Conservative women's group takes out massive ad buy against Obama

Jun 20, 2012 11:35

(CNN) - A conservative women's advocacy group on Wednesday announced a major ad buy aimed against President Barack Obama's sweeping health care reform ( Read more... )

female republicans, spending, stupid people, money, attacks, health care, propaganda, republicans

Leave a comment

Comments 31

catalana June 20 2012, 17:47:09 UTC
I don't want anything to come between my patients and me

ROFL. And this is a *conservative* women's group taking this out? Have they not noticed all the pro-life legislation their party is championing that's doing exactly that?

Reply

ajremix June 20 2012, 18:02:17 UTC
Obviously they don't want the government to allow patients to get in between them and their religion.

Reply

carmy_w June 20 2012, 18:30:15 UTC
No, they'd rather have the insurance companies between them and their patients, not to mention their ministers....

Reply

sparkindarkness June 20 2012, 19:00:16 UTC
When they say things like this I honestly doubt their ability to comprehend language. Because they cannot possibly mean what they're saying!

Reply


crossfire June 20 2012, 18:19:20 UTC
ugh ugh ugh I am dreading this election and the lies that are going to come with it D:

Reply


amyura June 20 2012, 18:21:55 UTC
Yes, if you don't want the government to come between a doctor and her patients, clearly voting Republican is the smart choice. They haven't shown any inclination towards forcing doctors to read inaccurate information from scripts or mandating waiting periods or trying to outlaw hormonal birth control.

Reply

roseofjuly June 21 2012, 04:23:53 UTC
Not to mention that the biggest thing coming between patients and doctors today are THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES

Seriously, every time my dad's company switches their health insurance I have to find new doctors who will take the new plan. I've been on three different plans in the last 5-6 years. I don't 100% understand why they keep changing (and it could be my father deciding to change so he could pay a lower premium from year to year, not sure) but I'm betting it has to do with cost-cutting and not better services.

Reply


doverz June 20 2012, 18:22:52 UTC
"I don't want anything to come between my patients and me - especially Washington bureaucrats," she says.

RME. Like Washington bureaucrats dictating that women can't get abortions isn't doing exactly this.

On a semi-health care related note, I finally went to the dentist today for the first time in like 7 years. I need one for sure root canal, one possible root canal if a filling wouldn't work, and one filling. Since I don't have dental insurance, I could have to pay over $4,000. I seriously hate this country.

Reply

pleasure_past June 20 2012, 23:12:37 UTC
I'm really sorry to hear about that. :( My little brother and I both went years without dental treatment that we knew we needed because our mom just couldn't afford it on her salary. By the time we could actually afford anything*, we were used to being in pretty regular pain, irreparable damage had been done to our teeth, and my little brother was actually getting physically ill from an infection in one of his teeth. And we had insurance.

So basically yeah, I hate this country too.

*Thanks to an unexpected windfall. God knows lots of kids, even kids we knew and went to school with, never got as lucky as we did.

Reply

roseofjuly June 21 2012, 04:26:16 UTC
Yeah, I'm teaching in a summer public health program and we heard a presentation from a public health dentist the other day who emphasized how much dental health is connected to whole system health. A lot of people separate dental care from medical care - and a lot of people who have general medical insurance don't have dental insurance (I know that after I lose my parents' insurance, I won't have dental insurance anymore unless I pay extra for it through my school - and even then, there will be a 2-3 month gap in my coverage). But a lot of problems that people experience could be prevented by good preventative dental care. The dentist was telling us that dentists can even see early signs of cardiovascular disease and diabetes in people's mouths, because the blood vessels change.

Reply


moonshaz June 20 2012, 18:27:02 UTC
"I don't want anything to come between my patients and me - especially Washington bureaucrats," she says.

And yet she seems to be perfectly happy to have a bunch of money-grubbing insurance companies come between her and her patients.

Because right now, it's the insurance companies who get to dictate who can have what tests/treatments/medications and under what circumstances--and even WHO can have coverage. THEY are running the whole show.

If this is somehow better than having the government involved, I am NOT seeing it!

Reply

carmy_w June 20 2012, 18:37:11 UTC
EXACTLY!

I posted on facebook a while back that I'd rather have my government dictating my health care than some private insurance company. My aunt tried to disagree with me, so I schooled her on all the advantages of the ACA, like no pre-existing conditions, 26 year olds covered on their parent's insurance, the closure of the donut hole for seniors, etc.

She never even made a reply. Considering that she has grandkids in that age range, she is a Medicare recipient now, and we have a relative with kidney failure who is waiting on her second transplant, well....

Reply

roseofjuly June 21 2012, 04:28:14 UTC
If it hadn't been for ACA, I would've lost my parents' health insurance two years ago.

And if it's the government making decisions, maybe they will actually hire physicians and other health professionals on the panel that makes insurance provisions in addition to the accountants and actuaries who currently make the decisions.

Reply

carmy_w June 21 2012, 14:59:36 UTC
Plus, if it's the government, their stock first, second, third, fourth, and fifth answer will not be "DENIED".

It amazes me that people would rather have for-profit companies making those decisions, which for obvious reasons will NOT be in the best interests of the patient, than have a government entity making those decisions, who, presumably (since no profit is involved) WILL have the best interests of the patient in mind!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up