Jon Cohn, John Cole, Juan Cole. I need a program to tell the players apart!

Thats why I like reading Balloon-juice. All of the righteous indignation without any liberal wishy-washiness.

Cole is pissed he was ever taken in by these thugs, and he doesn't hold back. Malkin has jumped the shark, and is being abandoned by her pimp Miss McConnell. The beginning of the end for the Reich-wing lynch mob.

So sad....not

[Content deleted. IP check verifies handle hijack by a banned commenter.]

[Handle Hijack by banned commenter]

I've been following the action mostly via Thers at WhiskeyFire, but the usually cool, analytical Ezra Klein has been incandescent over the past day or so.

The wingnuts are on notice: don't get Ezra angry. The boy is in full control of every brain cell he's got, even when he's flat-out mad.

Now perhaps the Europeans will ridicule Americans for their bad teeth (if the Europeans visit here, since Americans with bad teeth presumably don't have the income to travel in Europe). It is a hoary wingnut stereotype to make fun of the bad teeth of the British, c. 1960.

The class divide. I remember looking at a pretentiously proletarianly dressed white guy on the bus and noticing his blindingly white, straight teeth, and thinking, "With those teeth, he probably paid three figures for the outfit."

Is it just me or is that every since Bush came to office, bring his all no=bid contact, the money you give sets MY policy Bushie came into office.

We've had a lot more of this:

Warning on Banquet Pot Pies

Due to Salmonella Investigation, Health Officials Tell Consumers Not to Eat Certain ConAgra Turkey or Chicken Pot Pies
By Miranda Hitti

WebMD Medical NewsReviewed by Louise Chang, MDOct. 10, 2007 -- Check your freezer for Banquet or generic store-brand turkey or chicken not-ready-to-eat pot pies with "P-9" printed on the side of the package.

If you have any those pot pie products, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) says to throw them out or don't eat them as health officials investigate a multi-state salmonella outbreak.

My oh my the money does talk in Bushie administration

What's been missing in the criticism of the Right's stalking of the Frosts - and I haven't read all the latest links yet - is a recognition of what it says about their fundamental position.

When the Malkinites et al talk about how much the Frost's home is worth, whether it's 260k or 460k, their implication is that the family should either sell the house or borrow heavily against it to pay a small portion of medical bills that I've heard already total over $1million - much more than the value of the house, whatever it is. When they talk about the grandparents' assets, the implication is that they, too, should expend all or most of their assets in order to care for their progeny before the Frosts accept any help from the poor taxpayers.

In other words, in the wingnuts' ideal world, one of the effects of a serious auto accident, or major illness, _should be_ to render a working, middle class, uninsured family of 6 destitute and possibly homeless before they become eligible for government aid. This is their vision of a perfect society.

Also on this topic: now that the Frosts' finances are public knowledge, it'd be interesting if someone wonky could figure out how they'd have been insured under Hillarycare 2.0. Would they have been required to purchase insurance? Would they have qualified for a subsidy? Would the cost to the taxpayers have been less or more than under the current system?

MT

This Frost family is a perfect example why it should be illegal to not have health insurance.

Also shows, I believe, how far out of wack the parents' prioriies were.

When I was a kid in the 50s, normal medical & dental care was affordable, even when the doctor had to drive out into the country to check us kids out with contagious stuff like chicken pox & measles. My folks had no problems paying for our births out of pocket.

When my kids were born, I was working as a factory rat making less than half what the workers in the GM plant across the street were making. With all of them, if we had to, we could have paid the bills. We had only the necessary dental work done because of the cost. Our doctors' office calls were not covered by insurance, but we could easily afford them.

Today, the cost of routine medical & dental care are out of this world. Making comparable wages, paying for what we paid for then - we couldn't do it. Meanwhile, doctors & dentists' standard of living has steadily gone up.
-------------------------------------------
Now for Michelle Malkin. Read the Jon Cole link, then the Michelle Malkin link from there. My first reaction after reading that was, "That BITCH!" OK. Not very liberal of me. If her situation was such that SCHIP was available for her family in 2004 & she chose not to enroll, then I give her credit, although her hit piece was over the top. If, however, she didn't qualify because of too much assets/income, then everything she had to say about the Frosts were sour grapes & the word bitch still applies.

Kevin, where does that article imply that this dental issue is in any way Bush's fault? It's not like he founded the ADA.

Look at the charts. and the dates. Is it possible you are looking at a simple economic bump?

Bob:

In the 1950s, government paid for nobody's care except veterans, insurance only covered major hospitalization, and medical care was affordable.

Now people think they are poorly-used if they have to pay a ten dollar copay for something. Insurance, and the government pay for everything else, and medical costs are skyrocketing.

Subsidize something universally, and the price will rise. That's simple economics. Governments deal with this not by cutting back subsidies, but by imposing price controls. That will come with universal health care.

Illegal not to have health insurance? Where in God's name are the Frosts supposed to get private health insurance?

As I understand, Frost pere is self-employed and Mom's employer doesn't provide health insurance.

Mark, have you tried to buy private insurance? I've checked when my job nearly imploded. I have a nice income but to insure myself and family would be astronomically expensive under a private plan. If you can get it. I can't -- my wife's rheumatoid arthritis knocks us out as a pre-existing condition. Which would be the Frost family's situation as well.

How can you possibly put the burden totally on the family when they have no control over access to insurance or the extraordinary care their kids need?

My favorite quote from Malkin in her latest outrage pointed at a helpless 12 year old boy who was in a coma...

"Taxpayers of lesser means should not be forced to subsidize them."

See people! She is thinking of the little guy!

The latest dispatch from George Bush's America: richer dentists, but more untreated cavities. You can't make this stuff up.

One can almost see the Republicans shouting "Yes!!" at each other in triumph.

And of course, doctors and dentists are probably more conservative than lawyers (who Bush's policies generally tend to undermine-- unles you're a conservative he wants to appoint to a DOJ or judicial position).

Now people think they are poorly-used if they have to pay a ten dollar copay for something. Insurance, and the government pay for everything else, and medical costs are skyrocketing.

75% of Bankruptcies are for medical reasons.

50% of those had insurance.

Eat shit you fucking authoritarian loving lickspittle toadie, we've had enough of your crap.

$10 co-payments in your fuckin dreams puppy-fucker

This Frost family is a perfect example why it should be illegal to not have health insurance.

Are you willing to mandate that companies cap premiums at a reasonable rate and that they not deny coverage? If it is illegal to go without coverage, it should be illegal to deny it. Right? Or is your libertarian path one-way?

(Please notice, Mark, that I went out of my way not to offend your tender fuckin' sensibilities with profanity...)

Right? Or is your libertarian path one-way?

The only path those maroons have is FYIGM

"In other words, in the wingnuts' ideal world, one of the effects of a serious auto accident, or major illness, _should be_ to render a working, middle class, uninsured family of 6 destitute and possibly homeless before they become eligible for government aid. This is their vision of a perfect society."

I believe you are correct about the destitution and homelessness, but not so much about them getting any government aid at that point.

Its worse than I thought...

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html

More and more I have come to the conclusion that right wingers are pathological scum. Authoritarianism is just being lazy. Its always easier to outsource your critical thinking skills to a big fat drug addled blow-hard.

All of the worst aspects of the old Soviet system with none of the benefits. What a crappy world wingers want so bad.

Speaking of big fat drug addled blow-hards, here are some more "Phony Soldiers"(tm)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/11/washington/11military.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

harry: "Now people think they are poorly-used if they have to pay a ten dollar copay for something."

Are you guest-trolling for egbert while he's vacationing with Mom and her new boyfriend at Wisconsin Dells? If so, that accounts for your rather gross ignorance.

Consider the following from the National Coalition on Health Care -- you might actually become enlightened and perhaps even learn something:

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research and Educational Trust, premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance in the United States have been rising four times faster on average than workers' earnings since 2000.

The average employee contribution to company-provided health insurance has increased more than 143 percent since 2000. Average out-of-pocket costs for deductibles, co-payments for medications, and co-insurance for physician and hospital visits rose 115 percent during the same period.

The percentage of Americans under age 65 whose family-level, out-of-pocket spending for health care, including health insurance, exceeds $2,000 a year, rose from 37.3 percent in 1996 to 43.1 percent in 2003 – a 16 percent increase.

Workers are now paying $1,094 more in premiums annually for family coverage than they did in 2000.

Since 2000, employment-based health insurance premiums have increased 87 percent, compared to cumulative inflation of 18 percent and cumulative wage growth of 20 percent during the same period.

One in four Americans say their family has had a problem paying for medical care during the past year, up 7 percentage points over the past nine years.

Nearly 30 percent say someone in their family has delayed medical care in the past year, a new high based on recent polling. Most say the medical condition was at least somewhat serious.

A new survey shows that more than 25 percent said that housing problems resulted from medical debt, including the inability to make rent or mortgage payments and the development of bad credit ratings.

A survey of Iowa consumers found that in order to cope with rising health insurance costs, 86 percent said they had cut back on how much they could save, and 44 percent said that they have cut back on food and heating expenses.

Retiring elderly couples will need almost $300,000 in savings just to pay for the most basic medical coverage.

Aloha, fool.

That article was a real eye-opener - the dentists' association really doesn't seem to care that they're coming across as a bunch of money grubbing scum. Can't they get a better flack or something? I mean, please - campaigning against more dentists in training and against the use dental therapists in the context of a declining number of dentists, a growing population and a growing number of untreated people? How can they be saying those things?

The hideous harpie Michelle Malkin is the archetype of the modern American conservative - selfish, insensitive, willfully ignorant and a heart of ice. Oh yes, and penny-wise and pound-foolish...

The late Hawaii investigative journalist Bob Rees once appeared with Michelle Malkin -- then a relatively unknown and not-yet syndicated Seattle Times columnist -- at a 1997 forum at the University of Washington. No shrinking violet himself, Rees subsequently recounted his experience for island readers in his Honolulu Weekly column, asking rhetorically of Malkin's S-T publisher, "Who in Seattle, arguably the most liberal city in the country, would ever truly take to heart the John Birch-inspired rants of this poisonous know-nothing? She only proves, every time she sets pen to paper or opens her mouth, that old adage about beauty being but skin deep."

"That article was a real eye-opener - the dentists' association really doesn't seem to care that they're coming across as a bunch of money grubbing scum. Can't they get a better flack or something? I mean, please - campaigning against more dentists in training and against the use dental therapists in the context of a declining number of dentists, a growing population and a growing number of untreated people? How can they be saying those things?

Posted by: JohnTh"

Most dental work is cosmetic, and is therefore unnecessary. Like breast implants or face lifting. That's why healthcare insurance rarely covers dental work.

But rich people don't want anybody near them with less than perfect teeth, so if you want to work for them, better go to the dentist.

JohnTh,

This was a very informative article and I think the ADA just threw themselves under a bus. The eye opening part is how dentists work fewer hours but make higher salaries than primary care physicians and many of them still refuse Medicaid patients. I wouldnt be surprised if this single article leads to policy changes in state legislatures.

For one thing, its clear the dental technicians programs will be expanded, MDs had to adjust to nurse practitioners and physician assistants, dentists will have to get used to dental techs.

I guess the dentists have finally learned from the orthodontists (limit the supply of labor and jack up the price). Back in the 80's when my uncle worked for a Porsche dealer, the company nickname for the entry level model (the 924) was "the dentist Porsche".

Also shows, I believe, how far out of wack the parents' prioriies were.

Out of wack because...?

Oh, they send their kids to private school because the public schools in the neighborhood suck?

No? Maybe because they heave the nerve to own a 3000 sqf home that they paid only $55000 for and renovated themselves? I guess a 6 member family should live in a 500 sqf flat.

That's not it? What, they own an SUV? They should sell it and by a Civic. The kids can sit on the roof.

Thanks, concern troll, for your thoughts. Unfortunately, you didn't put too much thought into them.

We pay almost $20,000 a year for private insurance, no dental, no eye care for a family of THREE.

I would appreciate it if Malkin would tell us all where we can get insurance for $450 a month that would take a family where two of the children have terrible injuries????

THERE EXISTS NO SUCH THING

It's a terribly worn out stereotype, but there's a grain of truth in it that the people who end up in dentistry couldn't get into medical school.

But they still want to earn the bucks that doctors do.

This is why dentistry is unaffordable for most. If I need something more than what preventive dentistry will take care of, like I end up needing a root canal, heaven forbid, I'm looking at paying more than my rent just to fix a single tooth. That's if I have dental insurance, by the way.

Are we paying oral physicians or are we paying freaking craftsmen?

I know people who go to India to get their dental needs taken care of. The air fare is on a par with seeing a dentist in the US and having complex things done. How sad is that.

I was with a rich guy last night who told us that his insurance paid $75 of an $800 bill for a mole removal. He was disgusted, but of course he could easily pay for the rest.

And this is insurance from his job in finance. MAJOR exec and his insurance sucks OR as he saw it, the price for a mole removal that took 2 minutes was excessive. It costs so much because of the structure of payments in the past. Insurance would pay so they keep raising the prices. NOW, insurance pays less and the prices go up. Can't go on like this when even the rich get upset!

The capper to the whole story was this morning's report by John Roberts on CNN. In Roberts' version, the Democrats made a terrible mistake of not "vetting" their "poster child" for S-CHIP. So it's not the nasty wingnut bloggers who've attacked an innocent family, it's just another demonstration of Democratic fraud.

And who WAS that anonymous young woman making these judgements and seemed to be presented as a pundit? I saw no caption identifying her, and though a news junkie myself, I didn't recognize her at all.

I see the joker was back at it again. Oh well.

The Jon Cohn article was quite good. There are still two things that aren't clear to me (I'm sure many folks here will suggest there are more than 2 things that aren't clear to me!).

First, when did the Frosts enroll in the SCHIP program? They have said that they recently priced insurance and it was too expensive given pre-existing medical conditions (their two handicapped children). But were the Frosts' kids enrolled in SCHIP prior to the accident? And if so, what were their options with regards to being able to afford insurance back before the accident (when presumably it would not be in the $1,200/month range since there were not pre-existing conditions)?

Second, given that the Frosts were used to support the Democrat-led plan to expand SCHIP and oppose the president's alternative, has anyone suggested that under the president's plan, the Frosts would not have qualified for SCHIP. According to the NY Times yesterday, "Under the Maryland child health program, a family of six must earn less than $55,220 a year for children to qualify." Has anyone established that under the Bush plan, this would have changed so that the Frosts no longer met the requirements? If not, then aren't the Frosts a poor example of what the Dems claim the Bush plan would do?

Michelle Malkin, the slithery Eastern Timber Rattlesnake has only added more venom since her days in the latter 90s in Seattle - There, she lived in the Wallingford neighborhood of mostly 300 thou homes and wrote a column for the Seattle Times - She wrote one "beauty" - The state legislature wanted to conform to federal requirements for medical insurance for children - They had to amend their state laws to allow for the maximum federal earning level for a family of four, which was $38,500. Malkin used comments from a local state Senator from Bellevue in blasting this 38,500 level - She and the Senator harped on this being "Upper" middle class - So, why, as they cried, are we supposed to help the upper middle class? Notwithstanding, that 38,500 would have not qualified anyone to buy a garage in her neighborhood, which by any standard was no Laurelhurst of the Bill Gates family home type.

Malkin, please slither back to the Philippine jungles, where, you can mate with a misguided, lost Krait. Pity the Krait.

Shorter Hack: The lies and smears of my right-wing allies notwithstanding, it really is all about the Frosts!!!!11!!!

(You gotta love the mendacity of "the Frosts were used to support SCHIP, and the attribution to the Deomcirats with no mention made of its support among Republicans.)

Hack was unjustly accused of vileness and menacity in another thread as a result of a handle hijack. That's a pity, because he provides plenty of vileness and mendacity all on his own.

Are you guest-trolling for egbert while he's vacationing with Mom and her new boyfriend at Wisconsin Dells? Posted by: Donald from Hawaii

LOL and wipe the monitor down comment.

Mahalo Donald. Wisconsin Dells! Bwah!

I'd just point out Gregory that that's the second or third time you've simply ignored the question I was asking to rehash what I think is an unfair take on my view of the right-wing bloggers criticisms of the Frost family.

As far as mendacity is concerned, are you honestly suggesting that the following are lies:

(1)The Frosts were used to support SCHIP (unless you've assumed I meant by 'used' that they were taken advantage of by the Dems, which was not my intention).

(2) The proposed expansion the Frosts were enlisted to support (is that clearer than 'used'?) is led by the Democrats. How exactly do you leap from "Democrat-led" to "no mention of support by Republicans?"

that that's the second or third time you've simply ignored the question I was asking to rehash what I think is an unfair take on my view of the right-wing bloggers criticisms of the Frost family

You can try all you want to excuse your condoning of the right wing hate squads' attacks on the Frosts by pretending that they were some sort of honest fact-checking or good-faith policy debate -- although it took you a few goes to get your story straight -- but that's bullshit, plain and simple, Hack.

You're trying to excuse the loathsome tactics of the Right -- certainly you haven't condemned it, except to point out the obvious, which is that it's stupid politics -- and shift the terms of the debate with a thoroughly dishonest representation of Malkin's attack. Since you're obviously a mendacious right-wing hack, who gives a damn how you excuse your ilk's actions or believes you're interested in good faith debate?

unless you've assumed I meant by 'used' that they were taken advantage of by the Dems, which was not my intention

Riiiiiiiight.

How exactly do you leap from "Democrat-led" to "no mention of support by Republicans?"

Why, by the fact that you're calling out the Democrats by name but ignoring the support of many Republicans. A more honest way of saying it would be "bipartisan," but "Deomcorat-led" has more juicy propaganda value, doesn't it?

You can't have it both ways, Hack. You can't pretend to be interested in good faith debate and then misrepresent the substance of your fellow travelers' attacks -- with nary a word of condemnation, except, again, by noting how obviously stupid it is as a political ploy (or are you now prepared to condemn their lies?) -- and throwing in a lot of misleading GOP buzzwords to boot. That dog won't hunt, Hack. No one mistakes you for an honest commentator, and your tacit support of the Malkinites attack is thoroughly disgusting. How typical of your kind of conservative.

Second, given that the Frosts were used to support the Democrat-led plan to expand SCHIP and oppose the president's alternative, has anyone suggested that under the president's plan, the Frosts would not have qualified for SCHIP.

That's not the point, Hack. They were trying to put a human face on a buraeucratic program. And yes, according to the Baltimore Sun, under the President's proposal, over 1,000 children in Maryland alone would lose benefits.

This is beyond idiotic. The program costs an additional $35 billion over 5 years. Yet, from the party of "fiscal discipline", we are spending more than that in one month in Iraq, we would spend hundreds of millions for a bridge in Alaska that no one wants and we would spend #280 billion on a highway bill that would have built highways nobody wanted (except Denny Hastert, of course!). But to have the audacity to spend money to help insure children???

Where were you, Hack, when Republican Orrin Hatch was proposing this bill? Why wasn't it a problem then, but it's a problem now? Is the program perfect? No. Could "undeserving" families take advantage of the coverage? Most likely, just as undeserving taxpayers take advantage of tax breaks and deductions. But that's OK, I guess.

8 million children in this country are uninsured. Are you OK with that? If not, what's your solution? Instead of paying lip service to those smearing the Frosts, shit or get off the pot. If you agree that 8 million uninsured children in the richest country in the world is unconscionable, then what should we do about it? If you don't agree, I have nothing to say to you.

In America we judge the success of our health care system indirectly by the profitability of medical practices and insurance companies. The assumption is that if health care professionals are making lots of money then health care delivery must be good and people must be healthy.

In other countries (Canada, England, France) they measure health care directly by such criteria as life expectancy, infant mortality, health living habits, rates of disease. Doctors receive bonuses in England based on the health of their patients, not on how many services they deny in order to cut costs.

thethirdPaul: "Malkin, please slither back to the Philippine jungles, where, you can mate with a misguided, lost Krait. Pity the Krait."

OK. Foul ball. Low blow. To the penalty box with you. Time out.

FYI, Michelle Malkin was born in Philadelphia in 1970. Her father was a physician, and her grandfather fought against the Japanese Army with both the Philippine underground and Gen. MacArthur's forces during World War II. She is, therefore, an American citizen, by birth and by pedigree.

Attacking one's ethnicity sounds just as repellant coming from our side as from hers.

Donald from Hawaii,

Yes, you are correct about the useage of ethnicity, except for the background of MM's birth - Her father was on a work visa at the time - She has railed against "anchor babies". Under her blasting of anchor babies, she was one herself.

In addition, her defense of the internment of Japanese-Amercans, is based on her families background in the Phillipines. And, by the way, Marcos also fought with MacArthur against the Japanese. Did fighting give the Marcoites carte blance to mistreat their own citizens?