What's going to happen when John McCain loses...

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

coprolalia

Bored Certified
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Messages
3,084
Reaction score
19
Points
4,626
Location
Paradise
  1. Attending Physician
Here's what's going to happen starting in January, after the Republican ticket loses. These issues are going to affect you:


  • More taxes across the board. I don't care which party wins, you will have to pay higher taxes to pay for the programs which have been initiated during this current crisis in the lame duck session. For either candidate to say that there will be no increase in taxes is, quite frankly, balderdash. But, one candidate is going to expand government without a doubt: Obama. For those of you who have worked hard to get where you are - and, more importantly, continue to work hard to stay where you are - you are going to pay a higher share of the burden under Obama to reward those who don't.
  • More government programs. Because of the first bullet point, we will require a bigger bureaucracy to support the expanding socialist government we live (or will soon live) in. The government is comfortable dropping $20-30 billion on programs across the board, including expanding healthcare coverage, paying into an ailing education system (that needs reformmore than it does more money thrown at it), and subsidizing the banking industry. How they're going to pay for it... EHHH... just pesky details.
  • Democractic President, Democratic Congress. Be prepared for the full reign of Nancy Pelosi and the "left-coast" liberals to begin to have their way with the American people. You will see ridiculous mandates being handed down across a wide variety of industries, from requirements in the healthcare field to achieve greater "patient advocacy" standards with less money to a far-too-rapid insititution of high-cost, low-efficiency alternative energy programs (see bullet 2). It will be an onslaught of drastic "change" that doesn't have any foundation in or real grasp of the complexity of the current problems faced, nor understanding or foresight of the new problems this change will create.
  • America, the "Sir Robin" of the World. "When danger reared its ugly head, Sir Robin turned his tail and fled. Brave, brave, brave, Sir Robin." The world will learn that the U.S. will back down from conflict and adopt a more xenophobic approach to world affairs. The mistaken belief that this will "rehabilitate" our world image will instead be seen as a sign that we are weak and non-committal. This will begin with a stand-down of action in Iraq and a time table for withdrawal.
  • Che Guevara... Saul Mendelson... Barrack Obama? This administration's mission statement will be posited as a rebirth of "Nationalism" and a spirited effort to "change this country back into a Great Nation." What we will have is a leader who is long on social idealism, but weak in actually being able to effect change (as has been proven by his short and ineffectual record in the Senate). He will be someone who disdains the perceived "power elite" of this country, yet will be forced to work with them. Revolutionary? Hardly. What we are going to get is more of the same: ineffectual, bloated government that attempts to dictate policies that they perceive to be the "best" course of action for this country. What it will be instead is a crash course in the reality of learning to deal with diversity of opinion, in lieu of simply putting forth and achieving what is perceived to be one man's vision for a better America.
Long story short, expect more of the same over the next four years. And, expect Uncle Sam to dig deeper into your pockets. Sorry to disappoint you idealists. But, looks like you're going to get your way anyway...

-copro
 
New World Order. Google it or look it up on Youtube.
 
Copro,

What are your thoughts on Palin's "abuse of power" veredict? Shouldn't she be replaced?
 
Thank you for clearing up what will happen when Obama takes office. Its good to hear from someone with expertise in political science but combine that with your ability to see into the future...again thank you.
 
What are your thoughts on Palin's "abuse of power" veredict?

"Troopergate?" Politically motivated and irrelevant.

From the Independent in the UK, a potentially "less biased" news source...

"In order to violate the ethics law, there has to be some personal gain, usually financial. Mr. Branchflower has failed to identify any financial gain," attorney Thomas Van Flein said.


McCain campaign spokesman Meg Stapleton said the "Legislative Council seriously overreached, making a tortured argument to find fault without basis in law or fact."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...abuse-of-power-as-alaska-governor-958120.html

Shouldn't she be replaced?

Not at this point.

-copro
 
New World Order. Google it or look it up on Youtube.

😕

Not sure what this has to do with this thread. Please explain.

-copro
 
Thank you for clearing up what will happen when Obama takes office. Its good to hear from someone with expertise in political science but combine that with your ability to see into the future...again thank you.

Mark my words. Looks like you're gonna get your wish...

-copro
 
I weep and keep a perfect record of never voting for a winning candidate.
 
funny you are asking, it's quite obvious that wallstreet will recover, spending will be less on frivolous wars but rather on the american people , the infrastructure will be rebuild and money will be put to education and healthcare as opposed to running torturecamps in third world countries. america's political and economic standing in the world will be rebuild. W will spend his retirement writing his memoirs ( how to &^%$# up a country in 8 easy years).
glad i could clarify for you, fasto
 
funny you are asking, it's quite obvious that wallstreet will recover, spending will be less on frivolous wars but rather on the american people , the infrastructure will be rebuild and money will be put to education and healthcare as opposed to running torturecamps in third world countries. america's political and economic standing in the world will be rebuild. W will spend his retirement writing his memoirs ( how to &^%$# up a country in 8 easy years).
glad i could clarify for you, fasto

It will take at least a decade to recover from the current mess we're in. Obama's tenure ain't going to have any meaningful impact on what's already happened.

Welcome back to the 1930's, folks.

-copro
 
funny you are asking, it's quite obvious that wallstreet will recover, spending will be less on frivolous wars but rather on the american people , the infrastructure will be rebuild and money will be put to education and healthcare as opposed to running torturecamps in third world countries. america's political and economic standing in the world will be rebuild. W will spend his retirement writing his memoirs ( how to &^%$# up a country in 8 easy years).
glad i could clarify for you, fasto


Obvious???

You must have some crystal ball the rest of us are not so lucky to have.

How do you think the government is going to pay for all those t-bills we sold?? We got two options..

1. Tax the s*** out of the people which won't do jack, except make people invest less in the market, oh I forgot Obama will jack up capital gains tax, agian less market play..

2. Have the fed print up some money, devaluing what ever assets you have already, ruining any oppertunity to invest as cost of living will out pace your earnings...


So by obvious, you proably meant, we havn't got a snowball's chance in h!!. :laugh::laugh:

The only real shot this country has at avoiding economic disaster is getting spending undercontrol, by control I mean cut, cut, cut. I promise that aint in the cards with your meshia...
 
"Troopergate?" Politically motivated and irrelevant.

From the Independent in the UK, a potentially "less biased" news source...



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...abuse-of-power-as-alaska-governor-958120.html



Not at this point.

-copro
hahahhaha you're friggin hilarious. In order to prove your "independent, less biased point" you pulled out a quote from HER lawyer and THEIR campaign manager. I have news for you, those sound bites made our "biased" media, too. I really don't give a flying f*ck what she did or didn't do- I think she's a disgusting individual independent from anything she did regarding firing someone. But come on, of course there's no financial gain in a personal vengeance type of thing, that's why it's "usually" financial, unless it's a case like they're proposing. If I remember correctly, it was also underway before she became the VP pick, so not quite as politically motivated as you're implying. Stick to the facts, senator.
 
Why is it funny? Because I laid out a vision for the future under Obama, and it turned instead into another Sarah Palin attack thread? Again, check me if I'm wrong, but she's not running for President.

-copro
 
Why is it funny? Because I laid out a vision for the future under Obama, and it turned instead into another Sarah Palin attack thread? Again, check me if I'm wrong, but she's not running for President.

-copro

I don't think the VP position should be taken lightly. Especially when the Pres candidate is 72.

Why do you think she was chosen? The man pulling all the strings wanted McCain to lose. That's why.
 
Obama's foreign policy...

[YOUTUBE]BZwuTo7zKM8[/YOUTUBE]

:laugh:

-copro
 
http://www.electiontaxes.com/

Here is a nice calculator that will estimate the difference in taxes between Oboma and McCain. Its an interesting exercise. I came up with about 5000-7000 increased tax burden under Oboma vs McCain for someone making 350K married with 2 kids. At 249K there is no difference and for a resident (50K) you get a thousand more a year with Oboma.
 
You have much to learn in life.

I'll let my friend Georgie school you a little bit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ4SSvVbhLw

😕

The George Carlin diatribe (which I agree with... huge fan... he's arguing everything I've ever said on this forum) has nothing to do with anything in this thread. You are not connecting any dots, especially with your last statement... that the "man pulling the strings" doesn't want McCain in the White House.

I think it is actually you who has much to learn in life.

-copro
 
😕

The George Carlin diatribe (which I agree with... huge fan... he's arguing everything I've ever said on this forum) has nothing to do with anything in this thread. You are not connecting any dots, especially with your last statement... that the "man pulling the strings" doesn't want McCain in the White House.

I think it is actually you who has much to learn in life.

-copro
Did you watch the video?
If you did, then all I can say is your comprehension is pretty low.
 
Did you watch the video?
If you did, then all I can say is your comprehension is pretty low.

Urge,

You're not making any sense. The "man" wants Obama to win because it doesn't matter... consumption is all that matters... it's all a smoke screen... none of them care about "us"... they're only going to continue to pander to the people who really have the power... yeah, I get it. Or, are you suggesting that Obama can make a difference? If that's the case, you haven't read any of my posts.

It still doesn't seem you have a point. You're not making any sense. Don't bother voting? Is that what you're really trying to say? I got news for you: McCain in the office is a better bet at protecting people like me and you, the ones who fit into what Carlin is railing against. Fact is, I don't expect government to do anything for me besides protect me from idiots trying to steal from me, other idiots trying to invade my country, and even other idiots from trying to take away something I've earned. I am an owner. I know how to play the game. Why do I want Obama to try to overturn the apple cart (not that I think he can)? I want obedient workers. I've got news for you: I'm in the club.

I don't think you watched the video. Either that, or you really don't have a point.

-copro
 
http://www.electiontaxes.com/

Here is a nice calculator that will estimate the difference in taxes between Oboma and McCain. Its an interesting exercise. I came up with about 5000-7000 increased tax burden under Oboma vs McCain for someone making 350K married with 2 kids. At 249K there is no difference and for a resident (50K) you get a thousand more a year with Oboma.



go to the head of the class
 
Fact is, I don't expect government to do anything for me besides protect me from idiots trying to steal from me, other idiots trying to invade my country, and even other idiots from trying to take away something I've earned. I am an owner. I know how to play the game. Why do I want Obama to try to overturn the apple cart (not that I think he can)? I want obedient workers. I've got news for you: I'm in the club.

Copro,

Did you vote for GWB in 2000, and 2004?

Based on your criteria above, you must be part of the 25% that approve of his performance. Must be the loneliness that leads to threads like this one.

The Republican party really needs to lose this divisive culture war it took up against people with good jobs, good education, progressive values, and common sense. Those "left coast" people, as you call them. Of course that includes the right coast, and the middle coast too. And plenty of folks in between. They're completely out of touch with the best and brightest in America, and have gone very far to lose the dimwits too.

I'm certainly no fan of higher taxes, but the need for higher taxes in light of an exponentially rising national debt makes sense to me. I just wish Obama could push his 250K line up to 500 or 750K. That said, I accept his higher taxes as the cost of having a thoughtful leader in the Whitehouse. Did you see Michelle Obama on Larry King Live a few nights ago? If she's any reflection on her husband, and I suspect she is, Barak Obama is very much for real.

This thread is hilarious, and goes pretty far to convince people like me that you are, in fact, totally nuts.

It does look like Obama is going to win the election. According to electoral-vote.com, the score is predicted to be 343:184. What are your plans on November 5th?

:corny:
 
Last edited:
Copro,

Did you vote for GWB in 2000, and 2004?

No. I voted for Gore in 2000 (lesser of two evils at the time), and due to poor planning of my being on an away rotation in med school in 2004 and not planning ahead for an away ballot, didn't vote... but would've voted for Kerry.

So, how does that change your impression of me? (Other than the fact that I can learn.)

Based on your criteria above, you must be part of the 25% that approve of his performance. Must be the loneliness that leads to threads like this one.

Bush is clearly the worst president we've had in the last 100 years, and maybe the worst president we've ever had. But, the Democrats have successfully (and wrongfully) linked a McCain administration to another "four years of Bush". The fact that I hear this from people on a regular basis - everyday people - seems to demostrate without much additional critical thinking or actually looking at their records that a soundbite beats reflective thought for your "Average Joe" American. How sad.

The Republican party really needs to lose this divisive culture war it took up against people with good jobs, good education, progressive values, and common sense.

Huh?

Those "left coast" people, as you call them.

Does Nancy Pelosi reflect your idea of a strong, common-sense America? If so, let's talk about the fiasco of offending the people of Turkey last year, who are trying to get into the EU, in order only to assuage and satisfy some of her "core constituency" in Southern California. Are you even aware of that debacle? She almost was successful - on her own - of turning an otherwise friendly nation, hard to find in that part of the world, against us.

Of course that includes the right coast, and the middle coast too. And plenty of folks in between. I guess it's easier to govern from the gut than the brain, and it's easier to attract those flyover state dimwits, than people who live in our major population centers.

You are talking about people who are voting from the gut, if they elect Obama. That's the entire problem with this process: most people use their hearts, not their heads, when they walk into the polling station. They vote on issues that don't really matter (gun control, abortion, prayer in schools, etc.) instead of those that do. They make their decision based upon nebulous ideas that no President will have any sole power to effect any change.

This thread is hilarious, and goes pretty far to convince people like me that you are, in fact, totally nuts.

Argumentum ad hominem. It's much easier to ridicule someone you don't agree with than to see their side of the argument, isn't it? I believe that's called bigotry in some circles.

It does look like Obama is going to win the election. According to electoral-vote.com, the score is predicted to be 343:184. What are your plans on November 5th?

Hold my breath and hope for the best. And, laugh to myself when some of you graduate medical school and/or get into private practice and suddenly realize just how badly you are being f**ked.

-copro
 
Let me ask you all this:

Who do you think will better represent the interest of physicians in the White House, Obama or McCain? Do you think that Obama will protect us from the onslaught of purportedly "more cost-effective" mid-level practitioners fight for expanded independent practice rights?

If you said "yes" to the second question, you are horribly misinformed.

-copro
 
Let me ask you all this:

Who do you think will better represent the interest of physicians in the White House, Obama or McCain? Do you think that Obama will protect us from the onslaught of purportedly "more cost-effective" mid-level practitioners fight for expanded independent practice rights?

If you said "yes" to the second question, you are horribly misinformed.

-copro

Copro,

Normally I'm as conservative as they come and would vote for the (R) nominee without batting an eye.

That having been said, I'm not sure that it's quite as clear cut this time around. Obama has promised no new taxes for anyone making less than $250,000. This applies to a lot of physicians. In fact, the Heritage foundation has stated that his taxation plan is friendlier to the middle class than McCain's is.

McCain has said that he favors the Kaiser model of health care and expansion of midlevel practice rights. This translates directly into increased competition from CRNAs (for gas) and DNPs/NPs/PAs (for everyone else). I can't imagine that this is going to be good for physicians.
 
CASE IN POINT...

Do you support a cap on non-economic damages in medical liability lawsuits as a way to help doctors afford to practice in our state?

Since my days as an Illinois state senator, I have been opposed to caps on jury awards for medical malpractice.



At what level? //Or// Why not?

I don’t support such caps because they do not reduce insurance rates and limit the rights of patients.

http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/policy/federal/presidentialrace/positions/obama.html

... AND...

Senator John McCain did not respond to the AAFP Candidate Survey.

http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/policy/federal/presidentialrace/positions/mccain.html

Smart man.

-copro
 
Um. Why are you saying "when"? Shouldn't you be saying "if"? Why don't you have faith and support in your preferred candidate?
 
McCain has said that he favors the Kaiser model of health care and expansion of midlevel practice rights. This translates directly into increased competition from CRNAs (for gas) and DNPs/NPs/PAs (for everyone else). I can't imagine that this is going to be good for physicians.

I'm aware of the "Kaiser" model statements, but you'll otherwise have to show me specifically where he said that about midlevel practitioners. The Kaiser model functions more like an HMO, and does not allow for independent midlevel practitioner rights.

In the meantime, here's an article that shows how his plan is budget neutral and pulls the teat of the "government insurance business" out of the mouths of those who exploit it. It also allows for more independent choice and portability in selecting your own insurer, and not relying on your employer to provide one for you (something I've consistently advocated for, if you review my posting history). Is it a perfect plan? No. But, it makes people less reliant on government, which is the point.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122315505846605217.html

-copro
 
Um. Why are you saying "when"? Shouldn't you be saying "if"? Why don't you have faith and support in your preferred candidate?

I don't like the term "faith", but I will say that I have full confidence in McCain to do an excellent job and be the better choice of the two candidates. It's the choices of the American people I'm not so confident in, as reflected by recent polls.

-copro
 
I don't like the term "faith", but I will say that I have full confidence in McCain to do an excellent job and be the better choice of the two candidates. It's the choices of the American people I'm not so confident in, as reflected by recent polls.

-copro
Lol. Faith, confidence, same difference. Okay, I see the point you are making.
 
I'm aware of the "Kaiser" model statements, but you'll otherwise have to show me specifically where he said that about midlevel practitioners. The Kaiser model functions more like an HMO, and does not allow for independent midlevel practitioner rights.

Okay, I just checked myself on the above statement...

Some bloggers state that he would support CRNP's to staff walk-in clinics in strip malls and the like, in an effort to increase access to care. But, it was not specifically laid out (i.e. what kind of oversight these clinics would have). And, this is all he says on his website...

GREATER ACCESS AND CONVENIENCE: Expanding Access To Health Care. Families place a high value on quickly getting simple care. Government should promote greater access through walk-in clinics in retail outlets.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm

Fact is, there are already many such models in the Midwest where PA's and CRNP's are independently running clinics. There are physicians, however, who are "on call" for these clinics and ultimately responsible for the care of the patient under that midlevel, without going outside of the Stark regulations.

If this is the case (and what he means by this plan), I don't inherently have a problem with it as it is an expansion of the system we essentially already have in some geographic areas. Again, it is not specific enough for me to comment on at this point. We're talking about runny noses, vaccinations, and pimples here, folks. And, how this would then direcly translate into expansion of in-hospital CRNA independent practice rights eludes me right now.

Further, he says about tort reform...

TORT REFORM: Passing Medical Liability Reform. We must pass medical liability reform that eliminates lawsuits directed at doctors who follow clinical guidelines and adhere to safety protocols. Every patient should have access to legal remedies in cases of bad medical practice but that should not be an invitation to endless, frivolous lawsuits.

👍

-copro
 
Last edited:
Let me ask you all this:

Who do you think will better represent the interest of physicians in the White House, Obama or McCain? Do you think that Obama will protect us from the onslaught of purportedly "more cost-effective" mid-level practitioners fight for expanded independent practice rights?

If you said "yes" to the second question, you are horribly misinformed.

-copro


At this point, I'm not too concerned about who will better represent physicians.

I'm worried about who will better represent our country and our population.

I think anyone looking at this election primarily through the eyes of a physician has lost the forest for the trees.
 
No. I voted for Gore in 2000 (lesser of two evils at the time), and due to poor planning of my being on an away rotation in med school in 2004 and not planning ahead for an away ballot, didn't vote... but would've voted for Kerry.

So, how does that change your impression of me? (Other than the fact that I can learn.)

You are closer to the big bucks now than you were four and eight years ago.



http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/opinion/10brooks.html?em
 
At this point, I'm not too concerned about who will better represent physicians.

I'm worried about who will better represent our country and our population.

I think anyone looking at this election primarily through the eyes of a physician has lost the forest for the trees.

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍 couldn't agree more. I was a human being before I became a physician and as much as I'd like to have my cake and eat it too, I don't have any interest in changing that order.
 

Ahh... an Op-Ed piece. Blog on steroids.

Why don't we work to bring the Republican party back to the mainstream, then? Surely likening McCain to "another four years of Bush" is nothing more than a throw-away mongrel scare tactic dredged up by an out-of-touch, heavy-spending, give-a-man-a-fish Democratic party that is championed by the pandering petal pushing Nancy Pelosis of the nation, right?

McCain may have agreed, or even been suckered-in, to being the current leader of a trash-talking organization more hell-bent on scaring the bejezus out of people to win votes than cogently addressing every key issue out there in the campaign, but he's still McCain... just playing nice with the people footing the bill. This still doesn't mean Obama is the right man for the job.

-copro
 
I was a human being before I became a physician and as much as I'd like to have my cake and eat it too, I don't have any interest in changing that order.

Man, you guys have really taken a full quaff of the Kool-Aid, haven't you?

-copro
 
Urge,

You're not making any sense. The "man" wants Obama to win because it doesn't matter... consumption is all that matters... it's all a smoke screen... none of them care about "us"... they're only going to continue to pander to the people who really have the power... yeah, I get it. Or, are you suggesting that Obama can make a difference? If that's the case, you haven't read any of my posts.

It still doesn't seem you have a point. You're not making any sense. Don't bother voting? Is that what you're really trying to say? I got news for you: McCain in the office is a better bet at protecting people like me and you, the ones who fit into what Carlin is railing against. Fact is, I don't expect government to do anything for me besides protect me from idiots trying to steal from me, other idiots trying to invade my country, and even other idiots from trying to take away something I've earned. I am an owner. I know how to play the game. Why do I want Obama to try to overturn the apple cart (not that I think he can)? I want obedient workers. I've got news for you: I'm in the club.

I don't think you watched the video. Either that, or you really don't have a point.

-copro
You are so blinded by their political show that you cannot see further ahead. The "man" controls both republicans and democrats. The man wants Obama to win just because it's a good distractor. But it doesn't matter, you are getting shafted either way. You are not in "the club". You are just another peon.

This is what is happening while you jap around with your politics: New World Order
[YOUTUBE]hD_ZIs4zlDQ[/YOUTUBE]
 
Last edited:
You are so blinded by their political show that you cannot see further ahead. The "man" controls both republicans and democrats. The man wants Obama to win just because. But it doesn't matter, you are getting shafted either way. You are not in "the club". You are just another peon.

Ummm... alright... who's the nutter? Weren't you the guy who said we didn't really go to the moon? :laugh:

-copro
 
Same guy. Watch this. You will be spooked.

[youtube]7nD7dbkkBIA[/youtube]
 
Copro,

You may want to spend less time convincing us McCain is the better choice, and more time learning to appreciate what Obama brings.

Electoral Map

in trouble?


I understand the NYT has a bias, which is why I usually don't follow op-eds. It's hard to argue with the wave of voters siding with Obama these days.

And the "politically charged" investigation of Palin began back in June/July, when no one outside Alaska cared.
 
Top Bottom