Not surprisingly, you can't rely on Mark Fuhrman for truth about health care
On Fox News' Hannity, former Los Angeles police officer and Fox News contributor Mark Fuhrman pushed the myth that the government can't run health care programs, claiming that "the VA [Veterans Administration] and Medicare" are "total government failures" and citing Walter Reed hospital as an example of the VA's supposed failure. In fact, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system has won praise, Medicare is an extremely popular program and its costs have risen more slowly than private insurance, and Walter Reed is not run by the VA.
Fuhrman attacks VA and Medicare as "total government failures"
From the September 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
FUHRMAN: I wanted to comment on Howard Dean making a comment that --
SEAN HANNITY (host): Tort reform.
FUHRMAN: They've got two great programs already, the VA and Medicare. Total government failures. If I remember right, about 18 months ago, you had a show on here about rats going through Walter Reed. This is where our combat veterans, our men of honor that should get the best care in the country -- and please, tell me a VA hospital that's better than any private hospital in the country. Oh, there isn't one.
So if we can't fix the VA so our combat veterans have private room, the best care, no rats, if they have ongoing facilities, how can you have a public option and public health care?
In fact, VHA and Medicare are well regarded
The VHA currently provides the "best care anywhere." As Media Matters for America has documented, in a 2005 Washington Monthly article headlined, "The Best Care Anywhere," Phillip Longman wrote of the VHA: "Outside experts agree that the VHA has become an industry leader in its safety and quality measures. Dr. Donald M. Berwick, president of the Institute for Health Care Improvement and one of the nation's top health-care quality experts, praises the VHA's information technology as 'spectacular.' The venerable Institute of Medicine notes that the VHA's 'integrated health information system, including its framework for using performance measures to improve quality, is considered one of the best in the nation.' "
2004 Annals of Internal Medicine study: "Patients from the VHA received higher-quality care" than those in a national sample. A 2004 study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine study found that "[p]atients from the VHA scored significantly higher for adjusted overall quality." From the study:
Results: Patients from the VHA scored significantly higher for adjusted overall quality (67% vs. 51%; difference, 16 percentage points [95% CI, 14 to 18 percentage points]), chronic disease care (72% vs. 59%; difference, 13 percentage points [CI, 10 to 17 percentage points]), and preventive care (64% vs. 44%; difference, 20 percentage points [CI, 12 to 28 percentage points]), but not for acute care. The VHA advantage was most prominent in processes targeted by VHA performance measurement (66% vs. 43%; difference, 23 percentage points [CI, 21 to 26 percentage points]) and least prominent in areas unrelated to VHA performance measurement (55% vs. 50%; difference, 5 percentage points [CI, 0 to 10 percentage points]).
Limitations: Unmeasured residual differences in patient characteristics, a lower response rate in the national sample, and differences in documentation practices could have contributed to some of the observed differences.
Conclusions: Patients from the VHA received higher-quality care according to a broad measure. Differences were greatest in areas where the VHA has established performance measures and actively monitors performance. [Comparison of Quality of Care for Patients in the Veterans Health Administration and Patients in a National Sample, 12/21/2004]
Medicare's costs have risen more slowly than private insurance. As Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman noted, "[S]ince 1970 Medicare costs per beneficiary have risen at an annual rate of 8.8% -- but insurance premiums have risen at an annual rate of 9.9%. The rise in Medicare costs is just part of the overall rise in health care spending. And in fact Medicare spending has lagged private spending: if insurance premiums had risen 'only' as much as Medicare spending, they'd be 1/3 lower than they are."
Medicare is extremely popular. A May 2009 Commonwealth Fund study concluded that "elderly Medicare beneficiaries reported greater overall satisfaction with their health coverage, better access to care, and fewer problems paying medical bills than people covered by employer-sponsored plans." And Mark Blumenthal, writing for National Journal, noted a Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services survey that found that in 2007, "56 percent of enrollees in traditional fee-for-service Medicare give their 'health plan' a rating of 9 or 10 on a 0-10 scale. Similarly, 60 percent of seniors enrolled in Medicare Managed Care rated their plans a 9 or 10. But according to the CAHPS [Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems] surveys compiled by HHS, only 40 percent of Americans enrolled in private health insurance gave their plans a 9 or 10 rating."
Fuhrman falsely claims Walter Reed is run by VA
Walter Reed is run by the Army, not the VA. Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the woes of which were the subject of a Washington Post exposé, is a part of the U.S. Army Medical Department, not the Veterans Administration as Fuhrman claimed. Its command staff is made up of active-duty Army personnel.
Transcript
From the September 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
FUHRMAN: I wanted to comment on Howard Dean making a comment that --
SEAN HANNITY (host): Tort reform.
FUHRMAN: They've got two great programs already, the VA and Medicare. Total government failures. If I remember right, about 18 months ago, you had a show on here about rats going through Walter Reed. This is where our combat veterans, our men of honor that should get the best care in the country -- and please, tell me a VA hospital that's better than any private hospital in the country. Oh, there isn't one.
So if we can't fix the VA so our combat veterans have private room, the best care, no rats, if they have ongoing facilities, how can you have a public option and public health care?
JUAN WILLIAMS (Fox News contributor): Mark, Mark, if I sat here and told you that we were putting so much money into our veterans hospitals that they were better than any private care facility in the country, you would say, "What is going on? This is a waste."
FUHRMAN: No, I wouldn't.
WILLIAMS: This is government fraud.
HANNITY: I wouldn't say that about our troops. No way.
FUHRMAN: You know something, our veterans deserve it --
WILLIAMS: Well, they deserve it --
FUHRMAN: -- more than anybody in this country.
WILLIAMS: -- and that's why -- that's why the government and The Washington Post --
HANNITY: Wait a minute. Barack Obama --
WILLIAMS: -- and others exposed it as a scandal.
This guy Fuhrman couldn't find Wilt Chamberlain at nuns' picnic. I usually use midgets' picnic but was informed it is not proper. (Don't I sound like Hannity)
Randy
Short people got nobody to love.
They got grubby little fingers, and dirty little minds......
At least this short person does...;-0) 5'2", eyes of blue and green
So, don't want no short people 'round here.
ANYTHING that starts with "little" and ends with "dick" is never wanted. :-)
But all sweet. As in short and........
Yeah he could, cause he was Black.
Years ago when I was going to UCLA, and Fuhrman was working the Westwood area, he and a junior officer in training pulled me over in a residential neighborhood off of Wyton one morning-- the cops used to harass students who could and would park over there.
The junior officer had the collar, and he was a nice guy. I didn't have my license with me, so Fuhrman wanted the guy to arrest me and take me downtown. The guy wouldn't do it-- refused, in fact-- and just ticketed me instead, and then quietly apologized for his partner's behavior.
So Fuhrman gets angry and tells off the cop, and stalks back to the patrol car. Apparently LAPD rules were that whoever makes the collar makes the arrest decision, and Furhman had no say. I'll never forget what a jerk he was, such an anal ex-marine type, and years later when he was on the OJ case I recognized him immediately, as well as the name, which was on the ticket.
Furhman was a real bad news cop, and apparently he was well-known as such to local L.A. defense attorneys, for years.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/09/AR2007030902082.html
"Yay Mark Fuhrman, make sure that those Commies don't touch my Medicare and VA benefits...wait a minute (head explodes)."
Move on, good soldier.
I think it's rather shallow to use the theme that Hollywood has a "liberal" mindset. The producers and owners certainly don't.
It's really phony and stupid. Like Faux, talking about decadent liberal hollywood values when they show some of the worst sleazy trash on their own network.
And there have always been a large number of "conservative" actors who have been outspoken as well. Remember Ronald Reagan, Charlton Heston, Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson, Tom Selleck, James Woods, Patricia Heaton, Andy Garcia, Gary Sinise, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chuck Norris, LL Cool J, Freddie Prinze Jr. and Sarah Michelle Gellar, Dennis Miller, Denzel Washington, Robert Duvall, Catherine Bell, Danny Aiello, James Earl Jones, Ron Silver, Kelsey Grammer, Morgan Brittany, Ben Stein, Pat Boone, Kathy Ireland, Rick Schroeder, Bo Derek.....
So you see, Hollywood stars can be just as ignorant and uninformed as the rest of the public.
Don't forget that gem, Ted Nugent.
And Jon Voight hasn't done any quality since Midnight Cowboy that I can remember. Oh hey Dennis Miller and Bo Derek's career's are on fire! ;-0)
Sure, I buy THAT! You buying?
And Craig T. Nelson pulled hisself up by the boot straps with welfare and food stamps. Eejit. Doesn't even see the ridiculousness in that remark.
Yeah that Hollyweird sure is a bastion of liberals. Not one con in the group.
Yep, love those independent conservatives who are all self made with no help from the govmnt. Buncha maroons.
Now Mark Fuhrman doing commentary on health care; that's as bizarre as any hollywood script.
The Bizarro world is what we have with an idiot like Furhman commenting on anything.
And another nod to Seinfeld.:-)
At least the washed up actors have an excuse. They'll read any script, even one by Fox. Now the comic and guitar hero? Not sure there. ;-)
thanks, but i'm only a star on the internet, with a small but loyal following who probably doesn't know media matters exists... but if my fly is open then your nip has slipped, so touche...
several of your examples are people whose careers are dead, literally, by virtue of their assuming room temperature... and arnold is a RINO... as for the survivors, only a few are what i would describe as outspoken, as opposed to merely coming out of the conservative closet... i would agree that most of the outspoken actors are ignorant and uninformed, they just happen to be liberals... the vast majority, thankfully, are never heard from, or else they'd never eat lunch in that town again if they cheered bush or cheney... as long as willis and gibson put butts in seats they can afford to be outspoken... a young conservative actor doesn't have that luxury... owners may be conservative, but if there is a significant amount of cons among the producers, writers and directors, that philosophy certainly isn't reflected in the majority of the crap that industry spews out...
But I digress. Mark Fuhrman is dumb and clueless, and about as good an expert on healthcare as he was a witness at O.J.'s trial...
the guy give me the creeps...
In the days of yore, people whose careers had run their course would go on Hollywood Squares and try to be funny. Now they just go on Fox, newly born as GREAT AMERICANS, and regurgitate dogeared republican talking point cliches, and are unwittingly HILARIOUS.
Just like you. You just skipped the whole being famous part an fast forwarded to washed up and jumping on the right wing bandwagon. Congrats on a great career move!
as for your rather unkind smack, i take great pride in lurking about media matters, racking up thumbs downs...
Lets me see, who was was president 18 months ago...... Don't rush me, I'll think of the guys name.......Don't worry it will come to me.....
News flash: the current bills do not address health care reform. They don't. Not one little bit.
They address health care *insurance* reform. The public option is for health care *insurance*. Let me say it again: insurance.
Its insurance reform. Ask people if they love their insurance company, ask employers if they think they're getting a good deal on the plan they offer their employees.
Stop letting the right frame the debate: this silly "government run health care" is completely, 100% irrelevant.
Stop calling it health care reform, because that just gets people scared and confused that you're stepping in to the relationship they have with their doctor. Start calling it insurance reform, because that's what it is.
Say it with me now: insurance reform.
See, not nearly as scary. Takes the wind right out of the right wing blowhards' sails.
http://crooksandliars.com/logan-murphy/disgusting-teabaggers-shout-down-whee
That lummox who doesn't know why a woman in a wheelchair has more rights than he does...unbelievable. She's telling a personal story, trying to discuss the issues, and he wants to shout slogans from the back. I'll think of him every time the wingnuts here insist these teabaggers are at those meetings to "discuss".
And I don't know if the follow -up interviews are more funny or sad. Dancin' Grandma showing how she deserves to live, or the crazy-eyes woman after her, afraid of being terminated when "her viability is no longer needed". Ignorant, paranoid tools, but I feel more pity for them than anything.
Speaking of ignorant, have you seen U.S.S. Constitution Guy?I love when imbeciles attempt sarcasm. He's about 1:15 in to this video, but the whole 6 1/2 minutes is worth watching.
I assume this is the same group that was Billionaires for Bush during the 2004 election, and I'm reminded of one of the more hilarious moments of that campaign;
One of the righty radio hosts (may have been Hannity, can't remember) sent a staffer down to interview a Billionaires for Bush member. I'd seen video of the guy, he was dressed like, and speaking like, Thurston Howell III.
In an explosive bit of "gotcha" journalism, the righty interviewer was able to expose the group as neither billionaires nor for Bush, and the host was actually trying to use it as an example of deception by the left.
Thick as a brick, them wingnuts.
Hey Colonel, the Mookie guy above thinks Ted Nugent in the WH is a grand idea. Much better than BO. I don't know if he's being thick or just unintentionally hilarious.
One never knows with these types. ;-)
there's nothing hilarious about the notion of nugent being far superior to obama as a president... nor is there anything obama has in his resume that makes him more qualified than nugent to hold public office... furthermore, nugent has already demonstrated countless times that he doesn't need a teleprompter to out-articulate obama...
i suppose you think any conservative in the white house is hilarious, but are you more comfortable with career politicians because they ostensibly have more experience?... they are the problem, not the solution...
Nugent out-articulates Obama?
More qualified to hold public office?
I would absolutely eviscerate these statements with links and facts and biting, mocking rhetoric...but it's just too easy.
Try harder next time, for all our sakes.
qualifications for public office are quite minimal and largely a matter of opinion... if you think being a do-nothing lawyer, failed community organizer, professor, state and national senator with no legislation passed to speak of outweighs a hack musician/slash reality TV star who kills his own food, that's fine... but none of BO's experiences are a legal requirement to hold any office that i'm aware of... i put much more weight into each man's philosophy and ideology, and i'm clearly more confortable with nugent...
as for articulateness, nugent never used a teleprompter for his radio show or punditry appearances, while obama flounders around no better than dubya when his teleprompter isn't handy... but i can understand that may not be readily apparent to one gripped under the spell of obamamania...
Nugent for president! Ha! Loin cloth optional or required?
Ted Nugent attended Saint Viator High School in Arlington Heights, Illinois,
As patriotic as Uncle Ted claims to be, he pulled a nasty stunt to evade Uncle Sam during the Vietnam War. In a July 15, 1990, Detroit Free Press interview, Nugent crowed about how he managed to dodge the draft. He claims that 30 days before his draft board physical, he disavowed personal hygiene. The last ten days he ingested nothing but junk food and Pepsi, and with a week to go until the physical, he stopped using the bathroom altogether. When the big day came, he had been living in excrement-caked and urine-stained pants.
Ted Nugent at an August 21 concert calling Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) a "piece of sh*t" and referring to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) as a "worthless b*tch." In the video clip, Nugent holds up what appear to be two assault rifles and says he told Obama "to suck on my machine gun" and says he told Clinton "you might want to ride one of these into the sunset."
In a 1992 radio interview, Nugent referred to Heidi Prescott of the Fund for Animals as a "worthless who*e" and a "shallow sl*t," asking "who needs to club a seal, when you can club Heidi?" and was ordered by a court to pay $75,000
In 2005, Nugent was involved in a legal battle for not paying enough child support for a child he had out of wedlock in 1995. It was finally resolved when Nugent was ordered to pay $3,500 a month to the mother of the 10-year-old son named Christian Taylor that Nugent has allegedly never met.
So this high school educated, draft dogging, non family values, don't pay child support idiot is superior? To what, a rodent?
Can you spell clueless?
Mookie is just here to spout stupidity I guess. I won't continue to give the great eejit on stilts the time of day.
Always good to see you, Pearlene. ;-)
Liberals just always get in the habit of blaming someone else for their own ineffectiveness when it comes to communicating what it is they are advocating. I say it's because they never say it out straight, they always mask it somehow and put it between the lines. If some good comes of this maybe they will see that their plans should be put out on the table top side up, for everyone to see clearly and without suspicion, and let the chips fall where they may.
It's always been their downfall. Is it their message? Maybe, but let's get it out there and see.
The message is there. It's just drowned out by death panels, death books, death pillows, pull the plug on granny, free care for illegal immigrants, government take-over, rationing, etc. etc. etc.
And despite the misinformation campaign financed by the health insurance vampires to the tune of $1 million a day, people still want the public option. By a large majority. And it's kind of hard to be consistent on a message WHEN THERE IS NO BILL.
Your analysis was, though well thought out and presented, quite wrong.
Obama is making a huge miscalculation in counting on a civil, reserved message with a dash of bipartisanship to strike a cord with the American people, his adversaries in Congress, and the "liberal" media. But calm and civilized doesn't resonate with the public or the "liberal" media in the same way that force and swagger does, and his adversaries can simply capitalize on Obama's lackluster rhetoric by stacking the fear ever higher. We elected Obama to change things for the better but he's not throwing his weight around like he should.
You said it yourself, Obama's lackluster rhetoric - he needs to stop being so professorial and like he is on some lecture circuit and use his office and the mandate he received in the last election to sway public opinion and calm their very reasonable fears about overhauling their health care. I am not talking about people's fears of death camps and that nonsense, but rather the genuine fears regarding their care, doctors, insurance and costs. Those aren't manufactured by talk show hosts, they are reality. And they are reality because we don't have the answers or the comfort level we need to have. And that is on Obama and those selling this plan. Nobody else.
How often does that happen? Compare that to hour after hour, day after day of constant message control and paranoia on radio and cable TV. There is no comparison.
So to say they have as much influence over the general population as the President, Congress and all other media outlets is ridiculous. And nothing more than an excuse for a message that is not yet resonating. Work on the message and stop blaming it's failure to be accepted on over the top rhetoric that reaches a relatively tiny segment of the American people. You are just feeding those trolls.
So the Campaign for Obama's Failure only reaches a tiny segment of the American people? I don't agree with that rosy assessment.
Also, he should not be afraid to take on the serious critics on policy and costs, let them hammer that out, that is good for it. It's his plan, his mission, his responsibility.
Free will, and thinking for yourself, does get in the way of an organized message.
Since they were trying to stimulate car sales, I think they succeeded just a little.
If the government wasn't being careful about who got paid what then we would be hearing the cry of "Fraud" across the land.
Of course, I still expect to hear that because: there is always someone who will try to beat the system to make a buck.
Randy
Does that sound right to you?
"Phew. I think they didn't notice that it made no sense."
own it, dems... put up or shut up...
By a strange coincidence, that half of the time is when conservatives are running the government.
Walter Reed is an obvious example. The conservative message is "vote for conservatives, because you don't want conservatives messing things up".
For if they are, they run the risk of getting their funding trimmed, which could mean their jobs get cut.
So they pad their budgets to create relevancy, and spend every dime and then more because it then looks "necessary". And to get more money, say it's broken and find something within that department that may be worthwhile and preach apocolyptic sky-falling scare-the-wits-out-of-people ramifications if funding is not increased, or taxes are not raised. Throw more money at it, that'll fix it. When in reality it just grows the beast even more.
That is what scares people about turning their health care over to the government. Those fears are there, even if liberals won't admit it.
And this shows you are a prime example of the B.S. paranoia resonating with people instead of the actual proposals.
There is no proposal for government-run health care. The hospitals, clinics, and doctors will not become government employees. The companies that manufacture medical equipment will remain private companies.
There are however, proposals to give people another option other than expensive and often unavailable private insurance when it comes to how we pay for it. So the real proposal is government-run insurance, not government-run health care. The Republicans had plenty of time to do something about health care insurance rates that are rising 3 times faster than inflation, but they did absolutely nothing. The right wing had their chance to prove the free market delivers cheaper health care to all, and they failed.
Then what is the problem, this should be a piece of cake? If the private health industry is the abject failure that every liberal espouses then this should be gobbled up by the American people like a cheeseburger. If they are living the private health insurance nightmare, then why not the tidal wave of support from all of us?
Oh, it's because Rush Limbaugh spends three hours a day attacking it? Give me a break.
Whether you admit it or not, people are understandably nervous about the government's inefficient hands in the middle of it at any level. But liberals cannot fathom this is the case because government is always the answer to them, so they blame it on Limbaugh and Glenn Beck and Fox News.
And if you keep blaming the wrong thing you will never be able to fix what it really is. That is the problem.
In townhalls, people with real stories and real struggles are getting drowned out by people toting Obama signs defaced with Hitler mustaches crying "fascism! Socialism! Hitler! Indoctirnation!". Where do they pick up such concepts? And you think this is some kind of genuine nervousness?
The health care insurance lobby is spending millions of dollars recruiting lawmakers and citizens to their cause. This is not some grass roots nervousness. This is a corporate effort.
So those unscrupulous rightwingers and those who are corrupting this debate for their own selfish reasons will win, they want to keep liberals like you going after them and blaming them for your ill conceived messages because it distracts from the real issues and fears that people have. Ignore those and you will never see any meaningful healthcare reform.
Look, I don't deny the detriment that these serial misinformers and attention-whores are doing to this debate, but to sink to their level and focus on their stupid political games is counterproductive. Let sites like this worry about them, and let Obama and his administration take their message to the people. If it's worthy, it will sell - if it isn't, then it isn't. That is the best way.
I hope you're right, RightOn. I really do. It just gets hard sometimes to see that.
That is why I don't watch that stuff.
What about the Republicans who also portray the same nervousness, yet for some reason, government's inefficient hands are still good enough when it comes to their own care?
Is this more of that "good faith" you eluded to?
Never mind, you REFUSE to accept any responsibility for this whole issue not taking off like a rocket. It's the rightwing talk show hosts fault, it's the media, it's the other political party who is virtually powerless, it's the moon, it's always some other scapegoat for liberals. Never changes.
The other half of your post is your inevitable spoil sport, take-your-toys-and-go-home personal crap. It's disappointing considering how much I normally enjoy our otherwise good debates.
I am only saying that Obama needs to step up and sell his ideas, which I think he is capable of doing. I will listen. Granted, I am very skeptical about government in most things, but I am not a closed minded idealogue who refuses to look at both sides of an issue. And I don't have a talk show so I don't engage in stupid rhetoric to make a living. I appreciate the honest debate. I am waiting for Obama to "reset" the debate, will see what he has to say.
And for the record, I am sick to death of the Hannitys, and the Inhofes and the fear mongers who only look out for their own sorry behinds on stuff like this. I am in complete agreement with you on the stain they leave on our discourse.
You see, if my party just got done destroying the world, I'd be too embarrassed to talk. I would distrust my political worldview and my logical abilities, and I would be sitting on the sidelines studying the smart people.