Three days..Three weeks..Three months..

[Pudfark]

As I thought...ya skimmed it.
I'll wait for HH's take on it...it least, it'll be substantive...one way or another.

Funny thing is, Slick? What you wrote above...? Were you to apply it to the liberal media over the last few months?
In "reverse"...it would explain why? So many of them have been fired.

[callmeslick]

nah, I read the whole thing.......trying to attribute that technique to 'liberals' is where the treatise went off the rails.

[Pudfark]

Again, ya skimmed it.
HH will get to it soon...just weight.

[Pudfark]

While we're waiting on HH?

Take a gander at this Slick.....

Stephen Blackwood: ObamaCare and My Mother's Cancer Medicine
The news was dumbfounding. She used to have a policy that covered the drug that kept her alive. Now she's on her own.

Excerpts:

"in November, along with millions of other Americans, she lost her health insurance. She'd had a Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan for nearly 20 years. It was expensive, but given that it covered her very expensive treatment, it was a terrific plan. It gave her access to any specialist or surgeon, and to the Sandostatin and other medications that were keeping her alive.

And then, because our lawmakers and president thought they could do better, she had nothing. Her old plan, now considered illegal under the new health law, had been canceled."

"As a medical-office manager, she had decades of experience navigating the enormous problems of even our pre-ObamaCare system. But nothing could have prepared her for the bureaucratic morass she now had to traverse.

The repeated and prolonged phone waits were Sisyphean, the competence and customer service abysmal. When finally she found a plan that looked like it would cover her Sandostatin and other cancer treatments, she called the insurer, Humana, HUM +10.64% to confirm that it would do so. The enrollment agent said that after she met her deductible, all treatments and medications—including those for her cancer—would be covered at 100%. Because, however, the enrollment agents did not—unbelievable though this may seem—have access to the "coverage formularies" for the plans they were selling, they said the only way to find out in detail what was in the plan was to buy the plan. (Does that remind you of anyone?)

With no other options, she bought the plan and was approved on Nov. 22. Because by January the plan was still not showing up on her online Humana account, however, she repeatedly called to confirm that it was active. The agents told her not to worry, she was definitely covered.

Then on Feb. 12, just before going into (yet another) surgery, she was informed by Humana that it would not, in fact, cover her Sandostatin, or other cancer-related medications. The cost of the Sandostatin alone, since Jan. 1, was $14,000, and the company was refusing to pay.

The news was dumbfounding. This is a woman who had an affordable health plan that covered her condition. Our lawmakers weren't happy with that because . . . they wanted plans that were affordable and covered her condition. So they gave her a new one. It doesn't cover her condition and it's completely unaffordable."

"ObamaCare made my mother's old plan illegal, and it forced her to buy a new plan that would accelerate her disease and death. She awaits an appeal with her insurer.

Will this injustice be remedied, for her and for millions of others? Or is my mother to die because she can no longer afford the treatment that keeps her alive?

Like every American, I want affordable health care, and I'm open to innovative solutions of all kinds—individual, corporate, for-profit, nonprofit and public. It will take all of these, and all the intelligence, creativity and self-discipline we have, as well as everything we can offer one another as families, neighbors, friends and citizens—and it still won't be perfect. But it is precisely because health care for 300 million people is so complicated that it cannot be centrally managed.

The "Affordable" Care Act is a brutal, Procrustean disaster. In principle, it violates the irreducible particularity of human life, and in practice it will cause many individuals to suffer and die. We can do better, and we must.

Mr. Blackwood is the president of Ralston College, a planned liberal-arts institution in Savannah, Ga., and is on the board of the Caring for Carcinoid Foundation. His mother, Catherine, manages the Family Medicine Center in Virginia Beach, Va."

The Wall Street Journal link below:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 55560.html

Old Pudfark sez: " Some folks saved 6 dollars and some weren't saved at all...Then again, some folks "passed the buck" and some folks got "passed over".....a buck. "

[callmeslick]

dollars to donuts, the appeal is approved. Happens all the time, on all plans. She could, of course(and should have) consulted the pharmacy lists before signing up. I know I did. But, I will guarantee that there is no way she gets denied. Once again, though, we have another right-wing fantasy tale blaming the ACA for the conduct of private insurers. This sort of stuff has been happening WAY before the ACA. Likely, her loss of coverage had nothing to do with the ACA, and the new providers pharmacy list didn't at all(that isn't a matter for the law). It is, however, more proof that the ACA only goes so far, and the only time we'll see the true fix for the issue is when we have cradle-to-grave Medicare.

[Pudfark]

While we're waiting on HH?

Take a gander at this Slick.....

Stephen Blackwood: ObamaCare and My Mother's Cancer Medicine
The news was dumbfounding. She used to have a policy that covered the drug that kept her alive. Now she's on her own.

Excerpts:

"in November, along with millions of other Americans, she lost her health insurance. She'd had a Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan for nearly 20 years. It was expensive, but given that it covered her very expensive treatment, it was a terrific plan. It gave her access to any specialist or surgeon, and to the Sandostatin and other medications that were keeping her alive.

And then, because our lawmakers and president thought they could do better, she had nothing. Her old plan, now considered illegal under the new health law, had been canceled."

"As a medical-office manager, she had decades of experience navigating the enormous problems of even our pre-ObamaCare system. But nothing could have prepared her for the bureaucratic morass she now had to traverse.

The repeated and prolonged phone waits were Sisyphean, the competence and customer service abysmal. When finally she found a plan that looked like it would cover her Sandostatin and other cancer treatments, she called the insurer, Humana, HUM +10.64% to confirm that it would do so. The enrollment agent said that after she met her deductible, all treatments and medications—including those for her cancer—would be covered at 100%. Because, however, the enrollment agents did not—unbelievable though this may seem—have access to the "coverage formularies" for the plans they were selling, they said the only way to find out in detail what was in the plan was to buy the plan. (Does that remind you of anyone?)

With no other options, she bought the plan and was approved on Nov. 22. Because by January the plan was still not showing up on her online Humana account, however, she repeatedly called to confirm that it was active. The agents told her not to worry, she was definitely covered.

Then on Feb. 12, just before going into (yet another) surgery, she was informed by Humana that it would not, in fact, cover her Sandostatin, or other cancer-related medications. The cost of the Sandostatin alone, since Jan. 1, was $14,000, and the company was refusing to pay.

The news was dumbfounding. This is a woman who had an affordable health plan that covered her condition. Our lawmakers weren't happy with that because . . . they wanted plans that were affordable and covered her condition. So they gave her a new one. It doesn't cover her condition and it's completely unaffordable."

"ObamaCare made my mother's old plan illegal, and it forced her to buy a new plan that would accelerate her disease and death. She awaits an appeal with her insurer.

Will this injustice be remedied, for her and for millions of others? Or is my mother to die because she can no longer afford the treatment that keeps her alive?

Like every American, I want affordable health care, and I'm open to innovative solutions of all kinds—individual, corporate, for-profit, nonprofit and public. It will take all of these, and all the intelligence, creativity and self-discipline we have, as well as everything we can offer one another as families, neighbors, friends and citizens—and it still won't be perfect. But it is precisely because health care for 300 million people is so complicated that it cannot be centrally managed.

The "Affordable" Care Act is a brutal, Procrustean disaster. In principle, it violates the irreducible particularity of human life, and in practice it will cause many individuals to suffer and die. We can do better, and we must.

Mr. Blackwood is the president of Ralston College, a planned liberal-arts institution in Savannah, Ga., and is on the board of the Caring for Carcinoid Foundation. His mother, Catherine, manages the Family Medicine Center in Virginia Beach, Va."

The Wall Street Journal link below:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 55560.html

Old Pudfark sez: " Some folks saved 6 dollars and some weren't saved at all...Then again, some folks "passed the buck" and some folks got "passed over".....a buck. "

dollars to donuts, the appeal is approved. Happens all the time, on all plans. She could, of course(and should have) consulted the pharmacy lists before signing up. I know I did. But, I will guarantee that there is no way she gets denied. Once again, though, we have another right-wing fantasy tale blaming the ACA for the conduct of private insurers. This sort of stuff has been happening WAY before the ACA. Likely, her loss of coverage had nothing to do with the ACA, and the new providers pharmacy list didn't at all(that isn't a matter for the law). It is, however, more proof that the ACA only goes so far, and the only time we'll see the true fix for the issue is when we have cradle-to-grave Medicare.

Your answer is a guess/BS. You don't know and have no way of knowing.
"I will guarantee that there is no way she gets denied." Are ya backing that with yer lip...or yer checkbook? She's already outta pocket, her premium, deductible far in excess of the $14000.00 mentioned in the link.

"Likely, her loss of coverage had nothing to do with the ACA" again BS/Lie.
"And then, because our lawmakers and president thought they could do better, she had nothing. Her old plan, now considered illegal under the new health law, had been canceled." That would be the truth, her and six million others.

Here's some enlightenment for ya....read what a I "bolded" above...all of it, to include yours....try again.

[callmeslick]

same old, same old.....stuff like this has happened my entire adult life with private insurers. And, last I checked, only the past 4 years had an ACA in place.
I smell serious BS around any claim that 'Obamacare did this'.

By the way, how stupid is anyone in the healthcare business(as that woman is) that buys a policy from a salesperson who claims not to have 'access' to the formulary? The formulary, for one thing, has to be public record, by law. Also, I love how your cut and paste describes her new choice of insurer with the stock price rise alongside it.....sort of speaks to the real problem: making money over healthcare, which should be a national birthright, as it is for Res, for Fats, for Soapy and for Nic. It is a national disgrace......and, sadly, thanks to so-called Conservatives, the only bill that could be passed without a GOP filibuster was the ACA, which even I admit goes only half-way.

[callmeslick]

and, lookee-here! Right there in the 1423 responses to the OPINION piece you quoted, Pud, we find someone else who states what I was getting at:

"
In reading this article, it just doesn't hold together on many points.

First, . if indeed she had the same coverage and policy for 20 years, it would not have been cancelled due to the ACA This is the one area where Obama's "you can keep your policy" is correct. Policies over 3 years were / are grandfathered. So either the length of time this lady had her policy is incorrect or Blue merely cancelled the class of policies for any reason they choose.

Second, new policies through the ACA are not underwritten and therefore her existing cancer would not be excluded in the policies available for her age and location. And if she is using a drug that costs $7,000 per month, then she would have hit her deductible well before the end of the first month.

Is the question then about the specific drug that she is using? If so, then she needs to find a policy that does cover that medication. According to the article, she may or may not have found the right coverage.

It is unfortunate that any person, with or without cancer needs to go through any of this. (Part of Obama's motivation in health care reform was a similar situation with his Mother who too was fighting insurance companies while suffering from the cancer that eventually killed her). It is up to us to get our facts straight and fix what is wrong, keep what is right and stop trying to win political points. The ACA is here to stay. It will not be repealed. But we can all certainly use factual information and make it better . . . a whole whole lot better.

Articles like this are helpful if they are factually accurate. I hope the WSJ addresses some of these questions since this was an opinion piece that is certainly becoming news (see today's Krugman in the NYT).

Thanks for giving this some thought.

[Pudfark]

You are an idiot.
Every thing she had before the ACA took effect...she could afford and did.
Now? She cannot. It costs her a hell of a lot more. Because she's been denied. It's everything but..affordable to her and her future well being.

Where is your check book? All I see is your lip.

You seem to only profess concern for the poor....and yet you "lord" your inherited wealth over the poor...it's disgusting, at it's best.

Where is your empathy or sympathy...while yer hidin' behind yer checkbook/BS and this forum?

You say.....you're concerned?
I say, what you don't say....?
You should be...... "spurned".

Where....ever....have you posted any ObamaCare "success stories/reports/links"... Whoa, wait a few months..no, you haven't.

[HappyHappy]

A couple of honest gun toting men beating up on liars, thiefs and haters ("Liberals").
A careful mix of the truth and the message you want to send is the best lie.
You ain't that good at it Callmeshit, but at least you are a liar.

HH