Colusion between hospitals and insurance companies is prevailent under Obama care.
Hospitals can work out plans with insurance companies with respect to what they (the insurance companies) want to actually pay for, according to the policy language in legal terms.
Ok, now, mandates are not what is agreed upon with respect to those negotiations. You will experience differing levels of quality in your care, depending on the coverage you have and the new proceedures covering your care at the hospital.
The days of equal care ended with Obama Care. Obama Care Ended Equal Coverage Under Criteria.
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Mandates Do Not Mean Standard Of Care- Your Rights -Medical -Obama (Don't) Care
Meeting required mandates does not mean mandates equal a standard of care. It doesn't mean a right to health care equal to the average policy holder.
Mandates do not create a standard of care; quality health care has nothing to do with mandates.
The legal definition of the care you had the right to receive from a care giver was found in guidelines of criteria. Each patient was guaranteed the right to the same basic care in the hospital or doctors office under a guideline of criteria. That system of provider ship is now non existent.
Obama care guaranteed that you don't have the same rights to health care. Mandates do not cover criteria. The standard of care is a meaningless term.
There is no legal definition to the care you receive, now. The only actual legal definition now, is the mandate set forth by the Affordable Health Care Act. Health care can mean anything. There is no determination of what is required by hospitals in the circumstance of care giving to the patient.
If a certain procedure is not specifically covered on your policy, the hospital is not legally bound to follow any previous protocol in care giving.
(Including any type of criteria in patient care.)
Mandates do not create a standard of care; quality health care has nothing to do with mandates.
The legal definition of the care you had the right to receive from a care giver was found in guidelines of criteria. Each patient was guaranteed the right to the same basic care in the hospital or doctors office under a guideline of criteria. That system of provider ship is now non existent.
Obama care guaranteed that you don't have the same rights to health care. Mandates do not cover criteria. The standard of care is a meaningless term.
There is no legal definition to the care you receive, now. The only actual legal definition now, is the mandate set forth by the Affordable Health Care Act. Health care can mean anything. There is no determination of what is required by hospitals in the circumstance of care giving to the patient.
If a certain procedure is not specifically covered on your policy, the hospital is not legally bound to follow any previous protocol in care giving.
(Including any type of criteria in patient care.)
"Grand Canyon" abstract Poster- donrobbins
Friday, November 14, 2014
Obamacare deceptions. OBC. Manipulations, hidden taxes. False data.
https://plus.google.com/+ABCNews/posts/2LMXJk38yK5 Johnathan Gruber
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/14/despite-dem-claims-trash-talking-gruber-was-well-paid-adviser-for-obamacare-and/ Gruber- Admits that American voters were deceived. He calls Americans stupid. Ignorant about economics.
Nancy Pelosi denies knowing the architect of Obamacare. Her 2009 website highlights him as an expert advisor to the administration.
Obamacare deceptions. OBC. Manipulations, hidden taxes. False data.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/14/despite-dem-claims-trash-talking-gruber-was-well-paid-adviser-for-obamacare-and/ Gruber- Admits that American voters were deceived. He calls Americans stupid. Ignorant about economics.
Nancy Pelosi denies knowing the architect of Obamacare. Her 2009 website highlights him as an expert advisor to the administration.
Obamacare deceptions. OBC. Manipulations, hidden taxes. False data.
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
" Made up information doesn't count."
http://donrobbinsnewc.blogspot.com/2014/11/no-incident-for-ncaa-to-base-fines-on.html (My Other Blog)
No evidence yet to base charges on against officials. Where is the 2001 incident information?
Made up information doesn't count.
No evidence yet to base charges on against officials. Where is the 2001 incident information?
Made up information doesn't count.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Monday, November 10, 2014
What Satisfaction Do I Get? Penn State Work- Officials Innocent- (Truckers Hat)
Their
careers and the story lines, the sale, attention getting, tabloid justice
wrapped up in a gift package. All that, but no one cared about the neutral,
boring, not flashy, truth. No one dug for the facts. The facts. That's what
justice should be based on and fair and impartial trials. Justice should be
blind - not premeditated.
What satisfaction do I get out of this? They say I go on and on and on. Every day I have something to Tweet about or I say something on G+ that most people ignore. Sometimes I get as little as ten views for the whole day on my blog, but that's all I have. I'm not a big time reporter, I just knew Sandusky was innocent and the school officials did nothing wrong, that they were accused of. *How could they? If there was only one known incident and I was there at the school, in the locker room, when it happened? Sandusky wasn't. A child wasn't. It was 9:30 in the morning, not at night. It was in the Student Athletic Services building, not in the Lasch building.
What I get out of this work is the satisfaction that when our system doesn't work right, there are still people who believe in fair justice. And in this case it was a simple matter to prove the Penn State officials innocent and that Sandusky was not involved in the only incident in 2001.
Knowing that the information they must have had was false, or falsified. No one knew I was there. No one remembered the actual incident in 2001, but I did.
Calhoun saw the imposter in the shower room in 1998 with me and the security guard. He said nothing. Or, he was told not to say anything. But was he told to bring attention to Sandusky by saying he saw him in the Smeal building? I think so!
I did have some personal involvement in the case, even though I was unknown.
If Sandusky is acquitted, because someone finally decides to actually check the false evidence, then I'll be satisfied.
If the prosecutors drop the goofy, idiotic, charges against the officials, then I'll be satisfied.
If Paterno is given back his wins and the school and prosecutors apologize to his family for the gross injustice, then I'll be satisfied.
When will they seek the facts about the 2001 evidence, which was used to bring charges against the school? Where is the information that made them believe officials were guilty of a cover up? Where is the evidence they claimed to have had on Sandusky raping a child in a shower room in 2001? (There isn't any evidence. There isn't any information.)
Is it possible, that in 2002, McQueary did see a man in the shower room in the Lasch building that was a Sandusky look alike? Yes.
Was it possible that Calhoun saw a man in the shower room in the Morgan building that was a Sandusky imposter, posing as Sandusky, making a video tape? Yes.
I know it's possible, because I saw him myself at the same time the security guard and Calhoun did.
Did the security guard write a report on it? Was the report taken out of an office in the Morgan building? If so, was the security guard not working at Penn State anymore when the report was taken; when the office was broken into, after hours?
Is the report missing? Is the security guard missing? Did Ray Gricar suspect foul play? Is that why he came up missing?
Why was the matter of the man who looked like Jerry Sandusky making a video tape, in the shower room, pretending to molest a child never mentioned?
A video tape of a man that looked like, but wasn't Jerry Sandusky, pretending to molest a child. The little man in the tape looked like a child of about twelve, but was still just a man, not a child. Not a child. A man. A little man who I thought was a child when I first walked into the shower room.
In the shower room, with the man who looked like Sandusky and the little man, was another man holding the video camera. And a man named George Steinbrenner.
Was the incident covered up? Is that the real reason Calhoun thought he might lose his job, if he said something about Steinbrenner?
If there was a complaint about a person someone thought was Sandusky but was actually the impostor, did Gricar clear Sandusky but not know about the look alike?
Did the look alike do things that people believed was Sandusky?
It seems so.
The kid in the high school locker room. For one.
What satisfaction do I get out of this? They say I go on and on and on. Every day I have something to Tweet about or I say something on G+ that most people ignore. Sometimes I get as little as ten views for the whole day on my blog, but that's all I have. I'm not a big time reporter, I just knew Sandusky was innocent and the school officials did nothing wrong, that they were accused of. *How could they? If there was only one known incident and I was there at the school, in the locker room, when it happened? Sandusky wasn't. A child wasn't. It was 9:30 in the morning, not at night. It was in the Student Athletic Services building, not in the Lasch building.
What I get out of this work is the satisfaction that when our system doesn't work right, there are still people who believe in fair justice. And in this case it was a simple matter to prove the Penn State officials innocent and that Sandusky was not involved in the only incident in 2001.
Knowing that the information they must have had was false, or falsified. No one knew I was there. No one remembered the actual incident in 2001, but I did.
Calhoun saw the imposter in the shower room in 1998 with me and the security guard. He said nothing. Or, he was told not to say anything. But was he told to bring attention to Sandusky by saying he saw him in the Smeal building? I think so!
I did have some personal involvement in the case, even though I was unknown.
If Sandusky is acquitted, because someone finally decides to actually check the false evidence, then I'll be satisfied.
If the prosecutors drop the goofy, idiotic, charges against the officials, then I'll be satisfied.
If Paterno is given back his wins and the school and prosecutors apologize to his family for the gross injustice, then I'll be satisfied.
When will they seek the facts about the 2001 evidence, which was used to bring charges against the school? Where is the information that made them believe officials were guilty of a cover up? Where is the evidence they claimed to have had on Sandusky raping a child in a shower room in 2001? (There isn't any evidence. There isn't any information.)
Is it possible, that in 2002, McQueary did see a man in the shower room in the Lasch building that was a Sandusky look alike? Yes.
Was it possible that Calhoun saw a man in the shower room in the Morgan building that was a Sandusky imposter, posing as Sandusky, making a video tape? Yes.
I know it's possible, because I saw him myself at the same time the security guard and Calhoun did.
Did the security guard write a report on it? Was the report taken out of an office in the Morgan building? If so, was the security guard not working at Penn State anymore when the report was taken; when the office was broken into, after hours?
Is the report missing? Is the security guard missing? Did Ray Gricar suspect foul play? Is that why he came up missing?
Why was the matter of the man who looked like Jerry Sandusky making a video tape, in the shower room, pretending to molest a child never mentioned?
A video tape of a man that looked like, but wasn't Jerry Sandusky, pretending to molest a child. The little man in the tape looked like a child of about twelve, but was still just a man, not a child. Not a child. A man. A little man who I thought was a child when I first walked into the shower room.
In the shower room, with the man who looked like Sandusky and the little man, was another man holding the video camera. And a man named George Steinbrenner.
Was the incident covered up? Is that the real reason Calhoun thought he might lose his job, if he said something about Steinbrenner?
If there was a complaint about a person someone thought was Sandusky but was actually the impostor, did Gricar clear Sandusky but not know about the look alike?
Did the look alike do things that people believed was Sandusky?
It seems so.
The kid in the high school locker room. For one.
Make your own personalized
hats online at Zazzle.
Sunday, November 9, 2014
Cube City "Cubed" Wallet cases 5/5 S4 6 by Don Robbins scenery
"Cube City Night Scenery iPhone Wallet Case by AccountOpen
Look at other City Wallet Cases at zazzle.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)