Upgrade your browser!

Skip to Content

Videos / Random Videos /

Bill Maher: Sarah Palin, Guns & Healthca...

Bill Maher To Sarah Palin: Who Has Glorified Guns More Than Hollywood?

  • Views: 4235
  • All Ages
  • All Ages

Related Media

  • Video:Sarah Silverman
  • Sarah Silverman
  • She looks adorable here. That or I'm deranged.
  • Votes 3.59/5 - Views 567 - Comments 7
  • Video:Bill Cosby on DMT
  • Bill Cosby on DMT
  • Bill Cosby shares his experience on DMT with his daught. . .
  • Votes 3.19/5 - Views 930 - Comments 5

View All


Trouble playing the media? Click here to manually download it.

Rate This Video:
Rate it 0.5 Rate it 1.0 Rate it 1.5 Rate it 2.0 Rate it 2.5 Rate it 3.0 Rate it 3.5 Rate it 4.0 Rate it 4.5 Rate it 5.0

4.44 out of 5 based on 462 votes

Rating Results:
Earn XP by sharing this video!
learn more

Video URL:

Embedded Link:

Send This Video To A Cell Phone! Digg

15 Comments

Current View: 15 / Show all Comments

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -42 votes

116 days 14 hours ago...

Yes, I go to Bill Mahr, the "COMEDIAN," for all of my political insight... Obviously, he is far more politically savvy then the former Governor of Alaska, and Vice presidential candidate.

While im at it, here are some "New" Health care downsides.

1. Freedom to choose what`s in your plan

The bills in both houses require that Americans purchase insurance through "qualified" plans offered by health-care "exchanges" that would be set up in each state. The rub is that the plans can`t really compete based on what they offer. The reason: The federal government will impose a minimum list of benefits that each plan is required to offer.

Today, many states require these "standard benefits packages" -- and they`re a major cause for the rise in health-care costs. Every group, from chiropractors to alcohol-abuse counselors, do lobbying to get included. Connecticut, for example, requires reimbursement for hair transplants, hearing aids, and in vitro fertilization.

The Senate bill would require coverage for prescription drugs, mental-health benefits, and substance-abuse services. It also requires policies to insure "children" until the age of 26. That`s just the starting list. The bills would allow the Department of Health and Human Services to add to the list of required benefits, based on recommendations from a committee of experts. Americans, therefore, wouldn`t even know what`s in their plans and what they`re required to pay for, directly or indirectly, until after the bills become law.

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -35 votes

116 days 14 hours ago...

2. Freedom to be rewarded for healthy living, or pay your real costs

As with the previous example, the Obama plan enshrines into federal law one of the worst features of state legislation: community rating. Eleven states, ranging from New York to Oregon, have some form of community rating. In its purest form, community rating requires that all patients pay the same rates for their level of coverage regardless of their age or medical condition.

Americans with pre-existing conditions need subsidies under any plan, but community rating is a dubious way to bring fairness to health care. The reason is twofold: First, it forces young people, who typically have lower incomes than older workers, to pay far more than their actual cost, and gives older workers, who can afford to pay more, a big discount. The state laws gouging the young are a major reason so many of them have joined the ranks of uninsured.

Under the Senate plan, insurers would be barred from charging any more than twice as much for one patient vs. any other patient with the same coverage. So if a 20-year-old who costs just $800 a year to insure is forced to pay $2,500, a 62-year-old who costs $7,500 would pay no more than $5,000.

Second, the bills would ban insurers from charging differing premiums based on the health of their customers. Again, that`s understandable for folks with diabetes or cancer. But the bills would bar rewarding people who pursue a healthy lifestyle of exercise or a cholesterol-conscious diet. That`s hardly a formula for lower costs. It`s as if car insurers had to charge the same rates to safe drivers as to chronic speeders with a history of accidents.

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -32 votes

116 days 14 hours ago...

3. Freedom to choose high-deductible coverage

The bills threaten to eliminate the one part of the market truly driven by consumers spending their own money. That`s what makes a market, and health care needs more of it, not less.

Hundreds of companies now offer Health Savings Accounts to about 5 million employees. Those workers deposit tax-free money in the accounts and get a matching contribution from their employer. They can use the funds to buy a high-deductible plan -- say for major medical costs over $12,000. Preventive care is reimbursed, but patients pay all other routine doctor visits and tests with their own money from the HSA account. As a result, HSA users are far more cost-conscious than customers who are reimbursed for the majority of their care.

The bills seriously endanger the trend toward consumer-driven care in general. By requiring minimum packages, they would prevent patients from choosing stripped-down plans that cover only major medical expenses. "The government could set extremely low deductibles that would eliminate HSAs," says John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis, a free-market research group. "And they could do it after the bills are passed."

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -32 votes

116 days 14 hours ago...

4. Freedom to keep your existing plan

This is the freedom that the President keeps emphasizing. Yet the bills appear to say otherwise. It`s worth diving into the weeds -- the territory where most pundits and politicians don`t seem to have ventured.

The legislation divides the insured into two main groups, and those two groups are treated differently with respect to their current plans. The first are employees covered by the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974. ERISA regulates companies that are self-insured, meaning they pay claims out of their cash flow, and don`t have real insurance. Those are the GEs and Time Warners and most other big companies.

The House bill states that employees covered by ERISA plans are "grandfathered." Under ERISA, the plans can do pretty much what they want -- they`re exempt from standard packages and community rating and can reward employees for healthy lifestyles even in restrictive states.

5. Freedom to choose your doctors

The Senate bill requires that Americans buying through the exchanges -- and as we`ve seen, that will soon be most Americans -- must get their care through something called "medical home." Medical home is similar to an HMO. You`re assigned a primary care doctor, and the doctor controls your access to specialists. The primary care physicians will decide which services, like MRIs and other diagnostic scans, are best for you, and will decide when you really need to see a cardiologists or orthopedists.

Under the proposals, the gatekeepers would theoretically guide patients to tests and treatments that have proved most cost-effective. The danger is that doctors will be financially rewarded for denying care, as were HMO physicians more than a decade ago. It was consumer outrage over despotic gatekeepers that made the HMOs so unpopular, and killed what was billed as the solution to America`s health-care cost explosion.

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -31 votes

116 days 14 hours ago...

4. Freedom to keep your existing plan

This is the freedom that the President keeps emphasizing. Yet the bills appear to say otherwise. It`s worth diving into the weeds -- the territory where most pundits and politicians don`t seem to have ventured.

The legislation divides the insured into two main groups, and those two groups are treated differently with respect to their current plans. The first are employees covered by the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974. ERISA regulates companies that are self-insured, meaning they pay claims out of their cash flow, and don`t have real insurance. Those are the GEs and Time Warners and most other big companies.

The House bill states that employees covered by ERISA plans are "grandfathered." Under ERISA, the plans can do pretty much what they want -- they`re exempt from standard packages and community rating and can reward employees for healthy lifestyles even in restrictive states.

5. Freedom to choose your doctors

The Senate bill requires that Americans buying through the exchanges -- and as we`ve seen, that will soon be most Americans -- must get their care through something called "medical home." Medical home is similar to an HMO. You`re assigned a primary care doctor, and the doctor controls your access to specialists. The primary care physicians will decide which services, like MRIs and other diagnostic scans, are best for you, and will decide when you really need to see a cardiologists or orthopedists.

Under the proposals, the gatekeepers would theoretically guide patients to tests and treatments that have proved most cost-effective. The danger is that doctors will be financially rewarded for denying care, as were HMO physicians more than a decade ago. It was consumer outrage over despotic gatekeepers that made the HMOs so unpopular, and killed what was billed as the solution to America`s health-care cost explosion.

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -32 votes

116 days 14 hours ago...

The bills do not specifically rule out fee-for-service plans as options to be offered through the exchanges. But remember, those plans -- if they exist -- would be barred from charging sick or elderly patients more than young and healthy ones. So patients would be inclined to game the system, staying in the HMO while they`re healthy and switching to fee-for-service when they become seriously ill. "That would kill fee-for-service in a hurry," says Goodman.

In reality, the flexible, employer-based plans that now dominate the landscape, and that Americans so cherish, could disappear far faster than the 5 year "grace period" that`s barely being discussed.

Companies would have the option of paying an 8% payroll tax into a fund that pays for coverage for Americans who aren`t covered by their employers. It won`t happen right away -- large companies must wait a couple of years before they opt out. But it will happen, since it`s likely that the tax will rise a lot more slowly than corporate health-care costs, especially since they`ll be lobbying Washington to keep the tax under control in the righteous name of job creation.

The best solution is to move to a let-freedom-ring regime of high deductibles, no community rating, no standard benefits, and cross-state shopping for bargains (another market-based reform that`s strictly taboo in the bills). I`ll propose my own solution in another piece soon on Fortune.com. For now, we suffer with a flawed health-care system, but we still have our Five Freedoms. Call them the Five Endangered Freedoms.

http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/article/107408/5-freedoms-y
ou-would-lose-in-health-care-reform.html;_ylt=As2JAG44NGz68Q9pL6TWQpmCfNdF?
mod=insurance-health

dude_from_detroit : LVL 28: VP 3.7: said:

dude_from_detroit

Hidden (Show Comment) -10 votes

116 days 13 hours ago...

dog meet pony

LeighCedar : LVL 40: VP 4.8: said:

LeighCedar

13 votes NegativePositive

116 days 3 hours ago...

Hey Napalm, if you didn`t just copy and paste that good effort on your part.
However most of your points miss that most of the problems you listed are because of an already flawed system, rather than a more Canadian style universal package.

I had to single out this though:

"But the bills would bar rewarding people who pursue a healthy lifestyle of exercise or a cholesterol-conscious diet. That`s hardly a formula for lower costs."

- Actually, healthy living may cost more to the tax system according to some interesting articles from the past couple decades.
If that sounds counterintuitive, think about it for a second.
Unhealthy People tend to die quickly. A heart attack doesn`t cost the system very much. Cancer can take a while, but often kills quickly too. Especially Lung cancer.
Healthy people tend to take a long time to die, often requiring months or years in extended care or hooked up to machines.

Just some food for thought.

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -33 votes

116 days 3 hours ago...

Hey retard, It was copy and pasted by a finance consultant on yahoo.. I even left the link, good job reading. NO, these are problems to arise if the health care system is to be implemented, not its current. How could the options we hold now, be a problem? I mean, where would the contrast be? You dont even know what the fuck you are talking about.

L33terPan : LVL 25: VP 3.4: said:

L33terPan

3 votes NegativePositive

115 days 23 hours ago...

OMG I`M IN THE SITUATION ROOM!

THE TV SCREENS , THE FLASHING LIGHTS!

stbasdf : LVL 39: VP 4.7: said:

stbasdf

17 votes NegativePositive

115 days 21 hours ago...

wtf did sarah palan say????? she says half a sentence and then jumps to a totally different one. she never completes a statement. wtf is wrong with her. how did someone who talks or thinks like that ever become someone with some degree of power?

LeighCedar : LVL 40: VP 4.8: said:

LeighCedar

8 votes NegativePositive

115 days 18 hours ago...

"good job reading."

They way you intro`d it I thought you were presenting your own ideas. I guess thats a good enough reason to call me names :)

"NO, these are problems to arise if the health care system is to be implemented, not its current.``

- Duh..... Thanks tips. That doesn`t negate what I said at all. America`s problem is that it is trying to mix the two systems, and the private lobby has enough power to keep the free system from being properly passed. You need one or the other, not some half assed middle ground where both sides lose.
That is both a current problem, and a future problem based on the planned changes.

Maybe you need to read a little harder yourself before you start throwing insults around.
And "retard", really? The best you can do is to try and isult me by using special needs peoples problems in a derogatory way?

...Nice.

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -28 votes

115 days 17 hours ago...

LeighCedar, you are a retard faggot bitch, who sucks cocks and eats dirty asshole. Your mom is a whore, your dad is a loser, and I gaped your sisters asshole last night. Your grandma gives great head with her dentures out, and so does your grandpa. Fuck your entire family, you filthy, no good for nothing, dirtbag.

LeighCedar : LVL 40: VP 4.8: said:

LeighCedar

17 votes NegativePositive

115 days 16 hours ago...

More creative, but still lacking in intelligence and originality.

I don`t have a sister, but your attraction to old people is kinda weird :)

P.S. People who call others "faggot" are usually just acting out due to their own latent homosexuality.
Cheers

napalm4sd : LVL 30: VP 3.9: said:

napalm4sd

Hidden (Show Comment) -20 votes

115 days 16 hours ago...

CHeerS to you to slut nuggets.

Post a Comment:

Avatar

The Spikedhumor Drawing!Drawing Coming Soon!
Prize
Entry Dates: 9/8/2007-9/14/2009

Recent Blog Posts

Gifs [11.21.09] / [11.22.09]

Gifs [11.20.09]

Couple Busted For Refusing To...

Pimp Calls Off Rabbi's Drug F...

Paedophile Scare Keeps Santa ...

Agents Seize 316,000 Bongs In...

Woman Leaves $40,000 At Shrin...

Baby Girl Named After Car

Hotlinks on Spiked

Motorola Verizon DROID review

15 Best Prison Movies

Worst DVD Bootleg Covers

The Top 10 Doomsday Prophecies

UFC 106: Ortiz vs. Griffin 2

Assassin's Creed 2 Cheats for the Xbox 360

Spiked Classics of 2006

Sin City - Marv's Revenge
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.3
  • 5
6619762
NecroMonkey
View Profile
Level: 39
Voting Power: 4.7

Roadside Attractions With...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.2
  • 5
2310534
PorridgeGun
View Profile
Level: 50
Voting Power: 5

Panama Canel Time-Lapse
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.1
  • 5
489257
Kell
View Profile
Level: 39
Voting Power: 4.7

Seinfeld - The Soup Nazi
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.4
  • 5
4610783
GerRuleX
View Profile
Level: 33
Voting Power: 4.2

Gnarls Barkley - Star War...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.4
  • 5
4310395
Danimal
View Profile
Level: 47
Voting Power: 5

Game Master
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.6
  • 5
20657263
o22
View Profile
Level: 37
Voting Power: 4.5

WWF - The Rock Sings

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.4
  • 5
3810831
blackmetal
View Profile
Level: 41
Voting Power: 4.9

Sin City - Arrow Through ...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.4
  • 5
4410779
NecroMonkey
View Profile
Level: 39
Voting Power: 4.7

Whose Line - 3 Songs
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.4
  • 5
238578
The-J-M@n
View Profile
Level: 43
Voting Power: 5

Dodge Commercial, Pulled ...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.4
  • 5
9429582
Flatline
View Profile
Level: 15
Voting Power: 2.4

Ladder Man
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.2
  • 5
9735541
jscarlip
View Profile
Level: 32
Voting Power: 4.1

80's Infomercials - Slim ...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.2
  • 5
52010
ormannay
View Profile
Level: 32
Voting Power: 4.1

Sin City - The Death Of J...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.5
  • 5
437444
NecroMonkey
View Profile
Level: 39
Voting Power: 4.7

Gun Fight Outside Court H...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.5
  • 5
16249350
Beeziie
View Profile
Level: 36
Voting Power: 4.4

Mr.T Toy Doll
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.1
  • 5
5592
Order_66
View Profile
Level: 35
Voting Power: 4.3

Game Master on Piano
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.6
  • 5
5210031
AzumiRM
View Profile
Level: 9
Voting Power: 1.8

Being Polite Will Not Win...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.2
  • 5
4617873
elmonoalfa
View Profile
Level: 12
Voting Power: 2.1

Whose Line Is It Anyway 3...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4.2
  • 5
279783
Kisza
View Profile
Level: 26
Voting Power: 3.5