Article discussing how these guys are not the reason for the "medical malpractice crisis."

I think that is essentially what you had in 1967 and the Arabs left with their tail between their legs. The wildcard today, however, is nukes, because that changes the equation dramatically. Hence, don't be surprised if we or Israel take out the Iranian reactor in the near future.

My brother in law told me when I saw him last that many of his staff thinks this (he is an executive in an Egyptian telecom company). But he said it's all abstract - they have no problem dealing with Americans in a business context and and frequently in social context. My sister told me that some of her driver's beliefs are completely wacky, and yet he's a nice guy - she trusts him to babysit her son and to drive her around Cairo. I agree it's scary that people think this way, but I think for the vast majority who hold these thoughts, it's not out of a burning hatred or anything that would amount to more than words, so maybe we get a little too worked up when we hear these statistics.

I've seen that same argument time after time.

But, one thing still puzzles me:

If it's true, why, then, have so many insurers simply dropped all medmal coverage? They still do GL, they still do personal, and, if the article was correct, the bad investments and whatnot would make all lines unprofitable. Yet, it's only been medmal coverage that's been discontinued.

Businesses usually behave rationally. If the medmal business were actually profitable, they wouldn't walk away from it. So, this factor, at least, sort of militates against the Times' reason.

In the Bay Area in California malpratice insurance rates for Obstratricians is $350K a year. It is definitely tied to litigation. When something goes wrong with a kid everyone blames the obstratrician. On average an obstratrician gets sued once every fifteen months.

Democracy and fundamentalist Islam are not necessarily alternatives.

I was echoing your fears- your fears- your post. What did you mean Ty?

Democratic congressman somewhat hypocritical?
 

http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...2/hinchey2.htm

So why isn't this nonsense on the MSM? This is a NY congressman- either he's insane and that's news, or he's onto something- and that would surely be news. NYT reports of this NY congressman?

these two quotes taken together are fun!

I didn't allege I had any facts.
No administration has attempted to manipulate the facts and information and to manipulate the news media to distort the facts ... as what we are seeing in this administration.

Democratic congressman somewhat hypocritical?
 

Your first error.

Simply Ridiculous
 

"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. Having said that, all options are on the table," Bush said.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe....ap/index.html

Because our stated reasons for going to war in Iraq were ridiculous, I assume we are going to war against Iran soon. I read somewhere that Ritter says it will be in June. Any other thoughts?

Do you have a cite? Because the only one I can find is from the San Francisco Medical Society in 2003 that says that because of MICRA, California obstetricians pay about $45,000 a year. I haven't practiced in the Bay Area in California in about three years, so maybe things have changed drastically. When I practiced there, the malpractice insurance companies loved to set reserves for claims that weren't going anywhere and matters that never became claims, and then they'd charge ridiculous surcharges based on non-existent claims history.

See also, http://www.sfms.org/m_brief.htm though I can't find a publication date on this article, though it looks like it was before Proposition 12 passed here in Texas.

Simply Ridiculous
 

Bet for August board coverage? War by 7/31/05. Adder already has US troops invade Syria and Iran by 2/20/06.

Simply Ridiculous
 

How are we defining war? We're (meaning us, Israel, or both) obviously going to hit their nuke facilities. I'd be willing to bet we already have CIA and Special Forces guys there now. I think we need to define war something that attempts imminent regime change.

Simply Ridiculous
 

I think it’s very important to make charges like that ... I think it’s very important to combat this kind of activity in every way that you can, and I’m willing, as most people are not, to step forward in situations like this and take risks.

Simply Ridiculous
 

Like an election?

Simply Ridiculous
 

If you remember way back to ought-two, you will note that there was an extra step in the process in our experience with Iraq.

Simply Ridiculous
 

there was an election in Iraq in '02. Saddam won 100% of the vote.

Simply Ridiculous
 

Fuck. We really are subverting the will of the Iraqi people.

I think you have to look for something deeper than politics to explain the growing support for Islamism. As a Bay Area resident, and therefore a Communist, I naturally turn to economics -- the individual's relation to the means of production. Whereas, Burger (for example), or another conservative of similar stripes, might take more of a law and economics approach, and look to the individual's relation to the means of production. Many people have written interesting stuff about the relationship between fundamentalism and modernity. Hmmm.

Bluegrass music is as modern as jazz. Hmmm.

Translation:
"I don't go out w/o Shape Enhancers!"


http://www.internationalmale.com/Han...ges/ab70zz.jpg

Shape Enhancer® Boxer Brief
Enhancement underwear. Padded front pouch. Defining center-back seam. Machine wash. Cotton/spandex. Import. Navy, White, Red, Black. S-M-L-XL-XXL.

I work bluegrass into a convo about fundamentalist Islam and this is the thanks I get? Sheesh.

Both impulses resided in early man's mind. They just found expression disparately.

Article discussing alternative policies for medmal.

http://www.slate.com/id/2113103/

An Open Letter to Europe
 

In honor of President Bush's historic visit to Europe this week, I have penned a letter to all the Pierres and Dieters over there.

Dear Europe:

Listen up you socialist a-hole pussies, I have a story for you.

"Once upon time there was a diseased rotten continent filled with self-absorbed effete elitist fucks who were a century past their sell-by date. Despite a shared universal ignorance of the common ideals of capitalist economic principles, freedom, liberty and any sense of morality, these little girlie-men couldn’t get along with each other and play nice in their burgeoning cesspool and a savior known as Uncle Sam had to come in and reset the geo-political order to save the cesspool from its turdish inhabitants twice in a 30 year period.

Then, on the one occasion when good old Uncle Sam could use a little support and cooperation, these imbittered shitpuffs turned their generally useless backs on him. But in the end he was fine. He was wealthy and packing some big heat and had God on his side, so he could go it alone. Keeping the spoils of victory for himself. Meanwhile, the little pissants on the rotten continent, while united, remained in a steady downward spiral, much as poo poo circles the drain before disappearing forever. Like yesterday’s news. And Uncle Sam laughed while he waived bye bye.

The end."

Yours truly,

America

First Bilmore nude at his computer, and now Hank in his skivvies . . . This rash of self-outing has got to stop!!

S_A_M

An Open Letter to Europe
 

If Rumsfeldt ever posted while drunk, this is what it would sound like.

And it would be good.

An Open Letter to Europe
 

I heart you. Big time.

Are you...ummmm...seeing anyone?

An Open Letter to Europe
 

If? ever? One never knows does one......after all, just think if Jimmy the Snake Carville and Mary Matalin can stay married lo these many years, anything is possible!

An Open Letter to Europe
 

One never knows does one......after all, just think if Jimmy the Snake Carville and Mary Matalin can stay married lo these many years, anything is possible!

;)

An Open Letter to Europe
 

No, you don't understand. I haven't had a real man in so long, since I broke up with that slimeball Muslim guy. If only I hadn't let that bitch Daryn Kagan worm her way into Rush's pants, I'd be sittin' pretty. Damn liberal media ho that she is!

I had dinner with Tucker Carlson the other night, but he doesn't count. Kept whining about being canceled and asking me if I thought bowties were "cute". Right - like I give a shit about cute. He's undoubtedly a scumsucking dirtbag liberal too. Understand, it didn't stop me from capping off the evening by unhinging my lower jaw and swallowing him whole, but afterward I still felt so empty inside.

An Open Letter to Europe
 

Well, assuming this is true, one thing is certain, given that Tuck is a grown up version of the kid who didn't play any high school sports but rather hung with his favorite English teacher after school debating the merits of Keats versus Yeats, which prepped him well for college nerdom and a later career as a milquetoast RiNO with no more knowledge of the issues than our own dearly beloved (but mostly laughed at) Hank, i.e. he is boring, I’m sure to make more than your jaw drop. Unless of course you go Commando.

No - I should know better, but I was repeating hearsay. I sit on the Republican Central Committee for Santa Clara County (Silicon Valley) and the chairman is a doctor. He was once the president of the AMA. Anyway, most of the leadership of the Republican party here in the Bay Area is pissed off doctors. He is constantly telling me medical malpractice nightmares. If you want me to get you sources from him I can. If it is really important.

An Open Letter to Europe
 

I used to work in Asia and in Europe with a great many European attorneys. We all keep in contact on line. I just sent them all this letter. I can hardly wait for the responses. I will let you know when I get anything.

I have a question for the board:

I consider myself a moderate Republican. I am sure Mr. Megaloman would consider me a Rino. However, I don't understand why people consider George W. Bush such a conservative. He is a little more conservative than me on the social issue. But on those he mostly just talks a lot and does nothing (e.g. not really pushing for the marriage amendment etc.). On foreign policy we see eye to eye, although I consider the whole neocon thing as following in the Wilson and Kennedy tradition. Aggresively pushing for democracy around the world is not a traditional conservative foreign policy position. Usually the conservatives only do stuff that is in the national interest. On Fiscal issues I don't think Bush is conservative at all. He has not cut domestic spending significantly - he passed a rather small tax cut - and I would be pushing for much more drastic changes to social security. I would have never pushed the Medicare drug prescription thing. So if I am not a conservative Republican, and Bush is to the left of me on many issues, why do so many people see him as this right wing fanatic?

Because they're idiots.

The tax changes that have been made since he took office (I am trying to avoid making it all him -- Congress was of course also involved) is not small if they are all made permanent. The costs just balloon after 2009. It was an underhanded thing -- it looks not that expensive on the surface, in the 5-year and (at the time) 10-year projections, but he knows (or his people know) that once a tax change is passed, no one wants it to sunset (which is the only way those tax changes could be presented as having a relatively small effect on revenue) so they extend it.

And he panders to the religious right, which I don't like. I think he oversees a pretty socially conservative administration -- most notably the FCC guy (yes, I know, now out) and Ashcroft (yes, I know, now also out). It will be interesting to see how this goes in his second term. By appointing people like this, he effectively pushes the country in a more socially conservative direction without having to take any direct action. Also kind of sneaky.

While his foreign policy may not be in the traditional conservative camp, I find his jingoism and cowboy attitude offensive and annoying.

I wouldn't say I see him as a right-wing fanatic, though, so I may not be the audience you are looking for answers from. I just don't like the direction he's taking the country in a fiscal sense (with the sneaky tax cuts and the expansion/addition of a (?) new entitlement program) or a social sense (Ashcroft, FCC, judges he's appointed or tried to appoint, stuff he says -- just by yapping about it, he's making some of the wacky social stuff seem more mainstream).

Oh, I believe that doctors in California have a lot to bitch about.

Bitching about managed care nightmares and the failure of capitation, I can understand. Wanting to leave the state because reimbursement is so low, I can understand. Being frustrated at trying and failing to get on some of the panels (especially Hill Physicians in the Bay Area) and being effectively cut out of an entire market, I can understand. Being pissed off as hell over idiotic surcharges on malpractice insurance premiums because of "claims history" that has nothing to do with claims, I can understand. I regularly tell residents in Texas not to relocate to California unless absolutely necessary because physicians are treated so poorly there (go look at the San Diego Medical Society's report from about four years ago for details on how much it sucks to be a physician in California). But, because of MICRA frivilous malpractice claims should be very low on a physician's bitch list in California. I used to work very closely with CMA, and the malpractice crisis wasn't what kept them up at night (insert sleep apnea joke here).

For the doctors on the Republican Central Committee, their biggest complaint is malpractice insurance and trial lawyers. They all see that as the biggest problem. I am just reporting what they say. But even if $45,000 is what Obtraticians pay for insurance, that is still absurd.

I think your main objective is not based on ideology, but rather, party affiliation.

This is sure to get a fun response, but on the whole Bush may be more liberal than Clinton. Think about it:

1. Under Clinton we had surpluses; under Bush we have deficits.

2. Under Clinton, we had a reduction in an entitlement program (i.e., welfare). Under Bush we have an extremely expensive new entitlement program.

3. Under Clinton we had NAFTA and other free trade initiatives. Under Bush we have new tariffs.

4. Both Clinton and Bush subscribe to the "mend it don't end it" line on affirmative action.

5. Both Clinton and Bush were against gay marriage.

6. Bush has increased gross spending for, and has essentially federalized, education.

7. Under Bush we have extensive new regulation of the securities markets.

I could go on, but that should be enough to trigger the wave.

Guess It's Up to Israel