Comments by Avenger

Written on Letter to the Editor: Healthcare bill misleading:

Well, John, you didn’t give me any page numbers, but you did admit that the bill doesn’t say that you will “need to visit with a bureaucrat every five years (mandatory) once I reach ‘old age’.”

Now, let’s assume that the part of the bill from which you pulled your “interpretation” is Section 1233, on pages 425-430. That “legalese” says Medicare will pay for — not mandate — "advance care planning consultations" between individuals and their physicians every five years. So what do I think section means? That Medicare will pay for the counseling, so that doctors and patients would spend more time on it instead of just having a cursory discussion in an initial Medicare visit. Doctors, John — not bureaucrats. And the language clearly states that this counseling is voluntary.

Not wanting to take any chances in post- Schiavo Florida, a few years ago, I paid several hundred dollars for my living will, durable power of attorney, and advanced directive.

And let me refresh your memory about previous legislation related to this issue. Last year (during the Bush administration), Congress overwhelmingly approved legislation requiring doctors to discuss issues like living wills and advance directives with new Medicare enrollees. A 1992 law passed under President George H.W. Bush already requires hospitals and nursing homes to help patients with those legal documents if they want support.

Your twisted distortion about “visit with a bureaucrat every five years (mandatory),” is relatively mild compared to Palin’s “death panels” and Grassley’s “pull the plug on grandma” but you join them in being unhinged from the reality of the actual legislation. Too bad that ideology and Obama bashing is more important to you than the truth.

Written on Letter to the Editor: Healthcare bill misleading:

So what you’re saying, John, is that you read the 1000+ pages of the House’s proposed health care bill, H.R. 3200. In all those pages, the one item that most concerned you is that you will “need to visit with a bureaucrat every five years (mandatory) once I reach ‘old age’?”

I’ve read portions of the bill, and have been unable to find this “mandatory” requirement. So I challenge you to post the page number(s) where this “visit with a bureaucrat” is mandated. Better yet, copy and paste the section that contains this requirement so we can read what has you so concerned.

Written on Letter to the Editor: City leaders - Stop spending!:

Goodness gracious, you boys are so brave, ganging up on a woman, with your ALL CAPS yelling, incorrect spelling, and crappy grammar. Have another bourbon, boys, and write some more! Your class is certainly showing.

Written on Marco council unanimously approves tax relief:

NtJstUrMarco wasn’t the first poster to bring up national politics in this tread, although he was the first to make any sense. Why aren’t you telling van (#16), ejburger (#17), and playballonK (#22) to go elsewhere and get a grip, Issler?

Written on Letter to the Editor: Attacked:

WW,
Get real—“Nothing was said by me to identify her.” Ha! When I listened to the council meeting live, I knew immediately to whom you were referring.

You know they record these meetings, right? So if anyone is interested in what WW said, check out this link from the City of Marco Island web site:

http://ecweb4.ecstreams.com/public/dy...

-Click on City Council meeting 9-15-2008, then click “View selected program”
-In the viewing window that pops up, select item 6, City council communications…
-Fast forward to about 10:47 into that segment

WW talks about

-A letter to the editor that “ripped us (city council) very hard…”
- “by a young lady, won’t use her name…”
-“She had claimed City of Marco Island had caused her real estate taxes to go up $300…”

Now, that description pretty much narrows the identity of said individual down to one person only, to anyone who reads the newspaper. When she happened to be there, and spoke up, Trotter cut her off by saying “I don’t think we need to continue the discussion.”

At the risk of repeating myself, I will say that your actions were unseemly and contrary to civility and good government. Shame on you.

Written on Guest commentary: Tax rate falls and the quality work of the city continues:

Steve, that first paragraph of yours is BS, and I don’t mean “before Steve.” Spin what happened all you want, but the BL (bottom line) is that Marco’s millage rate last year was 1.2084, and for the upcoming property tax season it will be 1.3917 mils. Only in the alternate universe of Marco Island could both the City Manager and a newspaper reporter call that “tax relief” and “tax rate falls."

Written on Marco council unanimously approves tax relief:

Geez, Monte—among other reasons, your posts linking to that inflammatory website that further links to copyrighted material are violations of the marconews Terms of Use. That’s why they’re taken down.

And we’re not falling for your ridiculous tactic—dredging up 20 year-old allegations to distract from the real issues of today. To quote somebody: “It’s the economy, stupid.”

Written on Marco councilor rejects committee member’s allegations of impropriety:

Yes, Fossil, I think you’ve nailed it. Monte and his bois must really be worried about what Bill has uncovered to go after him the way they are doing.

Written on Guest commentary: Tax notices should be reviewed carefully, thoughtfully:

Waldack,

What you did at the last council meeting was unseemly and contrary to civility and good government. Shame on you. Your attack during council communications on a citizen whom you condescendingly referred to as “young lady” speaks volumes about your character.

And then you felt compelled to further beat a dead horse by writing this commentary. When I read this sentence, I nearly fell off my chair:

“My prior involvement with the League of Florida Cities provides me a vast understanding of the budget process, further how a well run city should be funded.”

Funny how you never mentioned this “involvement” during your interviews with the newspaper or talked about it at the candidates’ forums before the elections. I would characterize the “understanding of the budget process” that you demonstrated during this recent budget cycle as very little, and nowhere near “vast.”

By the way, there is no such entity as the League of Florida Cities, although there is an organization called the Florida League of Cities, of which Marco Island is a member. Maybe you should try to study the reams of paperwork that Marco Island produces during the budget process, instead of playing Gestapo agent against Marco Island citizens.

Features