How do we know the republican billionaires aren't funding denial of service attacks and then walking to the pulpit and saying "lolz see I told ya Obamacare and abortion must be repealed!"

Seems a likely scenario to me.

Umm.. probably because DDoS attacks are easy to identify for a large organization with infrastructure like the US Governments and if they had been identified the Obama administration would be screaming it from the rooftops because it would be a legit and reasonable cause for all the systems problems that removes their culpability.  

if cisco employees can sort of ddos their own company via email reply-to-alls .. what do you expect would happen to any gov site? technical difficulties or disaster is par for the course of any IT project. especially public sector ones.

I think those teachers that support the Democratic Party do so because they believe that the Democratic Party supports them. I understand your desire to politicize this discussion since school vouchers are generally supported by the GOP (privatization) and not so much the DNC.

From what I understand the lawsuit deals with segregation issues. Seems that Louisiana has had some issues in the past and has been under Federal mandate for those discrepancies.

The issues that have been also raised indicate that private/charter schools fair no better in core curriculum subjects than public schools, lacks specific accountability and that public funds are being provided to schools with religious ties including religious curriculum teachings. What success you are referring to, I'm not sure.

I just don't think public educational funding should be used for for-profit schools or for schools that emphasize a religious education, it's about where my tax dollar goes.

So, Like, what's your solution to ensure that all people have affordable health insurance coverage and what protections are need so that insurance companies can't deny coverage on preexisting conditions? What is actually so bad about socialized medicine? (not advocating, just curious) We pay $2,200.00/mo for BC/BS coverage, is this reasonable?

.

I'd be happy to have a discussion on the merits and challenges of voucher programs and the horrendous state of public primary education in this country as well as the crap reasoning behind the DOJs lawsuit against Louisiana, but this thread isn't the place for it.  Start a new thread about it and I'll happy contribute.  

As for:

Here's one example of a solution, proposed by a former Democrat Congressman from GA.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/243434/real-health-care-reform-jim-marshall

That's just one example.  There are many more potential solutions.  My point wasn't to advocate for a particular one (though I like Jim Marshall's more than most) but to point out that your "we shouldn't have healthcare" shtick was dishonest nonsense.  It's possible to be against ACA and still be in favor of improving the American healthcare system.  But since the ACA is largely indefensible based on the President's promises it's easier to pretend anyone who opposes it eats babies with polar bear blood for ketchup while using a seal-skin napkin than it is to defend the law.

As for socialized medicine, the reasons it is bad are many.  Look at the NSA scandals and then tell me if your comfortable giving the government even more of your personal information.  Look at the rollout of ACA or the efficiency Medicare/Medicaid and tell me you're comfortable with them having complete control over the healthcare industry and, more importantly, what you are or are not allowed access to within that industry. Look at studies about the shortage of GPs in this country and realize that Medicare is widely considered by many parties to be the primary cause of it (making it harder for GPs to make money) and then imagine that writ large.  

Those are all good reasons it is bad, but my problem with government run healthcare largely stems from my own experience.  You know what the government does well?  What it does better than private enterprise?  

Nothing.  

Now that's not to say there aren't things the government should do.  Of course there are.  But they should be limited to the things that private enterprise or the states can't reasonably accomplish.  The common defense, collection of taxes to support the government, everything foreign relations related, etc.  I spent a decade working for the government in various roles and had a successful career at it.  Public servants are generally normal people looking for a paycheck with the occasional civic minded person thrown in (or realistically, it's a combination of the two).  But as an organization, the government is inefficient to a fault and has accountability to no one.  At least private enterprise is accountable to share holders.  There is no incentive to improve within the permanent bureaucracy, because there are no shareholders capable of firing everyone.  

Simply put, I don't trust them to make medical decisions for my family and no matter how you spin it, socialized medicine puts the government in the middle of my family's medical decisions.

Well, there is certainly evidence that some of the American public are dumb.

I saw that article you linked earlier today. This is pathetic ( the bullying accusation ). Heaven forbid that someone win a football game by a landslide. Nooooooo, we might "hurt someone's feeeeelings"....

Let's raise a larger generation of wussies shall we!!!

 It also ties in to the OP... Why the FUCK is it so unreasonable that we DEMAND people ( and politicians ) be accountable for their own actions instead of blaming someone else.

The problem with healthcare costs isn't the insurance companies and what they allow or disallow, it's with the doctors and hospitals.

Without going into detail, I have personally been given unnecessary test and asked to come back repeatedly for what where unecessary visits. I have gone for standard annual visit and have seen addional charges on my bill that had nothing to do with the visit. (they insisted it wasn't a billing error). Multiply these slimy practices 300 million times, and the cost becomes substatial.

It should be up to a patient and a doctor to decide the treatment, but all too often, the doctors and hosptals take advantage of the patients reliance on them. "they must know what they are doing".

If there was some way to actively monitor these dishonest practices, it would go a long way to reducing costs.

WOW ... THIS  VERY  WEB SITE HAD  A ISSUES ... JUST  LAST  MONTH  ??? AND  HAS  BEEN  OPERATIONAL& TAKING   REVENUE  FOR  HOW  LONG NOW ???  ANY  SITE  RELEASED WITHOUT   A BETA  TESTING  WILL  HAVE   GLITCHES ... REMEMBER  AMAZON???   YOU  SHEEPLE  ARE SO  QUICK TO PASS  JUDGMENT ... WHEN  UR  LIL  IPHONE  HAD ANTENA ISSUES .. DID U  TAKE  IT  BACK  TO APPLE  ???   NO U DIDNT !! U ALLOWED   THEM  TO  MAKE THE  ADJUSTMENTS    ... EVERY  WEBSITE HAS  ITS  ISSUES ... HOW SOON DID  WE  FORGET  THE   ISSUES  OR  TWITTER ....HELL  FACEBOOK  FOR THAT  MATTER    .....

Tempting to lay the blame at the feet of one or two culprits, but it ain't that simple.  The healthcare environment of today is the result of a very complex ecosystem evolving over a long period of time, influenced by too many variables, the unintended consequences of which may not have appeared for decades after the variables kicked in, for any one or two actors to be assigned 'blame'.  Oversimplifying it won't help fix it.  The vast majority of physicians and hospitals, I'd venture to say 95% or more, do what they do every day in good faith, attempting their best to do what's right by patients within the confines of the system in which they find themselves working.

Mind you, there are dishonest actors among physicians and hospitals, but to contend that they aren't 'actively monitored' is an indication of lack of knowledge.  Even if there were a way to do so, completely eliminating the truly bad actors, an exceedingly tiny fraction of physicians and hospitals at most, would have measurable but negligible impact on healthcare costs.  Not saying they should be ignored, but the ROI on increased 'active monitoring', beyond the scrutiny already in place, is not great. 

Defensive much?  LOL

For another 9 days yet I happen to work for the largest Hospital Corp in the US. Let me tell you, it isn't at ALL about what's best for the patient anymore. It is all about making windfall profits and pleasing the stockholders. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

Top Corporate Management bring down millions per year in salary and bonuses, realize record profits and then over inflate their budget so they can justify cutting hours of the people in the trenches doing the REAL work. The Dr's are forced to meet "quotas" and see "x" number of patients per day. They don't have time to actually listen to the patients or become genuinely concerned about the personal aspects of the individual. 

Every year we take at 15% price increase every quarter. The profits just soar.

I've seen the corporation commit fraud with Medicare and just get a tiny slap on the wrist for it.

But alas.. the liberal media sure as hell isn't going to report that! 

You know after reading that article I think I may change my position on health care and opt for socialized medicine.

why not Phoon, everyone knows it's true but the liberals (such a term) don't control the enterprises, the corporations do.

If hospital costs were forced to be transparent and a real market existed this behavior wouldn't fly, because the hospital's prices would not be competitive.  Anyone who thinks that single-payer or greater government involvement in healthcare is going to have any positive affect on healthcare costs doesn't understand just how much Medicare fraud exists and how little it gets punished.  In this case "liberals" are relevant because they are the supporters of Medicare status quo.  Any attempts to reform the program are met with nonsense commercials of Paul Ryan look-a-likes pushing old women in wheelchairs off cliffs.