Chickshit Bush ditches WH Conf. on Aging

Once again, the only president we’ve got shows that he’s too much of a fraidy cat to face an audience one ounce shy of unwavering support.

The fifth White House Conference on Aging began today, but this was the first time in 50 years that the sitting president didn’t speak at this event.

But he’s a wartime president, right? He was just too busy fighting terrorism today to talk about issues concerning our senior citizens, I guess …

… But no – he had time to motorcade out to talk to a handpicked group of seniors about how wonderful his prescription drug program is.

Needless to say, many delegates at the WH Conference don’t think it’s quite so wonderful.

It’s as if he can’t even pretend any more to be the president of all the people – or else he’s so tetchy and delicate he must always be kept in a coccoon. Common, W, old boy. Be a man and come out to face some of your subjects who might not agree with you.

[First thread I’ve started on the Dope – if any ass-reaming ensues, please lube up first]

Same old same old. Gotta talk with a hand picked audience or there’s no ballgame.

I sincerely hope nobody is surprised.

I, for one, am shocked, shocked to find this sort of thing going on in this administration.

Have you taken a look at the Medicare prescription drug benefit, aka Medicare D?

If you’re on Medicare, your premiums shoot up to cover the benefit — different amounts depending on the plan you go for.

You pick a plan (presumably) on the basis of which meds the plan covers, and that opts you in for the Medicare D generically and binds you to that plan for a minimum of one year.

• This means you’d have to know in advance what kind of pills you’re going to need (*do * try not to develop any new or unexpected ailments, dearie)

• But the plans can stop covering any given medication for no reason, giving participants a mere one month’s notice. Not that participants can do anything about it untl the end of their one-year signup period. (Sorry, your plan doesn’t cover your heart pills any more, dearie, maybe your doctor could pick a different pill for you?)

• Online information gives Medicare recipients a breakdown of which plans cover which medications, but as plans drop medications the sites aren’t necessarily updated, so the info may be out of date.

• Online info also gives Medicare recipients info on which of their local pharmacies participate in which plans. You can’t just pick a plan, you have to pick a plan that some pharmacy in your area participates in. Oh, but pharmacies can drop plans the same way plans can drop medications. But you, the Medicare recipient, are stuck with the plan you picked until next year. (I don’t think any drugstores in town still belong to that plan, ma’am, but there might be one in Chicago that does)

• The plans don’t cover some X% of your medication cost and then you pay the rest. No, that would be too simple. The plans cover some X% of your medication cost after you’ve paid a fairly substantial deductible out of pocket this year — on drugs covered by your plans, the money you pay on non-covered meds doesn’t count — and then it covers meds up until a certain level for that year is reached and then stops, and you pay full cost out-of-pocket until the end of the year (while paying your Medicare D premiums, they don’t stop) until you exceed another specified level (and once again only the money you shell out for meds covered by your plan count towards this total), and then the plan kicks in again and this time it covers nearly 100% of your medication costs until the end of the year. Got that?

• But since we all know how astute Medicare recipients are at using online web-based resources to compare and contrast 30 or 40 or 50 different competing plans, there’s not much risk of folks signing up for expensive plans that still don’t cover what they need, right? Right? (Oh look, Henry, another 3 fliers in the mail telling us to sign up for their medication plan!)

• Eligible people can opt out but only at a surcharge that ratchets up the cost of premiums for every year that they don’t opt in. So if you don’t find a plan that covers what you need this year, or you happen to be in good health for a person your age and aren’t taking many meds (yet), and you decide not to sign up for Medicare D, then next year the cost of your premiums is automatically increased by some Y% above current standard costs for the plan. If you wait five years to sign up, your premiums will be 5 x Y% additional above and beyond the standard costs for the plan. And if the plan itself gets price hikes over the next five years, that’s 5 x Y% of the cost of the plan as it is priced five years from now.

This is the “irresponsible big-government spending” of the Bush administration that the fiscal conservatives in the Republican party are unhappy about.

But surely such a well-designed efficiently-planned social program would only elicit praise from groups of senior citizens, right? Right?

If i had my name associated with this klunker I’d hide, too.

I’ve said it before: I’d KILL for Question Time or somesuch here in the states.

Question Time, a real Town Hall, nothing like that will ever happen. It would be too easy for some total stranger to walk in and completely shred Bush. Too bad there isn’t some sort of No Confidence, or California style Recall.

Earlier today I heard something about the cover of this week’s Time or some other magazine showing a picture of Bush inside a bubble. Anyone know anything about that?

Newsweek

And he’ll never even have Condi read it to him, most likely.

The thing I found most amusing about that article was how many “insiders” would talk only under cover of anonyminity – everyone wanted to cover their asses to avoid getting slapped by one of Bush’s petty vengeance tantrums.

What was the gist of the article?

The article itself is online
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10417159/site/newsweek/

I think this might change (emphasize might), and I’d hold off on killing anyone just yet, Jonathan. :slight_smile: Note the speech he gave yesterday at the World Affairs Council* where he was asked about the Iraqi death toll. Emphasis added:

*No friendly, hand-picked audience there

Sure, Bush is trying to counter the perception that he’s become isolated in the oval office. Mclellan emphasized this recent interactivity on the part of Bush at today’s press conference:

(emphasis added)

Still, these are tiny steps. To turn things around, I think he’ll have to hold regular press conferences; not those speech and a couple softballs he’s known for, but regular, Clintonesque press conferences.

Yep, I msotly* agree. That’s why I gave a very qualified “maybe” in my post.

*I’m not sure what a “Clintonesque” press conference is, but I don’t see a need to turn him into Clinton. He isn’t Clinton, and if that’s the standard, then he’ll never meet it.

Seems like a Bush-friendly group to me:

And without some clue about the structure of the Q&A, it’s hard to say how controlled or freewheeling it was, within the limits of this particular group. Were questions submitted and screened beforehand, or taken from anybody from the audience who raised their hands? We don’t know.

That was a nice little bit of selective quoting you did there. Let me fill in the parts you (accidentally, I’m sure) forgot to quote:

FWIW, the White House Conference on Aging should have been a Bush-friendly venue.

From the St. Petersburg Times:

The WaPo’s Dan Froomkin gives a pretty good roundup of the reporting on the conference here.

Exactly how late in the day were you born, yesterday?

All sorts of groups, even with some very extreme agendas, can quite legally characterize themselves in the manner of that first paragraph, so long as they abide by the second one.

IOW, I left out the meaningless boilerplate, and quoted the part that says something about them specifically. How slanted of me. :rolleyes: