« GOV. CHRISTIE BACKS EMMER – VIDEO | Home | DFL DULUTH MAYOR DON NESS BEGS, PLEADS, AND THREATENS DULUTH NEWS TRIBUNE »
UPDATE: SHAMEFUL ATTACK PIECE ON DAN HALL
By Luke Hellier | October 26, 2010
UPDATE: The DFL has refused to apologize for this mail piece. Please call incumbent DFL Senator John Doll and ask him to condemn this piece.
Senator John Doll – 651.296.5975
UPDATE 2: KSTP – TV did a story about the mail piece today and the DFL refused to comment. I will hopefully have the video posted soon.
Here is the video:
The Minnesota DFL sent the below mail piece about Dan Hall (Senate Candidate in District 40) criticizing his work as a preacher.
Click the image for the full size piece.
Tags: 2010 Election
Topics: 2010 Election | 36 Comments »
36 Responses to “UPDATE: SHAMEFUL ATTACK PIECE ON DAN HALL”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 25th, 2010 at 7:33 AM
Denying health to everyone through Marxist style Death Panels is not the same as providing HC for everyone.
Not one poor person has been denied HC in this state. Not one.
October 25th, 2010 at 7:54 AM
Universal health care is the pro-life choice. If you are against universal health care, you are simply anti-life, especially of children.
Scott, our infant mortality puts us 46th in the world. Under our old system, more infants die before age 1 than 45 other nations. This is despicable, and anti-life.
Our old system rewarded less care. The more care denied, the more money the insurance companies made. Denial of care was the industry standard. The death panels were in full effect. Insurance companies would deny chemo because they knew patients couldn’t afford the aftercare drugs, so the chemo would be a waste. That is a death panel my friend.
Finally, emergency room visits are not “health care”.
Anyway, just try to explain our abysmal infant mortality rate. Richest nation in the world yet more infants die than 45 other nations. That’s your pro-life system Scott?
October 25th, 2010 at 8:31 AM
“Denying health to everyone through Marxist style Death Panels is not the same as providing HC for everyone.”
An interesting point. How is it different? In each case health is denied, the issue that matters to someone who needs it. Is an immoral act less immoral, if it’s harder to impute responsibility for it? Is the denial of health care less moral, if it’s the result of the interaction of impersonal economic forces rather than the action of a specific set of individuals?
October 25th, 2010 at 11:38 AM
Did you know that Dan Hall directed the Open Arms Food Shelf for ten years? But facts don’t matter to desperate Dems. Contribute to Dan’s campaign: http://www.votedanhall.com/
October 25th, 2010 at 11:46 AM
I think that’s nice. How does he feel about making sure that all Americans have access to health care?
October 25th, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Bring the level to care to next to nothing because then we are at least equal is not the answer.
……………………..
With regard to mortality rates, most do not know this as you may not either… the reporting systems cross countries are quite different with regard to various Gov’t definitions that count what is considered an infant mortality incident.
In short, those are not standardized statistics.
That is how Cuba has a higher rate, because they don’t count 3/4 of the infant deaths to skew the numbers. When the numbers do not appear to make cognitive sense, take a closer look for yourself and drop the whinny liberal lies.
October 25th, 2010 at 1:09 PM
Alec… thank you for the taker class opinion.
October 25th, 2010 at 2:26 PM
Alec, how do you plan to provide health care to all now that premiums are rising 45% BECAUSE of ObamaCare.
Moreover, how do you plan to provide health care when up to half of all doctors say that they will leave the profession when ObamaCare takes full effect?
If our health care system is so bad, then why do so many from other countries come here for it?
Are there problems with our current system? Yes, and ObamaCare did NOTHING to address the real problems. It was simply a giveaway to every left-wing interest group and a power grab for the federal government.
Opening up markets, letting people purchase insurance across state lines, letting companies profit from their research and technological advances, letting small businesses pool together medical costs, and increasing competition will drive down costs and increase availability and access for all. The answer is more freedom, not more federal control by bureaucrats and politician who cannot even balance a budget or manage social security.
October 25th, 2010 at 4:56 PM
“how do you plan to provide health care when up to half of all doctors say that they will leave the profession when ObamaCare takes full effect?”
And pursue promising opportunities in the field of used car sales?
“Opening up markets, letting people purchase insurance across state lines, letting companies profit from their research and technological advances, letting small businesses pool together medical costs, and increasing competition will drive down costs and increase availability and access for all.”
Allowing the sale of health insurance across state lines would effectively turn over health care policy to the legislatures of other states, whom we didn’t vote for, and who have no incentive to act in our interests. Bear in mind that most Minnesotans, don’t buy their own health insurance, their employer buys it on their behalf. And the employer’s incentive isn’t to provide good health insurance, his incentive is to provide cheap health insurance. It’s his costs, not yours that will be driven down, but it’s your health care, not his, which will have to bear the burden of your employer’s cost cutting.
October 25th, 2010 at 7:29 PM
I believe the Constitution says “promote the gereral welfare, not provide welfare.”
October 25th, 2010 at 7:30 PM
“general”
October 25th, 2010 at 11:30 PM
Infant Mortality is the one of the health statistics that ARE directly comparable. The 49th ranking comes from the CIA fact book and is not from solely the reporting country.
Lets talk about the number of Americans who leave the country to get medical care. Medical tourism is a large and growing industry and these are not just elective procedures.
October 26th, 2010 at 1:19 AM
Hector, you haven’t answered the question and you didn’t refute the premise. Doctors say they will leave the medical profession because the costs and controls of ObamaCare will far outweigh the benefits for them. Since they are professionals, they will find other worthy work, but where will you go to get surgery or have basic medical care? Are you willing to go on a waiting list that is all too common in countries that have such gov’t run health care?
Allowing competition means that the consumer can buy what is useful for him at a good price. It works well for auto insurance, it will work for medical insurance. You’ve simply thrown up a red herring.
October 26th, 2010 at 1:25 AM
Jude, my in-laws are European, so I have seen gov’t run health care up close. My father-in-law had to wait for 8 months just to get a simple eye exam. When he became very ill, they got him out of the ICU as soon as possible in order to save costs. They then sent him to a rehab center. Even though the average Belgian pays 57% in taxes in order to fund the gov’t programs there, if he had not purchased catastrophic health insurance before his major crisis, he would have been ruined.
So, how good is a system that bleeds you dry through taxes, makes you go on a waiting list for basic care, and still requires you to purchase extra insurance when you face a major illness? And that is where ObamaCare will take us.
October 26th, 2010 at 4:43 AM
Pike
We can trade stories all day. I can talk about the care my dad got when he worked in Canada or about my Aunt when My Uncle taught in Poland or cousins and their children. We are a tight clan even if we are spread out and we know both sides of this argument. Now I know that there are at least a 100 votes in my clan that the Democrats will never get, but 99 of them will never vote for anyone who threatens a repeal of this modest Health Care bill. One of them my brother would probably punch them out if they spouted the same old tired distortions to his face. Not because my Sister each month for the past six years has to relive that terrible helpless year as she signs the mortgage check on the family home. .It is because the bastard insurance companies killed the business that we all nurtured and she built over the prior decade and a half. The family home is not a big deal, that is what it was for after all. If she had gotten sick in the fall and not the late winter the limits probably would have let the family handle the extras out of pocket. That’s just life. But for damn sure my sister would still have lost her business and her child right after each other, because those rates were still going to explode and she still had to think about her other children.
That of course is to close to home to make any impact here. And it probably shouldn’t, we need to make these decisions a bit more dispassionately.
But think about this. Not all that long ago a plane landed from far away. In it there were some sick people who didn’t know they were sick. They took a taxi to a hotel. They were medical professionals so when they felt sick they went for treatment. Now the taxi driver felt the flu coming on. What did he do? I thank God that the plane landed in Toronto and not New York. Because that taxi driver went to a clinic, he had health care. Do any of you honestly think that a New York cabbie would have done the same thing? That cabbie would have waited until he was much sicker and so SARS would have been loose in New York for at least a day longer then it was in Toronto. This country and the world were very very lucky that plane landed in Canada. If for no other reason then national security, it is essential we get to universal health care ASAP.
October 26th, 2010 at 6:39 AM
Was this the question?
“If our health care system is so bad, then why do so many from other countries come here for it?”
I don’t think very many people from other countries do come here for health care.
“Doctors say they will leave the medical profession because the costs and controls of ObamaCare will far outweigh the benefits for them.”
I am sure that is why they say it. But I just don’t think many doctors will give up their profession to become Wal Mart greeters.
“Allowing competition means that the consumer can buy what is useful for him at a good price.”
But who is the consumer of health care insurance, you or your employer?
October 26th, 2010 at 7:56 AM
Hector Says: “I don’t think…”
….
Hector, that is obvious in your posts regarding this specific topic.
October 26th, 2010 at 8:01 AM
I just wonder what the statistics are. How many Canadians, for example, cross the border to use American health care?
October 26th, 2010 at 8:04 AM
From Wikipedia:
“n a Canadian National Population Health Survey of 17,276 Canadian residents, it was reported that only 0.5% sought medical care in the US in the previous year. Of these, less than a quarter had traveled to the U.S. expressly to get that care.”
Turns out Canadians aren’t flocking to U.S. hospitals after all.
October 26th, 2010 at 8:53 AM
Sigh. It’s hard to argue with a moving target. Hector and Alec keep changing the subject and adding unfounded assertions. In spite of that, however, I will fight to repeal ObamaCare and any and all attempts to bring health care under centralized gov’t control. Even England is learning the lesson and starting to reform and liberalize the NHS.
October 26th, 2010 at 9:09 AM
“Hector and Alec keep changing the subject and adding unfounded assertions.”
At least I provide targets. The question was asked of me twice:
“why do so many from other countries come here for it?”
That’s kind of a vague, open ended question, but I checked out it’s underlying premise, and found that there was little reason for it to be true. Canada is our good neighbor to the north. The vast majority of Canadians live within a hundred miles of the United States. Yet, the reality is very few Canadians come here for health care. This despite the fact that Canada spends about half of we do per person for health care costs.
October 26th, 2010 at 9:53 AM
Why do Republicans believe strange things?
“Doctors say they will leave the medical profession because the costs and controls of ObamaCare will far outweigh the benefits for them. Since they are professionals, they will find other worthy work, but where will you go to get surgery or have basic medical care?”
Let’s think about this for a moment. Medical doctors have to train for maybe 8 years to be fully licensed. Typically, at the end of this process they are in huge debt. The medical training they have received at such length and at such cost isn’t easily transferable to any other profession. Like many of the rest of us, doctors have mortgages to pay, and in the expectation of a doctor’s salary those mortgages are pretty high. What all this means is that doctors won’t be leaving the health care profession any time soon. That being the case, why do Republicans believe that they will? Why do they believe things that are so demonstrably false? And is it any surprise that policies based on false premises, have turned out to be as ineffective, indeed as disastrous, as Republican policies have proven to be?
October 26th, 2010 at 12:56 PM
NorthernPike,
Doctors have been saying that they would leave the profession since the early to mid 1990s – well before “Obamacare.” Your point is moot.
Also, the study you cite has been discredited. Very few repondants, not neutral questions, and by respnodants knowing the survey sponosor, this probably skewed results.
October 26th, 2010 at 6:33 PM
The Democratic Party is the most hateful, bigoted group of anti-American assholes in existance.
If you hate America, vote Democrat.
If you hate Christians, vote Democrat.
If you hate your neighbor, vote Democrat.
The Minnesota DFL and the Fascists of 1930s Italy are indestinguishable in agenda and tactic.
October 26th, 2010 at 6:35 PM
“Why do Republicans believe strange things?”
Maybe because about 33 percent of doctors say they will quit the medical profession, rather than become beholden to the confines and lower payments of government run health care.
Here’s a better question: Why is Hector such a complete sack of fucking pig shit?
October 26th, 2010 at 6:51 PM
NorthernPike,
Don’t conflate world class health care providers with health care access. Sure, we have world class providers, if you are the Prince of Jordan. Some folks are even lucky enough to still have good insurance. The reality is, though, that the profit motive dictates that insurance companies cover as little as possible and deny as much as they can. That’s just how capitalism works. Reduce costs to improve profits. Great for shoes and cars etc. but not great if you have an expensive disease.
All of you folks are seriously anti-life.
October 26th, 2010 at 6:53 PM
Trent T.,
You are a very, very cowardly man. You have zero honor.
That is all,
Alec
October 26th, 2010 at 7:02 PM
Hey, Jude -”Not long ago a plane landed from far away….The country and the world were very, very lucky that plane landed in Canada…” Jude- if you get any more dramatic people just might think your’re over-doing it. “I want it because-you know, I just want it!”
October 26th, 2010 at 7:13 PM
Alec- “…insurance companies cover as little as possible and deny as much as they can. That’s just how capitalism works.” Not really. There would be more “capitalism” if the free market would allow those companies to sell their ware across state lines. Then there would be an obvious recourse to your statement above- more competition. You know, your statement where you give an absolute with no data to back it up. Sorta like “all Muslims are terrorists…’
October 26th, 2010 at 8:49 PM
So, J.L. you think we should just throw out the 10th amendment and have the Federal government tell states they cannot regulate health care as they see fit? Is that big government run amuck? Kind of inconsistent J.L., what what should I expect.
Also, United Health is based in Minnetonka. They sell products n all 50 states. They can sell across state lines just fine. They just have to follow each state’s rules.
Just to be super clear, J.L., you want the Federal government to tell the states they can’t set regulations on health insurance within their sovereign borders. Is that right?
October 26th, 2010 at 8:51 PM
J.L. My statements are based on common sense and basic rules of economics. Maximize profits by increasing sales and reducing costs. What is the #1 way for insurance companies to reduce costs? Deny care. It’s simple and happens every single day. My kid was once denied a claim because the insurance company said ear infections were pre-existing conditions and she had an ear infection the year prior. That’s like saying the common cold is a pre-existing condition.
October 26th, 2010 at 8:55 PM
Minnesota DFL: Among the most venomous, racist, bigotted organizations in the country. Democrats should be rounded up, put on an ore ship to be torpedoed in the middle of Lake Superior.
October 26th, 2010 at 9:07 PM
So Alec- I guess we missed your posts on the evils of car insurance and homeowners insurance. “the #1 way for insurance companies to reduce costs- deny care.” No, that would be to increase the number that they insure- sorry.
October 27th, 2010 at 10:45 AM
It is no longer Health Insurance, it is a forced prepaid medical plan.
October 27th, 2010 at 10:50 AM
J.L.
I appreciate that you, almost alone, seem to be able to maintain an intelligent, non-threatening conversation with someone of opposing view. I appreciate it.
Now, could you address the state’s rights aspect of the federal government telling states they cannot regulate health insurance within their own borders?
Are you a state’s rights guy of convenience, not at all, or consistently?
thanks,
Alec
October 27th, 2010 at 7:17 PM
Alec- To answer your question, I’d say on the whole, I’m a state’s rights guy. I believe in having the federal government completely out of the health insurance business. But that doesn’t mean I’m against a state regulating insurance within it’s own borders. On the contrary, I think states do, and should, regulate. There obviously has to be some over-seeing of the insurance industry, and i believe there is in most or all of the states. That’s why I argued with your “deny as much as they can” quote. Because I believe each state has(or should have)a mechanism whereby someone denied a claim should have (if practical), an impartial entity to decide the merits of the claim. But that would be the state doing it within it’s borders, not the feds.