On Tuesday’s Radio Show…
February 17th, 2009, 6:00 PM EST
- As GM and Chrysler lay out their survival plans, Virg Bernero, the mayor of Lansing, MI, joins Alan to explain why the economy needs the auto industry to prevail.
- Signed, Sealed and Delivered: President Obama signed the stimulus bill into law today. Will it be the solution for America’s struggles?
- Yankee slugger Alex Rodriguez spoke out today about his steroid use and partially blamed it on lack of a college education. Do you buy his excuse?
Alex Rodriguez is ultimately responsible, but I feel that the emphasis on greed and money have more to do with it.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
That’s quite a way to twist Alex’s words there, Alan. He took full responsibility for his actions. Saying that he kind of wishes that he went to college rather than becoming a Major League Baseball player at 18 (my age) so that he could have an opportunity to grow up outside of the public eye is not the same thing as blaming his actions on lack of education. You’re usually a lot more fair than this Alan. In fact, you were more than fair to Rod Blagojevich. You practically gave him a complete pass.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
I am a big Alan fan and I think you have a point Michael.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
I think Alan hates sports, I can sympathize, they are awfully boring, after all.
But yea, give this (baseball player?) a break. He cheated his way to a multimillion dollar career and is now sorry (he got caught).
February 17th, 2009 at 8:38 pm
For a guy who hates sports, Alan sure talks about them a lot.
And he was signed right out of high school, long before he started using performance enhancing drugs. He’s a got a lot of talent with or without the drugs. He was great before and after he used them too. Steroids may give you a little boost, but in the end it comes down to your ability to hit a baseball, play the field and run the bases. No drugs are ever going to give you the ability to do that.
Not saying what he did was right or that he was not cheating. I’m saying that he did it at one time, he stopped years ago, he apologized, let’s move on.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Not saying what he did was right or that he was not cheating. I’m saying that he did it at one time, he stopped years ago, he apologized, let’s move on.
Does this guy have any records? If so, I wonder if the player right below him feels like everything is OK since Alex said he was sorry.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Does this guy have any records? If so, I wonder if the player right below him feels like everything is OK since Alex said he was sorry.
Posted by Um Cara
Call me cynical but I am sure they have used as well
February 17th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
@Um Cara
What do you want from him? He’s doing the right thing by being forthright and honest about it unlike Barry Bonds, who is under perjury investigation for lying about it, and Rafael Palmiero, who testified to Congress “I have never used steroids, period” and tested positive a few months later. (Even then, he still claimed to have “never knowingly used steroids”)
Everybody makes mistakes, he seems to clearly recognize that this was a mistake. I believe in forgiveness, so I forgive him.
@Placefield
You are absolutely right. Certainly not all, but more than any of us would like to think have used PEDs at some time or another.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
We need to get the steroids out of sports, and if we need to send a message by making an example out of these guys then so be it.
They are role models, and today’s kids are tomorrow’s players, if we act indifferently we are harming the future generation, the kids idolize these guys and if the message is, “its really no big deal”, then it really will be no big deal and the cycle will continue.
If you care about the kids, and if you care about the game then quit making allowances for this behavior, there needs to be a zero tolerance policy, if you could lose your million dollar career by using these drugs I have to think they would stop using them.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Let them all use steriods the game will be better.
They’ll find something else to sneak in. Let them use the stuff.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Takes a big man to admit he made a mistake after getting caught? So now hes telling the truth? I really dont care anyway, I drink coffee to stay awake at work thats sorta like a p.e.d. right? release the whole list! I always wonder why athletes are so stubborn about coming forward to admit they cheated? is it ego? or could it be when they signed a huge contract there were clauses against drug use?
February 17th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Michael,
Do you really think he is being completely honest? I’m personally skeptical of that as it smacks more of a ‘damage control’ exercise.
He only admitted this when he completely backed into a corner and knew it was coming out anyway. Even then he’s been carefully avoiding using the term ’steroids’.
I cannot know for sure but if this was your livelihood, making you millions of dollars, wouldn’t you at least check out the substance that is reported to give ‘you a boost’? I mean you would ask how it acts etc?
It seems his naivity is not very credible to me but maybe you think otherwise?
February 17th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Trees,
“We need to get the steroids out of sports, and if we need to send a message by making an example out of these guys then so be it. ”
I agree with the sentiment but I’m pessimistic about the chances here. I mean ‘how’ do you keep PED’s out of sport? The only reason these guys got ‘caught’ is because it wasn’t strictly banned at the time and they didn’t realize the test results would be made public.
Seems like a tough task to always stay ahead of the cheaters. Instead, maybe we should consider something radical for professional sports and simply allow it, in some ‘controlled’ fashion?
February 17th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
if you could lose your million dollar career by using these drugs I have to think they would stop using them.
Posted by trees are people too
——————————————————
I believe the problem is they could potentially lose their million dollar career by not using them.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Lee,
If you were a public figure and did something that you weren’t proud of, and you made the decision to quit, would you tell the public about it unless you had to?
I can believe that he was somewhat naive about it, especially if it was something OTC. But the details aren’t really what interest me. Bottom line is that for the most part he recognized this mistake years ago when he stopped using. My guess is that he probably didn’t care whether or not it was legal because he never thought he would get caught. Since he didn’t care, he didn’t really make an effort to find out.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
I actually agree with Jerry. Let them use, whatever they want, and have at it!
In fact, like the military, I’d like to see atheletes use amphetimines. Can you imagine watching the NFL all hopped up on speed?
Whistle? We don’t need no stinking whistle! Flag on the play?! grrr
Anyone who holds these ‘professional’ atheletes up for their children as role modes, is crazy, imo…
February 17th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Michael,
“If you were a public figure and did something that you weren’t proud of, and you made the decision to quit, would you tell the public about it unless you had to?”
Thats a good question. Personally if it was me, knowing the way so many kids (and adults) idolize A-Rod, I would have trouble living with my conscious, particularly when I’m widely viewed as Baseball’s savior after ‘Evil Bonds/McGwire/Sosa etc’ had tainted it.
Yes, I personally feel I would have come out and admitted it. But even if I had been reluctant to do so, I would not have blatantly lied on national TV (i.e to Couric) or play it off as a youthful mistake when he’d been in MLB for over 7 years when it allegedly started!
Obviously, I don’t know for sure, but given the way he lied before and the way he has been careful with his words, I’m afraid I remain highly skeptical that he’s truly contrite about this and highly skeptical that he has still told the whole truth here.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
In fact, I even see a place for handguns in professional sports…thoughts?
February 17th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
conscious/conscience..
February 17th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Let’s see some prime time dueling
February 17th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
National health care means your employer needs not supply health insurance.
And if you’re an employer, you are not forced to offer it.
Why on earth would I want my health insurance to have ANTHING to do with my JOB anyway?!
February 17th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
“In fact, I even see a place for handguns in professional sports…thoughts?”
Genius idea..
Let’s give one handgun to each MLB team and they can let one outfield player have the gun secretly at one time. This rule will be known as the ‘Designated Hitman’.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
Frosty,
“Why on earth would I want my health insurance to have ANTHING to do with my JOB anyway?!”
Stop it.. you’re making too much sense.. If America had a healthcare system that worked, was fair, efficient and didn’t unnecessarily burden employers in this country, well we’d be like, like.. all those other modern nations with long lifespan, low infant mortality rates, free/virtually free prescriptions and worst of all with doctors that actually give you the treatment you need instead of what their Healthcare Company/Hospital Administrator is grudgingly willing to allow..
Where are those ’studies’ from the right-wing think-tanks like the Fraser Institute which debunk these evil socialist ideas..
Sheesh, I like the idea that I can go bankrupt if I lose my job and get in a serious accident.. This is America Darn it!
February 18th, 2009 at 12:53 am
If America had a healthcare system that worked, was fair, efficient and didn’t unnecessarily burden employers in this country, well we’d be like, like.. all those other modern nations with long lifespan, low infant mortality rates, free/virtually free prescriptions
Posted by Lee
Isn’t the US medical system responsible for developing most of the prescriptions that other countries give out for free? and if you think they are “free” you are crazy.
Competitive free markets and profit making drive the pharma’s and hospitals and surgeons the opportunity to push the limits and be creative and develop the drugs, vaccines, and surgeries that other countries clamor to get to the US to get.
the other socialists countries, simply steal our ideas and buy our goods with tax dollars and then give them out. IF we become like them, global healthcare will go down the toilet, since innovation will essentially stall to nothing.
IMO
February 18th, 2009 at 2:58 am
A-ROD, was a phenom as a teenager and is truly one of the best baseball players of all-time.
I also played sports and it’s pretty easy to get into using PED’s without knowing it. Someone starts passing out an “energy” booster, or “protein” shake or something of that nature. You can buy GNC mixes that would be illegal in pro sports.
So when he says he was dumb and didn’t really know what he was doing, I tend to believe him. Remember he played with 3 other high profile players that have admitted or have tested positive. In the middle of a 162 game season, someone on the team says, hey A-rod you look tired try this it will help you work out better, he says, yeah sure.
Is it dumb, absolutely, does he need to be crucified over it, probably not, since technically during that time-period they were not specifically against the MLB rules or CBA…and everyone else was doing it, so comparitively his numbers would still hold true.
….Alan sucked at sports and has always been jealous…that’s my guess.
February 18th, 2009 at 3:05 am
“Why on earth would I want my health insurance to have ANTHING to do with my JOB anyway?!”
I would much rather just get the money they are spending on my healthcare and allow me to make the decision I want to make with it. My employer healthcare program sucks beyond all comprehension to the point where I didn’t even sign up for it, since it provides me with next to nothing and costs me too much out of my paycheck.
February 18th, 2009 at 3:08 am
“Lack of college education.” Hee, hee, hee, haw, haw, hee. I didn’t thin Alex Rodriguez was that dumb. But apparently I was mistaken. “lack of college education.”
He must be a liberal. :) Had to say that. Sorry.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:07 am
The correct question should be: Why on earth would I want government to have anything to do with my health care?
That is the question.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:09 am
As a Mariner fan, his decision to forego college was one of my favorite days ever…even though I think people should go to college, he was unbelievable. We were getting Ken Griffey Jr. part II, and he was everything he was advertised to be.
He decided at the very last second to not go to FSU (or was it Miami…I should remember this) and everyone in Mariner Nation (ok…village) was praying he’d take the money.
and though I can’t see myself giving up 252 million dollars, I’ll hate him forever for jumping ship to the Rangers and eventually the Yankees.
I still boo everytime he gets up to plate (then cheer when he hits one 500 feet)
February 18th, 2009 at 8:15 am
The correct question should be: Why on earth would I want government to have anything to do with my health care?
That is the question.
Posted by willy
……………………………………………
Why on earth would I want a private, for profit corporation, whose goal is to sqeeze out ALL competition, charge more and more, and provide less and less, to have anything to do with my health care?
February 18th, 2009 at 8:27 am
because for profits have to have customers, poor care means no customers, it’s in their best interest to give the best care possible.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:30 am
What do you think the federal government is trying to do Lefty? The federal government is doing exactly that with national health care.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Sounds like you want a all powerful federal government Lefty.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:34 am
GuidoVanHorn said,
“because for profits have to have customers, poor care means no customers, it’s in their best interest to give the best care possible.”
……………………………
Not when you have no choice. It’s the same as when a big store puts the small mom and pops out of business, then gives you no choice, because they have no competition.
The complaint of most physicians, about private insurance, is that they don’t want to pay for anything.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Guido,
“poor care means no customers, it’s in their best interest to give the best care possible”
In your dreams.. In the airline industry do you think Delta Airways tries to give better customer service than say American? No.. They are all as bad as each other and out to make as much profit as possible so as long as noone rocks the boat everybody (in the healthcare industry) wins, profit for all, deny service where you can..
And frankly, most of the so called ’socialist’ nations aren’t really truly socialist anyway.. The UK has vast amounts of private enterprise and relatively low taxes for example. People there don’t have to worry about medical bills and get even easier access to doctors than we do (for example, I’ve never heard of doctors doing housecalls in the US)
There is too much invested in the issue by the healthcare providers and too much lobbying power in congress to make it easily happen. But the raw truth is that when you look at WHO health rankings and average lifespan etc, the US is way behind many countries and yet supposedly has all the best whizbang technology and spends more per capita doing it.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:41 am
willy,
I want government to work FOR the American people, and not for the few intra national corporations.
Just cut out the middleman, who right now has to skim of THEIR cut.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Lefty, you said “Not when you have no choice. It’s the same as when a big store puts the small mom and pops out of business, then gives you no choice, because they have no competition.”
That is exactly what the federal government is trying to do with nationalized health care. That is exactly what they are doing. Cutting out all competition. Giving us no choice.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Willy,
“That is exactly what the federal government is trying to do with nationalized health care. That is exactly what they are doing. Cutting out all competition. Giving us no choice.”
Not true at all.. Not only would you still be able to ‘go private’ but you’d also get to choose your doctor etc so how exactly would you not get a choice?
February 18th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Not when you have no choice. It’s the same as when a big store puts the small mom and pops out of business, then gives you no choice, because they have no competition.
All but the truly remote have a choice.
I work in a small town that had a horrible, horrible hospital and clinic…both were going out of business, everyone went to neighboring towns for healthcare.
A couple of years ago the hospital and clinic were taken over by new management they made changes, gave better care, bought new equipment, recruited better doctors, hired more nurses. The people came back, and both turned a profit last year.
Delta may suck and American may suck, but there are other airlines.
No competition is the worst competition. If the government controls everything there is no competition and it will be worse.
I have first hand knowledge of three healthcare systems. Ours, Canada’s and Brazil. So I can only speak of those three…and I prefer ours over the other two….by far. The only thing I would change about ours is radically adjust how government funding operates. I think it’s in everyone’s best interest for some tax funds to be used for healthcare, however our present system is wasteful and deceitful.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:59 am
You have to realize how government works Lee. They take incrmental steps toward total control of everything. Also, why would a private employer pay for health care when they can let all the taxpayers pay. It would save them monthly premeiums. Private health coverage would be phased out Lee.
There is when and where we would lose our choice and get less and less for our tax dollar.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:59 am
Where and when in Brazil did you live, Guido? Was it a mission thing?
February 18th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Gotta go for a while. You all have a good day. Talk to ya later.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Willy,
Even Democrats in this country would not permit the government to ‘take control of everything’. The term ’socialized healthcare’ is used as a scare tactic that its the first path to becoming communist. Is the UK like that? Sweden? France? Germany? Of those France is probably the most socialist but even there private enterprise is alive and well, the only downside is much higher taxes (but then you get much better benefits to compensate).
And I’m not talking about employers.. the way it works in at least the UK (which is the other healthcare system I’ve personally experienced), poor and middle-class use the National Health Service while richer people can use the NHS, pay doctors directly or more usually just pay for private health insurance (e.g BUPA). Market conditions would mean someone would take up that role (private health care provider) here too.
I don’t think its going to happen anytime soon, as I said there is too much money and power concentrated in the healthcare system to let it happen. But wouldn’t it be great, particularly in this economy, to know that no matter what happens, you’ll get access to the healthcare you need and won’t have to worry about going bankrupt.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:12 am
You have to realize how government works Lee. They take incrmental steps toward total control of everything. Also, why would a private employer pay for health care when they can let all the taxpayers pay. It would save them monthly premeiums. Private health coverage would be phased out Lee.
There is when and where we would lose our choice and get less and less for our tax dollar.
Posted by willy
……………………………..
Exactly what private corporations are doing now.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Guido,
“Delta may suck and American may suck, but there are other airlines”
Not really, all of the major airlines with big hubs (e.g Delta/Northwest,AA,United,Continental,USAir) have pretty much the same level of customer service. In many ways its a semi-cartel. Its the same for healthcare providers. As long as they are more or less the same, there is little you can do (I left out budget airlines like Jetblue and Southwest btw as they are offering a different ‘value proposition’ than the big guys).
For example, my company in Silicon Valley offers either Kaiser HMO’s or PPO/EPO’s through Bluecross.. If I like Great-West/Aetna/Cigna/UH etc tough.. I have to ‘choose’ between one of those two. If I get a bad experience with Blue-cross, do you think my employer (with several thousand employees) is going to drop them? Of course not.. the employer goes for which one offers the best deal and a few ‘bad experiences’ is sadly pretty much expected in our system.
Thus its not within a healthcare companies best interests to try and ‘outdo’ others by offering less service denials etc, instead as long as they are all around the same levels, they can all maximise their profits and bonuses.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Btw,
I forgot to mention that since I don’t live in California I don’t even get the choice of Kaiser, its Blue-Cross or nothing.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:29 am
My mother used to work for Blue Cross. A big part of what insurance companies do is figure out ways to not pay for things (as that would cut into their profits).
She is retired now, but basically works as a free consultant for various friends and family members to tell people what they need to do/say in order to get insurance companies to do what they are contractually obligated to do. The profit motive does a disincentive to them from providing care rather than an incentive to provide good care.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:38 am
‘does a disincentive to them…’
Sheesh. Switching back and forth between two languages all day makes one forget how to write in either language.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:39 am
“The profit motive does a disincentive to them from providing care rather than an incentive to provide good care.”
Insurance companies pay (or don’t pay) for care rendered by physicians and nurses. The actual care is provided by healthcare providers, not insurance companies. The problem with insurance companies in general now is they don’t want to pay for what the doctors think is best. They are in the business of making money, not taking care of folks
That will not change with government insurance. You get the same aggravation with medicare and medicaid, sometimes to a higher degree. The plan the democrats put into place with this “stimulus” bill will give the government the option to hire someone to look at your medical records without your consent (a HIPPA violation) and advise the physician on what they think should be done.
Does that sound like safe medicine to you?
Most hospitals already have electronic documentation and PIXIS systems in place.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Insurance companies pay (or don’t pay) for care rendered by physicians and nurses. The actual care is provided by healthcare providers
Thank you, Mrs. obvious. I was using the word ‘provide’ in the sense of pay for, as doctors/hospitals/nurses mostly want to be paid for work they do, and are downright rude about providing many health care services free.
And yes, if you are leaking blood from a fancy new orifice caused by a recent gunshot, and limp into an emergency room, they will absolutely treat you regardless of whether you can/will pay for it.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Blissful,
Why do you think the government would be ‘in the business of making money’? Are they that way with the FBI or libraries or other federal services?
Don’t you think that if you’re a healthcare company with politicians in your pocket, it would be a bad idea to allow them to legislate free programs which offer better service than you do? Don’t you think its in their interests to make sure that at the very least, as you stated it is ‘no better’?
Why should the US subsidized healthcare systems have those issues (of bureaucrats preventing treatment) and not other countries with a subsidized healthcare system?
As for electronic storage, what about family practices, can your hospital reference healthcare records held at the patients local family practice or do they have to fax them etc (I don’t know for sure, just speculating as I often see shelves of paper patient records at mine)
February 18th, 2009 at 10:15 am
“”Isn’t the US medical system responsible for developing most of the prescriptions that other countries give out for free?”"
No.
“”because for profits have to have customers, poor care means no customers, it’s in their best interest to give the best care possible.”"
Actually, in an exclusiveley “for-profit” system, they tend to ignore things like preventative medicine, dietary counselling, school health visits, etc etc.
Who can blame them? If I was a for-profit health-care organization, I would rather sell you a $500,000
heart transplant than have spent a few thousand dollars over your lifetime giving you check-ups, wouldn’t I?
It’s not just your insurance companies that “don’t want to pay”…it’s your hospitals that “want them to pay A LOT!”…both go hand in hand.
And yes, if you have gov’t insurance, and you don’t curb the greed of the health care corporations as well…it’s going to cost.
The US needs a complete overhaul with an emphasis on early (and cheaper) treatment, regular doctor visits (I go twice a year…costs the taxpayers about $50, how about you?), pre-cancer screenings, blood tests, etc etc…all the good stuff you KNOW you should do, but can’t afford….
….And your insurance company would often (stupidly) rather gamble that you’ll either NOT get sick, or more likely, you’ll not see a doctor until it’s too late, and then you’ll die (as) quickly (as possible)…
One CRITICAL component of national healthcare SHOULD be preventative medicine. Does Canada do ENOUGH? No, not at all. Are we working on it? Trying to…
One problem up here is that we have had access to health care as part of everyday life, that we take it for granted. But lately there have been concentrated efforts by “for-profit” zealots like Brian Day and the profit oriented CMA.
He stands to make millions if he could just convince Canadians to allow a ‘two-tier’ system, and his poisonous misinformation pollutes the media. He’s the David Duke of health care.
One final note…with all the Chicken Little squawking from your far right wing, Canada’s per-capita expenditure in 2007 was just under $4000 US…yours, almost $7000 (WHO).
Furthermore, we live longer and have a lower infant mortality rate…. ;-)
Personally, I don’t care if you want to continue to rail and moan against equal healthcare….it’s just one more thing that will keep your unpleasant neo-cons out of power…
February 18th, 2009 at 11:35 am
“”Isn’t the US medical system responsible for developing most of the prescriptions that other countries give out for free?”"
No.
“”because for profits have to have customers, poor care means no customers, it’s in their best interest to give the best care possible.”"
Actually, in an exclusiveley “for-profit” system, they tend to ignore things like preventative medicine, dietary counselling, school health visits, etc etc.
Who can blame them? If I was a for-profit health-care organization, I would rather sell you a $500,000
heart transplant than have spent a few thousand dollars over your lifetime giving you check-ups, wouldn’t I?
It’s not just your insurance companies that “don’t want to pay”…it’s your hospitals that “want them to pay A LOT!”…both go hand in hand.
And yes, if you have gov’t insurance, and you don’t curb the greed of the health care corporations as well…it’s going to cost.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:36 am
Lee, as a matter of fact my PCP does have computerized medical records and shares them with the hospital if need be with my consent.
Noone touched on the violation of privacy issue I mentioned above. Legally you can’t even look at your own chart without first going through medical records, making a request and signing paperwork. Yet, the government wants to make your records available to the equivalent of a health czar who will direct the doctor on when and what treatment to proceed with or stop?
February 18th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Um Cara, to answer your question above I lived in Brasil from 99-01, I lived in Sao Paulo for about a month then I spent the rest of my time there in Eastern Minas Gerais. I lived in Belo for 6 months and then some smaller cities. Ipatinga, Caratinga, Sabara (just outside of BH) and Joao Monlevade.
Belo was a fun place to live, incidentally I’ve been told the downtown was planned exactly like Washington DC (apparently you can lay the city grid right on top of each other).
Joao Monlevade or Ipatinga were probably my favorite cities though.
and yes it was a mission thing.
As for health care…if you get rid of insurance and government pay programs the cost of healthcare would drop significantly, and healthcare would become about care again.
If everyone had to pay out of pocket the costs of dr’s visits would have to fall dramatically or no one would ever go.
The poor would be catered by low cost clinics.
Governement/charitable programs should subsidize/cover emergency care.
I don’t have an opinion on longterm terminal care (like cancer, coma’s etc…)but death should not be as feared as it is….I know what that sounds like…but think of it in the most compassionate way possible.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:52 pm