Jump to content

Talk:Conservatives for Patients' Rights

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lack of NPOV

[edit]

The entire article past the introduction reads like an anti-CPR pamphlet. Claims are poorly sourced, and are mostly irrelavent to the article as a whole. This article needs significant rewrites.

Since nobody else seems to be paying attention to this, I will have to begin fixing it myself

--Tallanto (talk) 01:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good Bones, Needs work

[edit]

I've added multiple inline tags about unreferenced sources, original research and lack of neutrality. The article in general has a good framework and structure, and much of the material appears to be factual, but lacking references. The biggest defect is possibly the use of "weasel words" like "some suspect". The phrase "Most health policy analysts would disagree with Scott's assertion..." may be true, but the linked article only quotes SOME people.

The article in places reads like a promotion of President Obama's plan. Accusations of the truth or falsity of CPR's statements or ads should include specific links to neutral facts that refute those claims instead of statements of their falsity. Similarly, statements about the wishes of President Obama or the will of the American public should include facts to support them. Those statements are original research, not encyclopedic.

Much of the article could easily be improved by linking strategically to articles such as Health care reform in the United States. There are also articles on websites like Factcheck.org that use research to dispute these claims. Be careful of references from "Health Care for America Now". That group is an advocacy organization, so much of the information on their website is not neutral. Find citations to neutral news sources wherever possible.

After clean-up, this article would make an excellent inclusion in the template Template:Health care reform in the United States. AlanK (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Badly written section moved to talk

[edit]

"Fox News is the most unreliable news network in the history of news media."

"One CPR tactic against the President's plan is to protest at town hall meetings on the issue in as ignorant and uneducated a fashion as possible"

in 4 years on wikipedia, this is probably the worst section of any article I have ever read.

==Campaign==

The American public seems more ready for health care reform now than ever,[1] with many actually without health care at all.[2] Conservatives for Patients' Rights assert themselves as advocates for better health care whilst simultaneously not having a single proposal for how to make it happen. CPR's plan is described as most conservative groups describe their reforms; in as generic a statement as possible with no intention of assisting the American people achieve a healthy and preventative lifestyle.

The CPR campaign for competition suggests a release of "burdensome regulations" against private companies in allowance of unfettered "competition" across the states.[3] Allowing private insurers to compete across state lines will not do much in the way of improving costs. Private insurance companies are pretty much standardized across the country; Cigna, Blue Cross & Blue Shield, Humana, Aetna, Etc. All corporations that already exist across state lines. Our plan to open the market across state lines won't do much to help you, the consumer - but it will allow private companies to adjust business practices as they see fit. Do you currently have a local insurance office? Under our proposal you may be required to travel cross country for any future dealings with your insurer. Scott said at that time of the CPR launch, "[When] the government gets involved, you run out of money and health care gets rationed."[4] Scott has created and starred in a series of commercials advocating against greater government involvement in health care. He doesn't want government involved in your healthcare because doing so would ensure that he does not receive any private kickbacks from lobbyists or those with a vested interest in the overall dysfunction of healthcare in the USA. Keeping government out keeps private capitalist enterprise in - meaning profit is the bottom line, not your health. Though it is not covered in our campaign, we know the best way to keep the American people healthy is through a public option much like the rest of the industrialized world already enjoys.... however, the CPR Campaign has no interest in keeping you or your loved one healthy - unless you can afford it.

One CPR tactic against the President's plan is to protest at town hall meetings on the issue in as ignorant and uneducated a fashion as possible. They have provided a list of local town hall meetings on the issue which the group urge their supporters to attend and have provided video footage on how previous people have handled the situation.[5][6] Fox News is the most unreliable news network in the history of news media.

Ikip (talk) 20:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ In Poll, Wide Support for Government-Run Health from The New York Times 4/5/09
  2. ^ Number of U.S. Uninsured Census Bureau
  3. ^ The Plans from the CPR website
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference WSJ 022609 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ [Congressional Town Hall Meetings] from the CPR website.
  6. ^ Fox News Coverage on Town Hall Meeting

Does this organization still exist?

[edit]

I can't find anything current (i.e., within the last few years) that even mentions the existence of this group. The last mention of it I can find in any news articles is from 2011 or so. Their website is dead, someone else grabbed the domain name and has a placeholder there. Does anyone know if this organization still exists? Shelbystripes (talk) 17:56, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Conservatives for Patients' Rights. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:47, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Conservatives for Patients' Rights. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:24, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conservatives for Patients' Rights. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:11, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conservatives_for_Patients%27_Rights&oldid=1206777968"