No to Single Payer, Yes to Prayer? Terminate healthcare for Congress. Let them eat prayers.

[Better Believe It]

Weekend Edition
November 6-8, 2009

For Those Who "Suffer From a False Belief"
No to Single Payer, Yes to Prayer?
By MISSY COMLEY BEATTIE

A recent Los Angeles Times article by Tom Hamburger and Kim Geiger detailed a provision to the healthcare band-aid, one introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch and supported by other congressional luminaries like Sen. John Kerry, which “requires insurers to consider covering Christian Science prayer treatments as medical expenses.”

After reading this, I immediately began to excavate for information about the Church of Christ, Scientist, whose name seems more than a little oxymoronic. According to the site, beliefnet.com, “suffering is a false belief” that originates in the mind. “Physicians are not viewed antagonistically; but their methods are seen as ineffective because they treat disease as originating in the body rather than mind.”

So, all of this leads to some conclusions/suggestions: if suffering is head-case stuff and can be prayed away, we don’t need medical therapies and, therefore, Big Insurance and Big Pharma are obsolete. Therefore, we citizens should demand the termination of this obsolescence—health coverage for Congress. Let them eat prayers.

And we’ll tell Sen. Hatch that if he’s short of breath, feels a crushing pain in his chest, breaks out in a cold sweat, is nauseas, and has arm discomfort, he shouldn’t allow anyone to call 911. Instead, he must request a good Christian Scientist Dial-A-Prayer to drive the evil and massive coronary from his noggin. If he thinks for one second that he requires a pacemaker, he can pace the prayers. Because it’s his head. Nothing more.

And for Sen. Kerry, we’ll advise if his prostrate cancer recurs or metastasizes, he should hire the prayer providers to exorcise from his mind whatever’s the matter—those figments of “false belief.” After all, who needs medical therapy when prayer therapy is so very state of the art?

http://www.counterpunch.org/beattie11062009.html

[blm]

1. This was KENNEDY'S compromise with Hatch - Kerry supported KENNEDY'S bill as did many of you, though

you now want to pretend you did not and have only the intention of trying to keep Kerry as your target for MISDIRECTED backlash.


Missy is also WRONG in that both Kerry AND Kennedy - who wanted this provision included - are/were known publically to be FOR single-payer and NEITHER one of them would have NO to single-payer as the underinformed writer of this article would have readers believe.

I don't blame Missy for not knowing this, since she probably read differently on sites that misdirected the readers away from focusing on those truly AGAINST reform while they targeted lawmakers like Kerry who actually SUPPORTED Kennedy's version of the HELP bill while publically acknowledging he preferred single payer at this point of time - Just like Kennedy.

[emulatorloo]

2. BLM - thanks for the background on this.

I had a feeling it was something along these lines. Just seems like a harmless giveaway to the Republicans. I don't understand the outrage, nor do I understand how anybody can equate this with single payer (?!?!) Just not logical

[Better Believe It]

4. You have no problem with your tax dollars being used to pay for prayers?

Sorry.

Call me a "purist" but that's unacceptable to me.

[emulatorloo]

6. 1. Probably won't come out of your taxes unless you are a millionaire 2. I bet the percentage

who "take advantage" is miniscule. 3. It is kind of to paying for a psychological counseling session.

There are so many things in this world to be OUTRAGED over that are more important than this.

That being said, I don't see why we can't call our Congresspeople and ask them to take it out of the bills.

ON EDIT -- note also that BLM says it was put in to "keep it consistent with what private insurance offers"

[blm]

22. That's why I asked if BBI is on top of attacking his insurance company who likely includes this

provision. But, it's a safe guess BBI doesn't really care about the details, and is just doing his normal routine of attacking Kerry with ANYTHING that can be spun, making sure it appears to be from the left.

[blm]

9. Are you with an insurance company right now? And why the misdirection onto Kerry, yet again, when

he's publically on record to prefer single payer and he did not draft Kennedy's bill?

[Better Believe It]

11. The insurance company just jacked up our premiums 20%!

I'd settle for a strong public option. Instead it's beginning to look more and more like we'll be getting a bill written by the insurance industry and big Pharma.

And you don't think public funds will be used to cover the "prayers for cash" program? Were do you think the money is going to come from .... god?

Well, you have the right to oppose the separation of church and state but I just can't go along with that.

[blm]

14. Your reply is all over the place - insurance companies offer that provision NOW and Kennedy

just replicated that offering.

Your beef SHOULD BE with Kennedy and the provision offered by insurance companies.

You are PRETENDING this is Kerry's doing because Kerry is your intended target - as usual.

[ej510]

3. I did not support this. Pull the shit out Hatch ain't gonna vote for the bill anyway.

Separation of church and state this is not a fucking theocracy.

[blm]

5. Not the point, though, is it? I'm an atheist, but understand the point of this was to keep

it consistent with what private insurance offers - you just rarely hear about it, and most have NEVER heard of it.

The other point is the direction of backlash onto Kerry who was never LEADING the drafting of the healthcare bill as his committee duties have him leading foreign policy and climate change legislation.


None of you have suspicions about WHY the misdirection of blame in this article and others? There isn't ONE other senator more involved in the actual crafting of the healthcare bill and is actually AGAINST single-payer that the writers of these attacks could target instead of Kerry?

Use common sense.

[emulatorloo]

7. There is always an impulse to slam Kerry on DU and at some of the blogs. Misdirected anger n/t

[ej510]

8. I'm not upset with Kerry, but I want useless republican plans stripped from the bill,

because repukes won't vote for it anyway.

[Better Believe It]

12. Let's hope it dies like Kerry's public option "trigger" suggestion.

I don't care if the damn church is located right next door to his home, that's not a good reason for John Kerry to support "cash for prayers" legislation.

[blm]

16. Kerry wasn't in charge of putting this in the bill. Kennedy did and Kerry supported Kennedy as did

most of DU, including YOU at the time.

But, attacking Kennedy and those who actually PUT this provision in the bill to replicate what insurance companies NOW OFFER is not the real goal - the real goal is to find another issue to twist into a smear campaign against Kerry.

Too bad that probably a few INNOCENT left bloggers will be misdirected enough to go along.

[blm]

13. I agree with that, too. But, insurance companies include it now.

This issue is being blown up by those who are launching yet another smear campaign against Kerry appearing to be from the left. They've been doing it since the 70s, ramped it up bigtime when he was uncovering IranContra, BCCI and CIA drugrunning, and went into overdrive when he was running for president.

Those of us who have paid attention to the smear campaigns over the DECADES always recognize when Kerry is coming forward with something important - the smears start anew and are usually disguised as coming from the left. And guess what....Kerry-Boxer climate change legislation is coming to the forefront, and, since summer Kerry has an investigator tracking AQ Khan's funding (an investigator who also wrote a book on BCCI).

As a longtime observer of the fascist establishment's ability to misdirect the general public....this is par for the course.

[redqueen]

10. Did you know that Weiner pulled his amendment?

Guess why.

[polichick]

15. They prayed?

[redqueen]

17. They didn't want a humiliating defeat.

There's a lesson in there, for those who want to learn.

[polichick]

18. Who didn't want a defeat? Was Weiner pressured? nt

[redqueen]

19. ...

http://ourcommongood.blogspot.com/2009/11/anthony-weiner-withdraws-his-single.html

[polichick]

20. Thanks! nt

[Oregone]

21. Maybe its more complicated

Maybe some Democrats don't want to go on record opposing it