Hi-Point Firearms Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,817 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Interesting, I read that letter and I didn't see his name on it anywhere? I did see Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, but never Obama himself. As for the reason of the letter, perhaps the explanation fits; "Specifically, CMS is investigating whether Humana inappropriately used the lists of Medicare enrollees for unauthorized purposes."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,817 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Interesting, I read that letter and I didn't see his name on it anywhere? I did see Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, but never Obama himself. As for the reason of the letter, perhaps the explanation fits; "Specifically, CMS is investigating whether Humana inappropriately used the lists of Medicare enrollees for unauthorized purposes."
Lists such as their customers?

Shall we delude ourselves by thinking this happened without his approval?
Is BO that incompetent concerning the defining issue of his term?

I know you are trying to defend this guy but like his Honduras policy there can be no logical defense.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,722 Posts
Interesting, I read that letter and I didn't see his name on it anywhere? I did see Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, but never Obama himself. As for the reason of the letter, perhaps the explanation fits; "Specifically, CMS is investigating whether Humana inappropriately used the lists of Medicare enrollees for unauthorized purposes."
Well as I understand organizational flow charts the CMS is under the DHHS who's head is a cabinet post so I assume Obama's administration gave the green light for the letter. But let's pull back a bit since you don't see his name on the letter and say .."Today the CMS part of the Obama adminstration ordered.." that work better for ya?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Well as I understand organizational flow charts the CMS is under the DHHS who's head is a cabinet post so I assume Obama's administration gave the green light for the letter. But let's pull back a bit since you don't see his name on the letter and say .."Today the CMS part of the Obama adminstration ordered.." that work better for ya?
Actually, yeah that works a lot better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,817 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Well as I understand organizational flow charts the CMS is under the DHHS who's head is a cabinet post so I assume Obama's administration gave the green light for the letter. But let's pull back a bit since you don't see his name on the letter and say .."Today the CMS part of the Obama adminstration ordered.." that work better for ya?
Actually, yeah that works a lot better.
Heh its the same freaking thing, its not an isolated event.
But ok ...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Heh its the same freaking thing, its not an isolated event.
But ok ...
No, its actually quite different. See I live in this world where we have this thing called accuracy, now i know that the world you live couldn't care less for being accurate, it focuses more on sweeping generalizations that can easily can be copied and pasted all across the internets straight from your lord and saviors over at Hannity and friends.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,095 Posts
Heh its the same freaking thing, its not an isolated event.
But ok ...
No, its actually quite different. See I live in this world where we have this thing called accuracy, now i know that the world you live couldn't care less for being accurate, it focuses more on sweeping generalizations that can easily can be copied and pasted all across the internets straight from your lord and saviors over at Hannity and friends.
Looks like you get yours from Olberman and Maddow and cronies.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Looks like you get yours from Olberman and Maddow and cronies.
HA! Jokes on you, I don't have MSNBC on my TV service. Though if I did have it I don't think I could watch Maddow, she gives the hibbijibbies :cantlook:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,817 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Heh its the same freaking thing, its not an isolated event.
But ok ...
No, its actually quite different. See I live in this world where we have this thing called accuracy, now i know that the world you live couldn't care less for being accurate, it focuses more on sweeping generalizations that can easily can be copied and pasted all across the internets straight from your lord and saviors over at Hannity and friends.
Nice sweeping generalization there LS. How is this for a bit of internet copy and paste;

Truman had a nice little sign on his desk, the high point of his administration in some ways. "The Buck Stops Here" partly meaning of course the president is responsible for anything coming out of his administration.

So please do continue...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Nice sweeping generalization there LS. How is this for a bit of internet copy and paste;

Truman had a nice little sign on his desk, the high point of his administration in some ways. "The Buck Stops Here" partly meaning of course the president is responsible for anything coming out of his administration.

So please do continue...
Yeah he did, and not one single President since has done that, but that's relevant how?

Back to the OP, Corporations have to be socially responsible, they do not have an expressly given right to free speech, which is what Humana is arguing now. From what I have read the letter is response to possible HIPPA violations CMS is arguing that Humana wrongly used Medicare mailing lists. The rules state personal information, like contact information, is protected under the law and can only be used for very specific purposes, like discussing current benefits/coverage. Anything outside of that scope is simply not allowed. Furthermore, CMS forbids lobbying, which this letter tap dances all around lobbying. Simply stated, Humana messed up and got called out on it.

Ctrl V Ctrl P
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,722 Posts
Back to the OP, Corporations have to be socially responsible, they do not have an expressly given right to free speech, which is what Humana is arguing now. From what I have read the letter is response to possible HIPPA violations CMS is arguing that Humana wrongly used Medicare mailing lists. The rules state personal information, like contact information, is protected under the law and can only be used for very specific purposes, like discussing current benefits/coverage. Anything outside of that scope is simply not allowed. Furthermore, CMS forbids lobbying, which this letter tap dances all around lobbying. Simply stated, Humana messed up and got called out on it.
Were you as vocal when:

"The controversial unsolicited e-mails - the most recent one supposedly written by Obama advisor David Axelrod to counter "viral" e-mails by opponents of healthcare reform proposals - were pushed into the spotlight by Major Garrett, the White House correspondent for Fox News. "I have received e-mails from people who did not, in any way, shape or form, seek any communication from the White House," he explained to press secretary Robert Gibbs, who responded with hostility and a request to see who sent the e-mails.

Critics have blasted both programs, citing concerns about privacy and propaganda. Some have gone so far as to suggest that the e-mails and the tip line are illegal. "I think they might have somebody in the new media office with a background in Google ... who may know how to do some drift net mining of email addresses and tossing them into the White House email system," said Karl Rove, a Bush-era White House insider who has been accused of violating multiple laws. "And that is frankly a violation of federal law."

Or is it ok for the Administration to illegally use names but not for Humana to inform recipients who will be directly affected by the cuts they aren't "allowed" to discuss?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,281 Posts
Typical of nobama to totally ignore the Constitution, he's as bad as congress. Throw all of them out!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Were you as vocal when:

"The controversial unsolicited e-mails - the most recent one supposedly written by Obama advisor David Axelrod to counter "viral" e-mails by opponents of healthcare reform proposals - were pushed into the spotlight by Major Garrett, the White House correspondent for Fox News. "I have received e-mails from people who did not, in any way, shape or form, seek any communication from the White House," he explained to press secretary Robert Gibbs, who responded with hostility and a request to see who sent the e-mails.

Critics have blasted both programs, citing concerns about privacy and propaganda. Some have gone so far as to suggest that the e-mails and the tip line are illegal. "I think they might have somebody in the new media office with a background in Google ... who may know how to do some drift net mining of email addresses and tossing them into the White House email system," said Karl Rove, a Bush-era White House insider who has been accused of violating multiple laws. "And that is frankly a violation of federal law."

Or is it ok for the Administration to illegally use names but not for Humana to inform recipients who will be directly affected by the cuts they aren't "allowed" to discuss?
Yep, I thought it was as Busch league as you could get, and Press Secretary Gibbs just furthered it with his asinine response's to Major Garrett. I would like to get to the bottom of how those addresses were collected, if it was data mining or whatever.

Concerning the legality of sending an unsolicited email, I don't think it violates the the SPAM Act which requires that a spam e-mail contain accurate header and subject lines, identify itself as an ad, and include the sender's postal address. Otherwise those fellows over in Nigeria seriously need to get my 1 million Euro's in the mail ASAP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,817 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Back on track;

Since the company only informed their own customers of regulations that were going to impact them explain how this actions by BO's administration isnt a suppression of free speech. Its entire intent to stifle debate surely you must see how they have been doing that since this whole thing started.

First they nearly were able to get a HC bill passed without even being read and would have succeeded if it had not been for the outrage of those nasty Tea Party people. Every dirty trick in the book has been employed since. Fishy emails, gag orders, rushed votes, closed committees, unreasonable time schedules, media attacks, etc etc etc etc etc.

You may want to take a closer look at who you are defending.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Since the company only informed their own customers of regulations that were going to impact them explain how this actions by BO's administration isnt a suppression of free speech. Its entire intent to stifle debate surely you must see how they have been doing that since this whole thing started.
Re-read please

Corporations have to be socially responsible, they do not have an expressly given right to free speech, which is what Humana is arguing now. From what I have read the letter is response to possible HIPPA violations CMS is arguing that Humana wrongly used Medicare mailing lists. The rules state personal information, like contact information, is protected under the law and can only be used for very specific purposes, like discussing current benefits/coverage. Anything outside of that scope is simply not allowed. Furthermore, CMS forbids lobbying, which this letter tap dances all around lobbying. Simply stated, Humana messed up and got called out on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
I just wish there was half time show to this game. At least then you could sit back, take in the sights and sounds and remember that it's just a game.

Win or Lose, your team didn't really accomplish anything other than making more money for themselves, and their advertisers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,817 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
The company's own customer database should not be covered by any edict from an administration as the relationship was established by the customer not the government. The matters addressed by the corp in communications directly pertained to health care which is exactly the relationship the customer established.

As far as lobbing that is a rather odd position for an administration that used the SEIU to write large portions of said health care bill and the Apollo Alliance to write large portions of the Stimulus. I see no lobby effort here leaving all matters of contact with government in the hands of the customer.

There is a pattern of this administration attempting to end or avoid proper debate on this matter. It is only one further example as I am positive, if you are not, that if the message had supported BO's plan there would have been no charges from the government.

Either way the cat is out of the bag and only sour grapes remain. An excerpt from the communication;

“Let your Members of Congress know why Medicare Advantage is important to you. Congress is considering significant cuts to Medicare Advantage now, and your Members of Congress will want to know why this program is valuable to you because these cuts could mean higher costs and benefit reductions to many on Medicare Advantage.”

How despicable of them .
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top