digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at washingtonmonthly.com

Obama - The Fact Checker In Chief

washingtonmonthly.com — Obama highlighted some of the more common talking points against his health care proposal, only to knock them down one by one.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 20, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

422 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • novenator, on 07/19/2009, -18/+81The full text of the speech can be found here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Weekly- ...

    FTA - "First, the same folks who controlled the White House and Congress for the past eight years as we ran up record deficits will argue -- believe it or not -- that health reform will lead to record deficits," he said. "That's simply not true. Our proposals cut hundreds of billions of dollars in unnecessary spending and unwarranted giveaways to insurance companies in Medicare and Medicaid. They change incentives so providers will give patients the best care, not just the most expensive care, which will mean big savings over time"

    This is one of the key elements to reform. The US has the highest cost of health care insurance in any industrialized nation on the planet per capita. Yet our life expectancies are not that great, 50 million are without basic care, and millions more get dropped by their insurers when they suddenly get sick. This situation needs to change.
  • bombula, on 07/19/2009, -31/+80Awesome.
  • replaysMike, on 07/20/2009, -18/+66I live in a country where health coverage is run by the government (like most westernized countries) - and while it's not perfect, it's far better than what Americans are putting up with. Is it about saving health costs primarily? No. It's about helping those who cannot afford it or run into trouble should they really need it. Health care isn't about profit - it's about health care.
  • catalysis, on 07/20/2009, -11/+51Unfortunately, this bill won't be passed until it somehow makes the rich richer.
  • charm803, on 07/19/2009, -8/+43And the opposing side has every right to get Obama's "facts" and knock them down, one by one.

    (I won't be holding my breath on that one.)

    If you can disprove his points, go right ahead. Maybe you can, maybe you can't, but to say he is creating straw man arguments isn't helping.

    It's annoying to hear people disagree with him but offer nothing as an alternative.
  • eliot2000, on 07/19/2009, -9/+40If, next year, we were paying per capita what Canada or England pays, we would be paying less, not more. It's possible, but the savings probably won't be immediate.
  • KRG12345, on 07/20/2009, -5/+32Piss you off.
  • tastypaste, on 07/20/2009, -10/+30Show me where in the Constitution is says Richard Nixon can create a Drug Enforcement Agency to prevent US citizens from consuming plant materials he doesn't agree with. Show me where the Constitution says George W. Bush has the power to create Homeland Security. Neither of those are allowed by the Constitution, yet they did it anyway.

    And Obamacare is a lot more beneficial than either of those useless wastes of tax money.
  • Donotsurf, on 07/20/2009, -5/+25Well in Cooperate American, everything is about profits.
  • offrdbandit, on 07/20/2009, -5/+25Constitution? That's like so 18th Century.
  • n00j, on 07/20/2009, -14/+34post office....
  • AgeofMastery, on 07/20/2009, -3/+22The British and Canadians are quite happy with their health care systems. Do you hear them agitating to change over to our system?
  • n00j, on 07/20/2009, -4/+21only the best if you have money!
    otherwise screw you!
  • tastypaste, on 07/20/2009, -7/+24They're both better than the American system.
  • roddack, on 07/20/2009, -27/+43Hmm no address of the constitutionality of such a proposal
  • inactive, on 07/20/2009, -3/+19No, it's a money thing. The depths of greed run far compared to that of racism.
  • jayjayjoni, on 07/20/2009, -19/+34the unemployment rate is caused by Bush, not Obama.

    Sources of this economic downturn can even be traced back to Reagan.
  • reeds1999, on 07/20/2009, -2/+16No, I think he is talking about the system the US has. The one ranked 37th. in the world.
  • RadGnar, on 07/20/2009, -5/+19first step towards health care for everyone in our country, it's ridiculous that people in the US are going into debt over health costs.
  • EndAntiSemitism, on 07/20/2009, -7/+20Yeah I can't believe that Americans want something that only every other industrialized nation on the planet has!

    You know, all of the ones that "collapsed"?

    /s
  • Arkyll, on 07/19/2009, -7/+20Ya no kidding
  • Ajajadude, on 07/20/2009, -8/+21I'm still not reading anything in your posts that counter his counter-points.

    Face it, you're scared because people who don't know any better throw around the term "socialized" and you're thinking we're all doomed. The system, as it stands, is *****. Doctors and hospitals aren't rewarded for giving quality care, they're rewarded for quantity of care, which is ass backwards.

    I've got a funny feeling that you've never been bent over the counter by your medical insurance provider or you've never actually been seriously ill. While I hope you never have to deal with the ***** insurance companies pull (how dare you get sick!), I doubt someone like you will understand how badly our medical system needs to be revamped.
  • kaag, on 07/19/2009, -27/+40The Obama administration and democratic congressmen need to go into a full campaign mode for the Healthcare Reform. This is a once in a lifetime change to get this done, and they(actually we) shouldn't let these so-called "centrist-democrats" derail it.

    They need to remind themselves that majority of Americans are on board. They've allowed these centrists and Republicans to make 160 amendments to the bills and they are still calling for it to be delayed. If this can be done by a simple majority vote, they should do. Remember the Republicans passed a number of their bills that way.
  • AgeofMastery, on 07/20/2009, -7/+20We did? We had enough votes to override Bush's vetoes?

    What world were you living in?
  • WorldLeader, on 07/20/2009, -12/+25We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. - Preamble to the Constitution

    General Welfare: The concern of the government for the health, peace, morality, and safety of its citizens.

    ---

    Also, the pursuit of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Life means that you are healthy and living. The government is supposed to grant you these and protect your rights.
  • ironhide, on 07/20/2009, -9/+22Oh good, so it *is* the same debunked garbage the right-wing idiots have been spewing.
    http://mediamatters.org/research/200907160040

    "In fact, the provision to which the editorial referred establishes the conditions under which existing private plans would be exempted from the requirement that they participate in the Health Insurance Exchange. Individual health insurance plans that do not meet the "grandfather" conditions would still be available for purchase, but only through the Exchange and subject to those regulations."
  • ironhide, on 07/20/2009, -14/+26Care to share your "proof"?
  • BasalCellBossk, on 07/20/2009, -12/+24Tune in once again, folks, for another thrilling episode of "When Butthurt !Right Wing Hysterics Whine and Cry"
  • Equinox2O12, on 07/20/2009, -0/+12@ Solid12345
    Do you really think that the money you put in to your insurance is your money? Insurance is the equivalent of renting some other person's money. I've put in a couple of thousand into my insurance. When my wife had triplets, the total for "the whole thing" came close to $940,000. You sir and thousands of others paid for my children. If you become ill and need intensive care, I and thousands of others will be paying for you.

    I can pay insurance and get taxed or I can just get taxed and still have insurance... I'm for the latter.

    "Of those 48 million uninsured, most choose to not get it for various reasons, I suspect the majority being they'd rather have extra spending money on trivial things like material possessions and weekend party supplies than worrying about their health."

    You have obviously never lived in the ghetto or a barrio or been so poor that every dollar was priceless. I have. I'd say a good 2/3 of your 48 million need every dollar. Having insurance is a "luxury", and means nothing to a person worried about keeping a roof over their head.
  • Ajajadude, on 07/20/2009, -1/+13Again, because the current system makes TREATING you and your ailments unprofitable.
  • Ajajadude, on 07/20/2009, -9/+21Every country that has gone the way Obama wants to take spends significantly less on healthcare per person with better results (as eliot said, longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality rate, etc). It's a simple fact that anyone with access to the internet can find out for themselves.

    There was an article about the Mayo Clinic in Time Magazine that highlighted their approach to caring for their patients. Their way of going about treating patients is what Obama wants to focus on: quality over quantity. And based on comparison studies, the Mayo Clinic way is better for patients. Unfortunately, given that doctors and hospitals are rewarded for quantity, quality treatments by the Mayo Clinic are not profitable.
  • Paranor01, on 07/20/2009, -0/+11my god you can see about an inch of foam from their frothing mouths...

    wish they'd all just smoke a joint and relax for a bit...
  • Paranor01, on 07/20/2009, -4/+15As a Canadian I can tell you that hasn't happened in Canada.
  • howclever, on 07/20/2009, -0/+11Yeah, because all rich people are rich because they are industrious and intelligent.

    HEY PARIS, I didn't know you knew Antwon!
  • NiftyG, on 07/20/2009, -2/+11You don't have to wait. Medical bills account for 62% of personal bankruptcies.
    http://www.healthreformwatch.com/tag/62-bankruptci ...

    This is with our current for-profit system. In other news, health insurance companies showed record profits last year as well.
    http://vancouver.injuryboard.com/miscellaneous/pri ...
  • buddhistMonkey, on 07/20/2009, -6/+15The CBO review of the House's health care plan actually projects a SURPLUS:

    http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/104xx/doc10464/hr3200.p ...
  • bdolcourt, on 07/20/2009, -29/+38The president is sadly glossing over the details and sticking to his talking points. Calling this "fact checking" is like calling Dick Cheney an up front and honest man.

    The crux of the matter is that the expectation is that doctors will see more patients, get paid less (at minimum per patient and likely less overall), still have the same malpractice risk and order less testing. Then they actually expect that doctors are going to do it. They must have re-written a few chapters in Samuelson's Economics when I wasn't looking.

    Capitation didn't work in the 80s, why would they expect it to work now?
  • tastypaste, on 07/20/2009, -7/+16Government run health care is more efficient and better at delivering care than private health care is. Look at France, the Netherlands, Britain and most of Europe. Now compare that to America's broken system. The benefits are obvious.
  • OrangeBob, on 07/20/2009, -0/+9@ Equinox

    Agree completely. Anyone who would say something like:

    "Of those 48 million uninsured, most choose to not get it for various reasons, I suspect the majority being they'd rather have extra spending money on trivial things like material possessions and weekend party supplies than worrying about their health."

    Has just shown themselves to be so clueless that they shouldn't even be participating in the conversation. I have been that poor and it sucks. Having to work long hours at dead end jobs just to make sure that you have food and a place to sleep is no fun. Luckily for me, I went through this when I was young and could endure it better.

    But, when you have to live like that, there is no money for luxuries like health insurance.

    Even though I have past that stage in my life, I am now once again one of the 48 million, but now it's for different reasons. Now my problem is that I have developed some health problems and companies I've checked with won't sell me insurance at any price.
  • jpete71chevmal, on 07/20/2009, -1/+10If you really wanted to "fix" health care in this country, you could start be repealing the 1973 HMO Act which Ted Kennedy, Richard Nixon and Kaiser Permanente got together and shoved down our throats. Now you want to let the same people "fix" the mess they created. Not going to happen. Let doctors and patients work with each other again. Or aren't doctors smart enough to run their own businesses?
  • swamp916, on 07/20/2009, -1/+10Its also interesting that you would rather protect something that is not yet a living human being but have no compassion for living people who are hard working and fall ill or are injured in a car wreck and loose their homes as a result of the piled up debt? Its also funny that pro-lifers tend to be pro death penalty and pro torturing terrorist. Your claim to value life is a joke.

    Its funny that every other industrialized country manages to provide care to its citizens yet the greatest country in the world can't? It should concern you that we have the highest infant mortality rate in the western world. I guess we only have enough doctors for the rich babies, thats what we call survival of the fittest in America.

    Obviously the founding fathers did not intend for the government to provide health care but they also owned slaves, didn't believe in women's rights whats so ever, and probably used whiskey as anesthesia and pulled out their own teeth. I'm sure if they had known the quality of life we would one day be able to attain and the advancements in technology and medicine that have occured, they would feel that health care was a right too.

    Just giving the people the ability to go to the doctor without worrying about the cost wont mean that Americans will be rushing to fill up hospital beds to get the free pudding... Maybe less people will go to the emergency room or wait until their condition is too serious because they will be able to regularly meet with a family doctor, bringing down overall cost to society in the long term.
  • AgeofMastery, on 07/20/2009, -4/+13Try this from the CBO. It says the House plan would generate a surplus...

    http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/104xx/doc10464/hr3200.p ...

  • iamacyborg, on 07/20/2009, -1/+10Is it because he's black?

    It's because he's black, right?
  • tastypaste, on 07/20/2009, -8/+16What are these alternative solutions you're talking about? So far I haven't heard any of them. All the right wing seems to talk about is what kind of mustard Obama uses and whether or not he's evil for buying a dog from a breeder.
  • Bloodwine, on 07/20/2009, -3/+11Fun fact: Their health care plan is run by a private firm.
  • roddack, on 07/20/2009, -10/+18I love how no one is addressing this point just digging it down.

  • AgeofMastery, on 07/20/2009, -5/+13With sources like that yes you will. A right wing blog and a right wing skewed magazine.

    Try this, from a health care trade journal

    http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/ ...

    And on a purely anecdotal level my fiance is Canadian, her family live not far from the ND border. I asked her parents if they knew anyone who had gone to the US for treatment. They just laughed, there's a good hospital in town and more just up the road in Regina. Why would they come here and pay for it?
  • Kerrigore, on 07/20/2009, -1/+9gopfan, meet straw man. Straw man, meet gopfan. You two should get along great.

    Seriously, did you even read the article? Obama isn't suggesting anyone abandon their current health care plan if they are happy with it or able to afford it. All he's trying to do is provide a public option to compete in a free market with private plans. If you guys are so sure that the public option will be terrible/inefficient, what's the worry, since by that logic no one will ever choose it? Anyways, I'm pretty sure the 50 million uninsured would like to have some healthcare even if it's not as good as wealthier people can afford.
  • inactive, on 07/20/2009, -9/+17You can get free care (no lines at all) at Canada and drugs only cost $10 no matter what your disease is. You can choose between either that or the premiums, co-pays, and deductibles offered by your insurance companies. People will only be forced to switch by their own free will.

    Seriously, the kinds of diseases we have hasn't changed much over the years. But the insurance companies keep making more money! How is that? They do one of three things: increase premiums, increase co-pays/deductibles, and deny more claims. You need a kidney? DENIED. You need a liver? DENIED. Cancer patient? DENIED. Your son has autism? DENIED. I could keep going on. Even Wendell Potter agrees, a former Vice President of Cigna, and head of the Public Relations arena in that rock star of a company. Talk about being a ***** human being!
  • BaphClass, on 07/20/2009, -2/+10THANK YOU FOR SHARING THIS GRAND REVELATION, OH MIGHTY CRUSADER FOR TRUTH. GOD FORBID YOU DIDN'T TYPE ALL OF THAT IN CAPS. I TOTALLY WOULDN'T HAVE NOTICED THIS SHOCKING EXPOSE IF THAT WAS THE CASE. YOU BEST BE CAREFUL SPREADING FACTS LIKE THESE AROUND, OR ELSE THE EVIL NEO-COMMUNIST MUSLIM NAZI BABY-KILLER GOVERNMENT WILL GET YOU.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 433 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.