to get him cheaper coverage because under Obamacare you do not have to fork out the extra costs in covering your unemployed son for his high risk condition. So by your not having to pay the exact costs, which still exist, they have now be dispersed across all the taxpayers under the Obamacare scheme
Your happy as a pig is shit living off the welfare dime and loving it, and whats worst of all, you don’t even know it and your teaching your 26 year old unemployed son to do the same thing.
Glenn says....do you really think the status quo we had for so long was better?
The status quo of costs acocated with risk, as in your sons case and mine, are still the same as before. The only differaceis now they can be socialized accorss the pupblic at its expence. So to answer your questionu, yes, we were better off before we took on a Greece type systme of the absurdity that everone thinks they can life at the expecies of everyone else.
Glenn says.....And one more thing - do you really understand WHY Obama allowed the compromises he did? Because of a little something called DEMOCRACY.
And the bull shit just keeps on coming! Obama made no heart felt compromise for the sake of democray. He is for a single payer state run medical system. He only speaks of the public option to get his plan in the door so he and his ilk can ram home single payer on us in future.
Glenn, to not know that in the face of all the evidence is to be brain dead.
You see, the Republicans were voting as a solid bloc against ANY reform...
Flat out flat lie! But then again, that is the only way you can sell it, just like your master that now feeds you at the public trough.
Like watching my oldest son's face light up when he found out that yes, he WILL have access to health insurance.
How inspirational Glenn. Only problem is you want to five at the expences of every one else through a forced insurance program by the goverment with is 100% based on redistubution of other peoples personal property. Something the law is supposet to pprotect at all times.
Correction: Like watching my oldest son's face light up when he found out that yes, he WILL get to eat at the public trough.
I disgress