Mister Mxyzptlk

10+ Year Member
May 16, 2006
5,006
1,128
Yewston, TX
Status
Attending Physician
Got this via email. Not fact-checked. Content reproduced exactly as received.


A LAWYER WITH A BRIEFCASE CAN STEAL MORE THAN A THOUSAND MEN WITH GUNS

--Vito Corleone
The Lawyers' Party

By Bruce Walker

The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers’ Party. Barack Obama is a lawyer. Michelle Obama is a lawyer. Hillary Clinton is a lawyer. Bill Clinton is a lawyer. John Edwards is a lawyer. Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer. Every Democratic presidential nominee since 1984 went to law school, although Al Gore did not graduate. Every Democratic vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress: Harry Reid is a lawyer. Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different. President Bush is a businessman. Vice President Cheney is a businessman. The leaders of the Republican Revolution: Newt Gingrich was a history professor. Tom Delay was an exterminator. Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon. Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford was, who left office 31years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president running against Ronald Reagan in 1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work, work that is often the target of lawyers.
The Democratic Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like First, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers’ Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers’ Party, grow. Against whom do Hillary Clinton and President Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and other parties producing products of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side. Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become adverse parties of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws. We are contorted by judicial decisions. We are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers’ Party to provide real change, real reform or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic, in which every major governmental action must be blessed by nine un-elected judges, is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

The United States has 5% of the world’s population and 66% of the world’s lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party. When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association goes to the Democratic Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!
 

lonelobo

PAIN DOC
10+ Year Member
Jun 1, 2005
2,800
754
Southwest
Status
Attending Physician
Great.....

I'll post the next Email I get about how Obama is going to institute Sharia Law in US

why let the facts get in the way of a good spam email
 
Sep 9, 2010
10
0
Status
Attending Physician
Been sued in the past. Practice in a state where the lawyers to doctors ratio is 2:1. And recently read on Slate.com that lawyers are struggling to find jobs. http://www.slate.com/id/2272621/ This last fact warms my heart to no end. That said, this article is horse poo propaganda.

There are lawyers in both parties, and to single out the recent spate of Democratic politicians corrupting us versus the more virtuous "businessmen" of Dick Cheney and George Bush's ilk is moronic. We physicians have no friends in both parties, the sooner that's understood, the better. Let's not forget that the Republican agenda in the 1990s is to repeal Medicare or to severely cripple it. And according to the recent intellectual rising star of the right, Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, we should do away with Medicare. Now, it may not matter to some of you, but a third of my patients are Medicare. So love the Reich wing at your peril.

Democrats, they're hopeless and now we're screwed by Obamacare. We need a viable third party.
 

powermd

Lifetime Donor
15+ Year Member
Mar 30, 2003
2,658
407
Northeast
Visit site
Status
Attending Physician
Democrats, they're hopeless and now we're screwed by Obamacare. We need a viable third party.
Not going to happen with the banksters pulling the strings. We're totally f'd unless a true revolution occurs. I can only see that happening if food and gas exceed some breaking point for the masses. Or some wildcard event occurs. Like maybe some definitive evidence leaks that 9/11 actually was a neocon conspiracy. That would get people out of their seats. Or an acute environmental catastrophe.
 

hyperalgesia

member
Lifetime Donor
7+ Year Member
Jan 9, 2010
5,006
1,642
Status
Attending Physician
I don't think a third party will ever survive because whatever party is in charge will do whatever it takes to retain the support of at least 40% of the people. Thare's no way a third party can take more than that of the remainder. It's always gonna be the status quo and those who are opposed to it. Us and them.

Regarding Medicare and Rand Paul, I really think Medicare has to be completely overhauled or dismantled. The model is just not sustainable in its present form. The whole concept of the taxpayers' annonymous money filtering through the bureaucracy and finally making it into the hands of free market capitalists is flawed. I don't know if there's a better way to annonymize and detach people's money from their healthcare, which is the apparent "progressive" goal, but Medicare is not sustainable. Rand Paul is pragmatist, not a politician.
 

Tenesma

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Jun 11, 2002
5,332
127
Visit site
Status
Attending Physician
for some reason healthcare survived and grew before the advent of medicare - in fact we had major hospitals and local community hospitals THROUGHOUT this country before medicare...

if we get rid of medicare, you wouldn't lose 1/3 of your practice - that is asinine...

it is also asinine that we are spending >60% of medicare dollars in the last 6 months of life...

my new govt plan for the elderly:

once you hit the average american life expectancy, the govt will no longer pay for your health-care... you can save up for those costs, you can insure yourself for those costs, or the govt can allow you to put a certain amount away every year with tax-deferred earning (like a Health-IRA) that kicks in when you hit 74 (or whatever the life expectancy is).... if you can't afford CVVH/LVAD while intubated and you are >74, too bad... you are given some morphine, and we start playing Jimmy Buffett music while your family kisses you goodbye...why should my great granchildren have to bear the burden of my 87 year old grandmothers health needs when that "screening" colonoscopy isn't going to extend her life, nor is it going to turn her into a tax-producing citizen???
 

kdlymes

Hero Member
Nov 1, 2010
51
0
California
Status
Attending Physician
Been sued in the past. Practice in a state where the lawyers to doctors ratio is 2:1. And recently read on Slate.com that lawyers are struggling to find jobs.
There are lawyers in both parties, We physicians have no friends in both parties, the sooner that's understood, the better.
Never trust a lawyer. When we need them, they have us by the nutsac. Think of all your past experiences with lawyers. They are all crooks.
 

specepic

10+ Year Member
Feb 2, 2008
1,757
250
New England
Status
Attending Physician
I agree that the Dems are out to F__ docs. That being said why didn't Repubs do tort reform when they had the chance?? Are they stringing us along?
 
Sep 9, 2010
10
0
Status
Attending Physician
for some reason healthcare survived and grew before the advent of medicare - in fact we had major hospitals and local community hospitals THROUGHOUT this country before medicare...

if we get rid of medicare, you wouldn't lose 1/3 of your practice - that is asinine...

it is also asinine that we are spending >60% of medicare dollars in the last 6 months of life...

my new govt plan for the elderly:

once you hit the average american life expectancy, the govt will no longer pay for your health-care... you can save up for those costs, you can insure yourself for those costs, or the govt can allow you to put a certain amount away every year with tax-deferred earning (like a Health-IRA) that kicks in when you hit 74 (or whatever the life expectancy is).... if you can't afford CVVH/LVAD while intubated and you are >74, too bad... you are given some morphine, and we start playing Jimmy Buffett music while your family kisses you goodbye...why should my great granchildren have to bear the burden of my 87 year old grandmothers health needs when that "screening" colonoscopy isn't going to extend her life, nor is it going to turn her into a tax-producing citizen???
You seem angry. Someone kill your dog or sumthin'?

Thanks for history lesson professor, but medicine in this country has advanced beyond the barter system. To a large extent, all of us are beholden to Medicare whether you want to believe it. As Medicare cuts loom, so follows private insurances. Unless you got yourself a pill mill where you're taking cash only. Is that what you're proposing?

And we spend that money the last few months of someone's life because it would otherwise be labeled socialist rationing. People in this country want their cake and eat it too.

And the point was made by specepic that for all the capitulation the Repubes got from Obama, why can't tort reform be one of it? We are truly screwed from both sides. In other words, our reimbursements will continue to fall and we'll also continue to practice defensive medicine. Perfect. Let's move to Canada.
 

kdlymes

Hero Member
Nov 1, 2010
51
0
California
Status
Attending Physician
Unless you got yourself a pill mill where you're taking cash only. Is that what you're proposing?
In other words, our reimbursements will continue to fall and we'll also continue to practice defensive medicine. Perfect. Let's move to Canada.
Its too late to take back medicine in the USA. We need to stick together here. What if we all went to cash? Nobody would be able to afford our services. But at the same time we eliminate billing, office staff, etc; we can loweer our prices. The biggest issue in our practice is not being paid for every procedure we do. It is a constant insurance fight, with all the bs that goes with it. Insurance companys pay only 65% of all claims. The rest are held back, and fighting for them week after week just wears down the billing companys. Thats where the reform should be.
 
OP
Mister Mxyzptlk

Mister Mxyzptlk

10+ Year Member
May 16, 2006
5,006
1,128
Yewston, TX
Status
Attending Physician
My parents' PCP just went concierge. He told his patients that the first 600 people to hand over $1500 will remain in his practice. $900K and all he needs is a nurse and an exam room.
 

Tenesma

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Jun 11, 2002
5,332
127
Visit site
Status
Attending Physician
my parent's friends family doctor in Sarasota has been a concierge doctor for the last 8 years (started before it was hip) --- he charges a retainer of 20k PER YEAR per family (up to 5 members).... it basically guarantees you 24 HOUR/7 day a week access... to his Nurse Practitioner - who will call the Dr. if it is a complicated issue - and as many office visits/year as needed.... he limits his practice to 500 families.....

unbelievable
 

pathstudent

Sound Kapital
15+ Year Member
Mar 17, 2003
2,987
78
43
Visit site
Status
Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
My parents' PCP just went concierge. He told his patients that the first 600 people to hand over $1500 will remain in his practice. $900K and all he needs is a nurse and an exam room.
Plus he still gets to bill their insurance, no? That's awesome. That makes primary care much more lucrative.

I heard about a group of gastroenterologists who are doing something similar, where you pay an annual fee for a level of access. For 500 a year, you can communicate with your doc via email, for 1000 you can get a phone call within 24 hours, for 1500 you get a call within an hour. If you don't pay, you just have to wait until your appointment to speak to the doctor. That seems like a clever way to make up for declining reimbursements. Of course you can only do this if you are practicing in an affluent community.
 
Last edited:

pmrmd

SDN Lifetime Donor
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Mar 22, 2008
1,218
267
Phoenix, Arizona
Status
Attending Physician
my parent's friends family doctor in Sarasota has been a concierge doctor for the last 8 years (started before it was hip) --- he charges a retainer of 20k PER YEAR per family (up to 5 members).... it basically guarantees you 24 HOUR/7 day a week access... to his Nurse Practitioner - who will call the Dr. if it is a complicated issue - and as many office visits/year as needed.... he limits his practice to 500 families.....

unbelievable
I never understood why anyone would do this. Fork over that money and as soon as something comes up the PCP can't handle, which will be quite a bit and quite often, care is assumed by a specialist who doesn't give a damn about a concierge agreement/payment.