Extra coverage needed
Oct.01, 2007 8:26 am |
STDs |
Commenting Rules
Do's
- “Criticize ideas, not people.”
- Create one original moniker and stick with it.
- Please use a unique name.
- Be civil and considerate.
- Read fully and consider carefully before responding.
Do Not's
- Blasphemy will not be tolerated.
- No swearing or slandering of others.
- No deliberate inflammatory comments.
- Do not violate another’s privacy.
- Do not threaten fellow commenters or anyone else.
- No personal, racial, ethnic or gender-based insults/slurs.
- Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
*snicker*
Ugh, I will absolutely cry if Hilary gets the nomination. She’s such a terrible candidate. As a female, even *I* couldn’t be bothered to vote for her.
But that comic is funny. :)
Why shouldn’t a national healthcare plan cover STDs? They are health care problems like anything else.
testing
My question is why people oppose a national healthcare plan in the first place. It allows low income single mothers access to medicine for the children they gave birth to, should those children fall ill.
Teehee…
Ha! does that mean women wouldn’t need to go to PP anymore?
Love the cartoon. I can almost picture him saying that. I see this as a skit on SNL with Phil Hartman as Bill Clinton. RIP Phil Hartman.
JK – It’s not that I oppose a national healthcare plan, it’s that the national healthcare plans that have been brought forward are not practical. It doesn’t work in Canada, France, etc. the tax burden is so high and healthcare suffers dramatically. It’s a hard spot. I’m all for a system that works but my insurance is horrible. I pay an arm and a leg yet none of the well baby visits OR immunizations were covered. (I had to use the government subsidized shots but still had to pay the $100 for each visit.) My husband and I can’t get a yearly check-up without paying for it (not a co-pay but the full amount) and they only cover DIAGNOSTIC mamograms. Oddly enough it’s my husbands insurance and he’s a teacher. So no well baby visits for teachers kids are covered – and he teaches in one of the best districts in Illinois. But with the healthcare plans that have been talked about I’ll have to pay my insurance but wouldn’t be eligible for the program my tax dollars go toward. There’s no good answer.
The cartoon is funny though..
Yeah, private insurance companies are evil.
Hahaha…that’s a great cartoon. I don’t mind Hillary too much, but that’s hilarious.
JK – It’s not that I oppose a national healthcare plan, it’s that the national healthcare plans that have been brought forward are not practical. It doesn’t work in Canada, France, etc. the tax burden is so high and healthcare suffers dramatically. It’s a hard spot. I’m all for a system that works but my insurance is horrible. I pay an arm and a leg yet none of the well baby visits OR immunizations were covered. (I had to use the government subsidized shots but still had to pay the $100 for each visit.) My husband and I can’t get a yearly check-up without paying for it (not a co-pay but the full amount) and they only cover DIAGNOSTIC mamograms. Oddly enough it’s my husbands insurance and he’s a teacher. So no well baby visits for teachers kids are covered – and he teaches in one of the best districts in Illinois. But with the healthcare plans that have been talked about I’ll have to pay my insurance but wouldn’t be eligible for the program my tax dollars go toward. There’s no good answer.
Posted by: Kristen at October 1, 2007 11:12 AM
…………………………………………………………………
Take the burden in taxes or….. take the burden in taxes while hoping that some charity really is . Think about it. People that cannot afford health care will eventually become a tax burden in another tax funded area. Prevention is worth a pound of cure. All of the industrialized nations on this earth seem to get it but us.
A few things to remember about Hillary: she’s proven her competence as a politician in the senate. And every possible argument against her has already been made.
Also, she’s incredibly sharp. She has a record of making things succeed, going back to her cattle-futures investments. (Unlike Bush, whose whole life has been : get a management job using the Bush name, transfer the assets of his employer to his cronies, and leave the employer bankrupt and move on to the next employer. That’s what he did with his ball team; that’s what he did with his company, and that’s what he’s doing with the US government. Read Molly Ivins’ book.)
Past accomplishment is the best predictor of future accomplishment.
I can see Bill Clinton enjoying the cartoon.
Remember, he went on Letterman and when asked if he still played his saxophone, he said, yes, every so often I go down to the basement and have myself a good blow.