Collins: Don’t listen to GOP fear-mongering on health care
Be very afraid — of the GOP mantra on health care
Beth Collins
Collins, of Roanoke, is a retired obstetrician/gynecologist.
We should be getting ever so weary of hearing that President Obama’s health care initiative for reform is government-run health care like Canada’s. This is the mantra of the Republican Party of “No” and “Fear.” Powerful health care lobbyists spending $1.4 million per day to inhibit competition in the health care market sway them.
Read more.
August 8, 2009 - 8:42 AM
“President Obama has cost-cutting support of doctors and hospitals.”
I can’t imagine why doctors would want to be told how and whom they must treat or why they would support a plan that will cut their incomes. Of course, this statement by Beth Collins is fantasy. Doctors hate Obama’s plan.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/22/doctors-wage-war-obamas-health-care-overhaul/
Suzie, so do a lot of people, millions in fact…see it on tv all day long..I just do not get why these reps refuse to read the bill…now they are taking out the town hall meetings because they have not been honest so people are mad and asking questions that they cannot answer. It is so sad to see our country dissolving away in socialism. hopefully we can save it…but I dont even see this post staying on lately most of my posts seem to quietly go missing
yes most every single doctor, nurse practitioner, phys therapist, etc, and I know quite a few in the business, all hate the plan and are angry about it as well, but this newspaper will not allow people to express their feelings without editing….insane that our own city has to do that because they so live in fear of the truth that they may not have this nanny state of govt for control…sick as it is
Here’s a link to a true health care “expert” and their opinion on Obama’s health care plan.
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0809/647770.html
Pammala
Don’t feel bad dearie…many of my posts go unprinted because I ratchet up my passion a little too high and let fly with more “colorful” language than I should.
I’ve talked to a few doctors and nurses myself. Those I’ve talked to see a need to fix a broken system.
As for Beth Collins statements…I highly doubt that any are fantasy. I know her and she is well respected and highly regarded in her profession and reputation. She doesn’t make claims that aren’t true.
And by the way, using Fox to refute doesn’t really work. It’s that whole wolves/hen house thing again.
This letter to the editor from Anna Mitchell of Blacksburg hits the nail on the head:
“There is a solution to the angry mobs disrupting town hall meetings. Those attending should have to show their voter ID cards to prove they live in the district trying to have the meeting, and be given the opportunity to sign a statement that they want to refuse Medicare, veterans health care, Medicaid and any other government health care they may be eligible to use.
They will assume the health costs for themselves, their parents, children and grandparents who are now enjoying the benefits of government health care or may be eligible for them in the future.
Give them the opportunity to burn their Medicare and other socialist health benefit cards at the meeting.”
Fear has a way of obliterating the intelligence a mind is capable of. Below is an excerpt from Nuremberg Diary by Gustave Gilbert:
Nazi Leader Herman Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trails, 1946 April 18, quoted in Gilbert’s book, Nuremberg Diary:
Goering, “Naturally the common people don’t want war… but it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.”
Gilbert: “There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”
Goering: “Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the biding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
Obama from the onset of his administration made an effort towards bipartisanship and was given a very, cold shoulder. The GOP appears to have made their strategy not to fix the failing systems but to create fear around any effort to do so. It appears that we the people, once again, are being manipulated in the service of the power hungry.
As for doctors hating these suggested health reforms, please note the writer of this article is a doctor. I have heard people say, “I don’t have to think to know ….” Not very encouraging to see my fellow citizens be unwilling to look at(in this case the author of the writing they are objecting to) or feel the need to think. They are the fodder for the Goering type of leader who assumes that we the citizens are the idiot masses. For example, our treasury exhausting war with Iraq, the current slandering of our president without any suggestion for a better plan. If I were someone who did not love this country I would take a great deal of glee in our divisiveness. “United we stand, divided we fall,” makes sense to me. Let us work together lucidly to really look at all the problems that have made Health Care an issue and together make a workable plan. Health Care issues are not party specific. Democrats and Republicans alike are experiencing the difficulties. It is impractical to fight one another on this. We should really listen to each others concerns. We should really try to find our common ground. If we do not stand together on matters that affect all of us, it seems we become easy targets. And, remember, your congressmen, Republicans included, enjoy a government run health insurance.
Right. It is hostile, intimidating, discriminatory and discouraging to voter turnout to require people to show ID cards prior to voting, but it is okay to require it before people can attend a public meeting. Argue against a perceived restriction of one Constitutional right (voting) but argue for restriction of several others (free speech, assembly, petitioning the government for redress of grievances) and doing so for no reason other than to spare some the discomfort brought on by their own partisanship. No, that’s not a hypocritical stance.
Personally I am tired of hearing the either hopelessly naive or woefully disingenuous trumpet Medicare and the VA as examples of why government run healthcare will work. Both programs were conceived to assist limited demographic groups who were either unable to provide for themselves or who had earned the coverage through service to their country. Neither was ever intended as a massive entitlement program for the able-bodied whole of the population.
Medicare failed to plan for increasing life expectancies and a growing elderly population. That’s why it’s going broke. That’s why emergency stop gap measures are always on the table to try to keep it afloat. In other words, a bailout is in order.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/01/retirement/SStrustees_2006report/index.htm
Is this an example of the government planning and efficiency to which the proponents of a government run system refer? There has been argument that the government should intervene when something is “too big to fail” because it is the only body big enough and powerful enough to control it, with part of the argument being that government run programs are beyond failure. But as some posters here correcly point out, private insurance companies and healthcare providers are vastly profitable. The government can’t even run a system that targets a limited population and break even.
Medicare and Social Security are perfect examples of this. Why do people now think the government would be able to provide coverage for the entire population without completely bankrupting the country in the process?
Ramsey, never have I been allowed to vote without showing ID that listed me as a resident of that precinct. You say, “Right. It is hostile, intimidating, discriminatory and discouraging to voter turnout to require people to show ID cards prior to voting, but it is okay to require it before people can attend a public meeting.”
Who is it that you are accusing of advocating no requirement for ID in the voting process?
Why do people now think that private enterprise would be able to provide coverage for the entire population without completely bankrupting the country in the process given that unbridled free markets have already carried us to the brink of bankruptcy?
Its a shame that the Republican party is using fear and lies to rob the American public of their best chance to reform health care for the people’s benifit. They aviously would rather leave millions of children in this country uninsured than work with our President on this One Republican said ” If we’re able to stop Obama on this , it will be his Waterloo. It will break him .” I dont belive this will be Obama’s Waterloo but the Republican Party’s Waterloo when the millions that they are duping into being cheerleaders for the Health Insurance companies wake up a year from now and realize they cant aford there health care any longer and that they threw away their best chance to leave their children a better life .
C Ramsey…
not only is Medicare going broke due to life expectancies, but because the people on it aren’t paying anywhere near the costs to adequately fund the program and maintain its solvency.
What does it cost for a 60 y/o man and wife to have a $1,000 deductible for hospitalization plan and $135 deductible 80/20 coinsurance out patient
plan in our area? If in good health maybe $500/mo. Yet for parts A/B of medicare a 65 y/o couple pay less than $200/mo. regardless of health.
Medicaid is far worse..as one can get name brand drugs for $3-5..any wonder why these wonderful gov run programs are bankrupting our states and nation?
While this legislation may not establish a government run system like Canada, Britain or Australia, it creates an environment that will lead in that direction.
The “public option” will undercut private insurers as they will be required to offer policies that cover not only pre-existing conditions, but also a one size fits all coverage that will prohibit personalization of coverage. The cost of covering pre-extsting conditions itself will drive out profitability for insurers.
The governemnt will essentially be setting up an insurance version of an entity they despise for its ability to drive out competition by undercutting prices, and offering lower quality products, Wal-Mart. Yes, the “public option” will essentially be a Wal-Mart of health insurance. That is what will lead to a health care system where other for-profit insurers are marginalized and the healthcare of the nation is paid for by the government. Once the government has the purse strings, they also get to make the tough decisions about who gets the next liver, who gets faster access to CAT Scans, and the priorities for drugs and surgeries.
Just Google the terms obese, visa, deny, health system. You will find multiple stories where individualas are denied entrance to a country because of the governments rationing of resources. It may not be in this bill, but the reality of the “public option” is that it is a a road to socialized medicine.
We need reform, but we cannot penalize the many for the needs of the few.
Has anyone here READ the bill? If you had, you wouldn’t be so derisive of those (like me) who are against it.
Did you know that, in fact, you CANNOT keep your present coverage as long as you like?
Page 16, SEC. 102, states that IF the issuer (your current insurance company) changes any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, etc. AFTER the bill is passed, you lose your current option.
Did you know the GOVT. will have access to YOUR bank account, from which they can draw whatever expenses THEY deem necessary?
(Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to your banks accounts for elective funds transfer.) I love the word “elective” there.
Did you know Health Care will be RATIONED?
(Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill)(A) ANNUAL LIMITATION.—The cost-sharing incurred under the essential benefits package with respect to an individual (or family) for a year does not exceed the applicable level specified in subparagraph (B).
(B) APPLICABLE LEVEL.—The applicable level specified in this subparagraph for Y1 is $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family. Such levels shall be increased (rounded to the nearest $100) for each subsequent year by the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (United States city average)applicable to such year.
READ the BILL folks!
Here is a link to it, IT IS HORRIBLE!
http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
You need to check the law allen. You do not HAVE to show an ID. You can say you don’t have one and sign an affirmation of identity on the spot and still be allowed to vote. If you choose this route, no one verifies that you are who you say you are. They only check to make sure you are on the list of registered voters. Any time there is legislation proposed to REQUIRE the presentation of an ID, the liberals grab their torches and pitchforks and start squealing about how it would unfairly discriminate against minorities and poor people.
And despite your counter-assertion that the private industry has bankrupted us, I still contend that the supporters of a single payer government system who hold up Medicare as their example of success grossly underestimate the difference in funding a program for a limited portion of the population and funding a program for the entire population. If Medicare is so well adminstered, why is it going broke?
“We need reform, but we cannot penalize the many for the needs of the few.”
This is a ridiculous argument, unless you’re against the whole idea of any kind of insurance, public or private. A tax or a premium is not a penalty. It’s a small share of the cost, paid by a lot of people for mutual support, so that the few who need a lot of money for health care can have it.
T. Witten,
Have you actually read the bill and figured out what the complex legal language means, or have you just listened to the cherry-picked talking points distributed by those with a huge monetary interest in the current dysfunctional system.
Guessing from the list you’ve provided, I’ll guess it’s the latter.
First of all, you CAN keep your current coverage as long as you like. If the coverage changes, the new program will have to be certified as meeting the minimum standards set out in the law. That’s it.
It’s a nice Saturday afternoon, so I’m not going to take the time to debunk the rest of your claims, but I will suggest to anyone reading this that they are likely as specious as the first.
It’s very easy. No Government run health care. Someone above said burn your Medicare and Social security. WRONG. You have no option but to buy into them. Trust me, I would much rather have put MY money into a nice Roth IRA then Social Security.
Dan,
READ the bill. Clearly, you haven’t.
And Dan, this line right here… “have you just listened to the cherry-picked talking points distributed by those with a huge monetary interest in the current dysfunctional system” just REEKS of the DESPERATE talking points from the left. Did Barry send that one to personally?
Do YOU think the GOVT. should have access to your bank accounts in order to charge you when they deem it necessary?
Who in our country ISN’T getting care right now, Dan?
What happens when the GOVT doesn’t have to make a profit, like a private company Dan? Will their quality rise or fall? What happens when they don’t have to compete with ANYONE?
Well, Dan, that’s when we will ALL be waiting months to see the doctor for ailments like a herniated disc. Months.
0bama is NOT telling the truth about THIS current bill. I urge all of you out there to read it and make up your own mind.
One last thing, 0bama is for a SINGLE PAYER system (which would DESTROY our health care system). He has said this himself on VIDEO. Now, he says he DIDN’t say it. Who are YOU going to believe…the un-edited video or the politician who is desperate and losing credibility with every passing day?
Read the bill yourself.
http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
“Give them the opportunity to burn their Medicare and other socialist health benefit cards at the meeting.”
We can do that if liberals agree that the only ones who pay for government health care are the ones that use it. Deal?
Very nice, all the Georing quotes about ginning up fear. How about this one for fear-mongering:
“If we do not pass this (health care, cap-and-trade, stimulus) bill RIGHT NOW, the country/planet will be headed for disaster.”
The problem is, that it is NOT easy. This is a difficult problem that has been simmering for many decades. While we, as a society worked for and achieved the “safety net” programs for those who are on the low end of the socio-economic level in this country, we still have large gaps for those who do not “qualify” for Medicare or Medicaid or who never served in the military and therefore “qualify” for the VA system and while all of those have helped those they serve, the “working poor” who make too much money for Medicaid but not enough for private coverage (or those who lose it with their job) are left in a situation I would not wish on anyone. I fully understand the “I got mine” attitude that is prevalent for a certain segment of our society and like the many other programs and changes that came from the open-minded and kinder hearted among us, this too shall pass. It is time to address this issue and help the working poor in this country to have decent health care that will not destroy what little they have if they become seriously ill.
While no program is perfect and this one will not be either, I would like to think that those who oppose it would at least attempt to argue with facts and helpful input instead of the vitriol, distortions, out right lies and misrepresentations we have been subjected too. If we do not allow you to disrupt and shout down the speaker at the “Town Hall” you call us cowards. I find some amusement in the defense of civil disobedience and disrespect shown by the protesters considering how our side has always (and still is) treated, it is time to “get a grip”. You had a chance for input, you had decades to work for a different method, you have Representatives who could be working for compromises right now. Quit the griping and fear mongering and argue with honesty or stay on the porch.
This picture was taken of a right-wing extremist at a Town Hall Meeting
http://www.uic.edu/depts/oee/fasi/thumbnailrockwellfourfreedomsspeech.jpg
Why should we burn our Medicare cards when we have already paid for Medicare with our FICA taxes? It’s coming out of my pay check. Burn your Medicaid cards, That’s more logical
Dan has only read what he has received from the pro-government propagandists. His job is to parrot their position.
T Witten backed up all his/her assertions with page and verse of the House bill, yet (s)he’s insulted and accused of parroting “cherry-picked talking points”. We are supposed to accept the official Obama talking point version which conflicts with the actual bill. T Witten, how dare you present actual evidence?
“…and be given the opportunity to sign a statement that they want to refuse Medicare, veterans health care, Medicaid and any other government health care they may be eligible to use.”
Would those folks then be guaranteed that none of their taxes dollars would pay for someone elses healthcare?
Oh, and having spent 20 years in the military, I’ve already paid for my veterans health care.
Protest held after beating of a protester by pro-government thugs at the behest of President Obama
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/08/st-louis-holds-protest-against-democrat.html
The Democrats are the new Taliban.
Make sure you get a copy of these posters. Place them in public places or you could be Flagged for unauthorized apathy
http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=3848&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
What is the need for comples legal language? Is this a good deal or not?
I thought it was about the 47 million uncovered but I now understand that’s not the real reason.
“And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”
It’s too bad such a large segment of the population has forgotten that sentiment. This country used to believe in the ‘pull yourself up by your own bootstrap” mentality. People did not want government handouts. People were ashamed to be on welfare. Apparently a growing segment of today’s population thinks just the opposite. They seem to think that we should all rely on government entitlements for our quality of life. They also seem to castigate those who would rather earn their own way, work for what they have and, sin of sins, expect to be able to keep what they work for and not be required by the government to give up what they have earned in the name of some great social experiment. Where those people used to be considered self-sufficient and productive, they are now accused of being selfish and greedy by those who favor entitlements and consider themselves to more open minded and kind-hearted.
We are witnessing a fundamental shift away from what America has historically stood for. And though capitalism is much maligned for promoting greed, the element of greed is no less present in these new social agendas. People have adopted the mindset that they are owed a particular lifestyle simply for being alive. They expect the people who work and earn money to guarantee that everyone, regardless of effort or contribution, receive the entitled lifestyle they desire. I will gladly accept being called greedy by the more “enlightened and kind hearted among us”, but in my opinion there is no greater avarice than that exhibited by those who believe they are entitled to a share of what another person has earned by the sweat of his or her own brow.
The 12 million illegals leeching on the healthcare system should be sent home. Then and only then should we be considering the reform of healthcare, not before.
Henry, what makes you think President Obama ordered people to beat a man in St. Louis? Is there any basis for this accusation?
T Witten, are individuals really going to be limited to 5,000 dollars of Health Care per year?
waynep, you say, “What is the need for comples legal language? Is this a good deal or not?
I thought it was about the 47 million uncovered but I now understand that’s not the real reason.”
What is the real reason?
Ramsey, you, probably, should notify Virginia that the law has changed. My precinct as of 2008 was still operating under the old system. §24.2-643(B)
The officer shall ask the voter to present any one of the specified forms of identification.
If a voter does not have ID, “he shall be allowed to vote after signing a statement, subject to felony penalties for false statements.”
The Democrats called out the unions to put down the dissent. “Punch them twice as hard” was the exact quote from the White House.
Obama may not have ordered the union thigs to beat a man, but apparently his HHS Secretary thinks it’s a good idea. She thanked the SEIU for showing up at meetings and said “Keep doing what you’re doing.”
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/08/07/sebelius-calls-her-seiu-brothers-and-sisters-to-battle/
I forgot to add…nor have I seen Obama publicly condemn the violence either.
And exactly what change does the section you cite represent from what I stated. Does it not include a provision to allow the person to vote if he doesn’t have an ID. There is a difference between being asked for an ID and be required to produce one. I’m sure the RTEB would have weighed in by now if I am wrong.
Ramsey, one more time, all we get from your side of the isle is more whining. Why no solutions are offered from your side is apparent to everyone who has lost several different jobs to the free market system. The free market system, which is ruled by greed, is indefensible with logic. You can continue to blame unemployment on the unemployed, but that will not improve the situation. You can blame the cost of unemployment benefits on those who have been laid off, but we know that the real culprits are those who let it burn their soul to pay a fair share for living in a free world. By the way, are unemployment benefits considered an entitlement? Are entitlements good or bad? What is an entitlement?
“And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”
“It’s too bad such a large segment of the population has forgotten that sentiment.”
I certainly agree with that statement but not with your view of it. The segment that you view as forgetting that sentiment is the very group that has been most victimized. The ones that I see forgetting that sentiment are the ones who bought off and propagandized government officials so they could destroy the industrial foundations of this country just to make a few more dollars for your revered achievers and producers. Very few of your heroes achieved or produced their big profits over the last 30 years off their own sweat and hard work. They did it by slowly but surely trampling and beating down the middle class working people of this country. Now that there is no longer an over abundance of well heeeled consumers, big businesses, like GM, Chrysler, Toyota and even Honda, are hving trouble making a profit. Surprise, surprise, who would have ever thought it? That sounds like the height of avarice to me.
READ THE BILL
we will be paying for illegals, late term abortions, forced into end of life counseling. at a young age of 65….that isnt fear mongering people it is WHAT IS IN THIS BILL READ IT!
if the people at the town halls would actually give out true info, some angry people might not be so angry, just tell the truth, which is NOT being told, and see how people behave. I attended a town hall meeting yesterday in bedford va where the people against this were far outnumbering those for it….and they were all well behaved..it was very interesting and periello, tho i wont vote for him did a decent job
obama union thugs beat up a man selling shirts, had to to the hospital too, he did absolutely nothing, just selling shirts and the union thug beat the living craap outta him for nothing
Your democratic congress at work….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BttTtjhlvmY
If the coverage changes, the new program will have to be certified as meeting the minimum standards…..
Comment by Dan Radmacher — August 8, 2009 @ 2:38 pm
Minimum standards, what this democratic congrees excells at.
C. Ramsey, I find it more than a little ironic that you use a quote from a Democrat to start your lecture, but it surely is a good one and reminds us of the collective sacrifice President Kennedy was asking for. I do not think “a large segment of the population has forgotten that sentiment”, in fact, it appears that a large segment of the population is remembering the admonition and taking it to heart in asking for relief from the overpowering control of the health care industry by the private insurance industry and “not-for-profit” corporate conglomerates with greater and greater control over access and outcomes.
This country still richly rewards the “pull yourself up by your own bootstrap” people and any denial of that is belied in every news day and Forbes listing.
I also do not believe that more people want a government handout and I see every day, people working hard and steady to stave off bankruptcy and hold their families together. There is still a great societal outcast label on people who reach for any help and if you feel otherwise, re-read some of the archived blog posts here. Many lament, disdain and insult such people on a daily basis. There are people who get wealthy and build a good life on the government dole, no doubt, but they are the contractors with sweetheart deals, the corporations and others who get subsidies and tax incentives and breaks NOT the welfare queens in public housing. No one likes the cheats and louts who appear to refuse to work, but throwing people in the gutter to prevent fraud and abuse is not a palatable option to a civilized society. People who live by the Biblical philosophies realize that in many cases, “there but for the Grace of God, go I” and we act and support accordingly.
I do not see a growing group of people who want to rely on entitlements but I do see a growing group of people who want to insure some minimum standards of living and health care in this great and opportunistic country that we love. If you are labeled greedy or castigated for not supporting the Christian principles that many insist this country was founded on and should be run by, then perhaps you should check and see how well your “principles” align with the Biblical teachings and societal admonitions. If anyone insults you for earning your own way they are wrong. If you insult others for expecting you to pay your fair share of taxes that might even go to programs you do not support, then yes expect insults in return should be expected because THAT is not the American way. We are a collective and when needed we stand together even as we embrace our individuality and individual freedoms. The great societal experiment you lament is us, and we are a great society because of us. It is more open-minded and kind-hearted to want to support a civil and successful society even to the point of your own sacrifice IMO.
I beg to differ, we are experiencing the very thing that America has historically stood for. We are one, we stand or fall together, we sacrifice for the greater good, we work to defeat all enemies, foreign and domestic, we uphold and cherish the founding documents and we hold sacred the promise and challenge within them. A new regime in Congress and the White House does not change what this country fundamentally is. It enhances and expands the story of this nation as a rich and diverse tapestry of the progression of man.
I also cannot believe that you even attempt to say that it is greed that motivates people to want to insure a safety net and level of decency in the lives of those less blessed but no less worthy. If you think that the people in public housing on public assistance have it so cushy, you should try living on food stamps for a month like that reporter did, or move into the projects for a month or two. Their “lifestyle” is not comparable to nor as secure and affirming as any of ours and I cannot fathom where you get the information to make the comparison in the first place. Since NONE of us succeed in a vacuum, I will ignore that you believe yourself or any other person who is blessed to be able to work and earn what they have to be so superior to the less fortunate in our society. If you ONLY meant the welfare cheats, those who refuse to work at all and the frauds who scam disability, you should have said so instead of tarring a whole group as being beneath contempt.
Yes, Kennedy was a Democrat…..who cut taxes because he believed it would stir growth.
Incredible post, Sandi.
all we are asking is to read the bill..how hard is that. it could’ve been read and explained to the entire country by now instead of going thru all of this garbage. well we have copies now and it is being read and what we have been saying is true…
pammala, THERE IS NO BILL.
To the collective you: There are proposals of bills on the table and none have gotten to the point of being in the voting stage, reconciliation stage or threat of passing stage. You are quoting from a working offer and condemning it with misinformation and misstated claims and screaming at ever person to “read the bill”, “shut up and let you talk”, “we don’t want government run health care, but leave my Medicare and VA benefits alone”. When there is a bill, I will read it (not in depth, because unlike many of you, I elect my Representative and I live with the consequences so sweating the details is not my job. I support health care reform as long overdue and very necessary for the health of this country and that is what I elected Obama, Warner, Webb, & Perriello to do. Any single vote does not get you especial access or input (unless you are very wealthy or a lobbyist, that is). I have contacted my Representatives and told them what I want and that is the extent of my responsibility to them and to you.
Pammala,
No, most of what opponents are claiming about the bill is false, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly. For instance, above you say:
READ THE BILL
we will be paying for illegals, late term abortions, forced into end of life counseling. at a young age of 65….that isnt fear mongering people it is WHAT IS IN THIS BILL READ IT!
Of that list, only the part about paying for abortions is true. The rest is all incorrect.
Dan,
Both sides point out “facts” of the bill and claim them as true.
It’s gotten to the point that no one knows what true or not anymore.
all versions of this bill are no good for this country
Sandi, I don’t recall mentioning anything about Christianity. Are you saying we should support government run health care because it’s the Christian thing to do? If so, how does that jibe with the whole separation of church and state thing?
BTW, though I will readily acknowledge that you are a master of rhetoric, try not to get so carried away that you distort the facts. You vehemently insist to pammala that THERE IS NO BILL. But if there is no bill, what is that thing Congress is considering? Even your friends over at the Huffington Post acknowledge that there is a bill.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/14/health-care-bill-released_n_232206.html
Perhaps you are confusing bills and laws. You know, any senator or representative can introduce a ‘bill’ which is simply a proposal for a law. There is a great episode of ‘Schoolhouse Rock’ that explains the process. While it will not be a law until passed, there most certainly is a healthcare bill under consideration.
Dan, thanks for the info. I wasn’t aware that the healthcare bill was going to provide a back door for the approval and funding of late term abortions.
C,
Is abortion not a medical procedure that’s currently covered by many insurance policies? Anyway, the bill does nothing to change when late-term abortions can be approved.
Would someone please enlighten me about the upside to government-run health insurance? While you’re at it, would you also share with me the reason why Congress isn’t seeing to it that HR 3200 contains a provision requiring Congress to sign up for it themselves?
Sandi, your comment, “we work to defeat all enemies, foreign and domestic” has me wondering…who exactly is “we”?
Yes or no question: are you, Sandi Saunders, willing to give up your life to defeat said enemies?
Frank,
“Would someone please enlighten me about the upside to government-run health insurance”
The biggest upside is that government is not a profit-seeking corporation. If properly administered, government health care would cost us ONLY the medical expenses + the administrative costs. No extra skimmed off to pay obscene salaries to insurance company executives, or dividends to the stockholders.
Another advantage is coverage for pre-existing conditions, which private insurance can’t afford to do; and maybe, equal premiums for everybody, without risk-based adjustments.
There is no possible justification for allowing abortions to covered by the government. I am thinking that will be a deal-breaker for some Congressmen, both Democrat and Republican with a conservative bent.
If you think the government can run some business because they can eliminate high salaries and profit need only look at the postal service to see how the government can run things into the ditch. Something so simple as sorting the mail and finding the street and house number has turned in to a massive bureaucracy with layer upon layer of management, crushingly excessive benefit costs and billions of dollars of loss every year because of unionization and it is subject to the influence of congressional meddling for their on political purposes. Do we want to turn health care over to that? Wait until lobbiests get ahold of this.
Still no solutions. What is the problem?
Actually Dan, my insurance only covers medically necessary abortions, not the “oops I really wish I would have been more careful” kind undertaken solely for the sake of convenience. My plan rightly considers that to be an elective procedure. It would be interesting to know if the government plan is going to require coverage for all abortions.
Oh and allen, if you’ll look closely you’ll see the Dem plan isn’t much of a solution either. Get a chance to re-read that election code yet?
Solutions?
Just say no. That solves everything. Doesn’t it?
Ed H.
Thanks for the answer to the first question. Well said….and, unless the answer to the second part is anything but “our elected officials/Congress WILL enroll in the plan”, then I have to think that the concept behind your answer to the first question is wishful thinking.
I also don’t believe it is conceivable that the answer you provide to the first question will actually occur UNLESS the answer to the second question puts “them” in the same boat as the rest of us. If they can’t put THEIR faith in it, why should you or I? Furthermore, I think if THEY do enroll in the plan, then the cost of such a plan will certainly reach into the pockets (probably very deep into those pockets)of the middle class.
allen the problem is that very few actually want a solution.
For many there is no problem and for those that can see some hint of potential problem they don’t want no damned government plan to come in and change everything especially when that plan is coming from them no good liberal democrats.
Even those from the left and center who see the need for change have very significant differences in how to even approach the problem.. let alone the details of those approaches.
meanwhile you get the chattering nabobs on teevee telling the uninformed what to think which is that very few actually want a solution; and so on.
“Just say no. That solves everything. Doesn’t it?”
I’ll assume, then, that you’re OK with having a bill rushed through before people have a real chance to understand it.
Mr. Ramsey, did I accuse you of mentioning Christianity? I thought your stance was far from it, in fact. I do not believe supporting a program or law because it jibes with my Christian belief is a violation of the “separation of Church and state”, but you feel free to make that argument if you like.
I appreciate that you deem me some “master of rhetoric”, but the truth is that there are at least 5 versions of bills floating around in the ether of Congress and that none of them have been submitted for more than consideration, discussion, and since they are not in session, any action. The Town Hall Meetings were to be for the Representatives to discuss the bills under consideration and remove what people do not support, compromise on what people can and get the best bill possible with as much input as is possible for the House and Senate to debate, vote on and send to Reconciliation (you know, how a bill becomes a law 101). While I forget the audience here must have every minute detail explained or they cry foul, I think you know well what I meant and that I was factually correct. There is no one bill that should be quoted and eviscerated because the proposals are not even set in ink at this point, much less “stone”. Even if there was one bill, the misinformation, shout downs, protests and distortions used to scare people already as jumpy as a cat at a rocker convention is a shame beyond measure, but fear, while ugly, is certainly a tried and true Republican tactic.
Very true MrR. They are scared to death of a workable solution because that would have a huge impact on elections for the future.
Okay, one more time on the election code, Ramsey. “He shall be allowed to vote after signing a statement, subject to felony penalties for false statements.” What do they need to do beyond making it a felony for giving a false statement on voter eligibility?
“Oh and allen, if you’ll look closely you’ll see the Dem plan isn’t much of a solution either.” I’m all ears Ramsey. I know people without insurance who will settle for “not much of a solution” as opposed to no solution.
One more time… during ALL the years when the Republicans controlled Congress and especially the years when they controlled the Whitehouse… exactly how many healthcare reform bills were offered?
Thats right… ZERO.
Be sure to beaar this undisputable fact when considering the johnny come latleys to the topic and their “ideas” to amend the bill.
“I know people without insurance who will settle for “not much of a solution” as opposed to no solution.”
Why don’t they have insurance allen?
That’s because the Republicans did not want to screw up the best medical care in the world. You don’t need to reform things that work. Attempts to limit malpractice awards was dismissed by the lawyer in Congress. Especially former Democrat Senator and VP Candidate John Edwards whose baby momma has been testifying in a fraud case involving him.
“The free market system, which is ruled by greed, is indefensible with logic”
Allen Bunch
Supply and demand rule the free market economy.
“C. Ramsey, I find it more than a little ironic that you use a quote from a Democrat to start your lecture”
(Sandi saunders)
John F. Kennedy, if alive today, would be considered a right-wing extremist by the Left. AND, this is NOT about wanting the needy to be taken care of. This is about individual LIBERTY.
The whole “THERE IS NO BILL” tactic is a clever one…because it is TRUE that there isn’t really a final BILL. But, we KNOW from the House bill (that I posted) what Democrats want. We are condemning the BILL (or ideas), as it is WRITTEN, not with your talking point “misinformation”.
“unlike many of you, I elect my Representative and I live with the consequences so sweating the details is not my job”
Sandi, you just lost credibility in my estimation. Unintended consequences? Who cares. WOW. You sound like the Democrat Senator who said the bill was TOO BIG to read.
Ed, “If properly administered”, THERE is the problem (of many). Do people forget that the POSTAL SERVICE is Bankrupt?
Amen to Frank! Why won’t Congress sign up for it themselves?
Patrick, Thanks for your service to our country!
There is a BETTER way to take care of the smaller percentage of people out there that are NOT currently covered or unhappy with their current care.
We don’t have to further enslave the MAJORITY to get it done.
I have some questions for our leftsist pals here and THEIR Democrat reps:
1) Will illegals be covered under this plan? Yes or No, no obfuscating.
2) Will all of Congress be leading by example and using the Public Option, if there is one?
3) When health care rationing begins (it will have to, it is in EVERY country with Socilaized medicine) what should we tell our elederly relatives who really want to LIVE a while longer, maybe to see there grandchild get married?
4) Is MY money going to be used for others to have abortions? Period. Yes or No.
There are SO many to ask, but start with these.
Also, it appears the PUBLIC OPTION is being pulled from the discussion. Democrats see that it won’t work. It’s a nice start.
Sandi, I asked you a question in post #52. Did you miss it or just ignoring it?
I thought this was on point, wanted to share it.
Charles Krauthamer nails the ObamaScare simply on the facts:
“… today’s ruling Democrats propose to fix our extremely high-quality (but inefficient and therefore expensive) health-care system with 1,000 pages of additional curlicued complexity — employer mandates, individual mandates, insurance company mandates, allocation formulas, political payoffs and myriad other conjured regulations and interventions — with the promise that this massive concoction will lower costs.
“This is all quite mad. It creates a Rube Goldberg system that simply multiplies the current inefficiencies and arbitrariness, thus producing staggering deficits with less choice and lower-quality care. That’s why the administration can’t sell Obamacare.”
The CBO agrees with him as well. It WON’T save any money.
I have three more serious questions for anyone SUPPORTING this Bill:
1) One very big question is, should U.S. taxpayers be required to pay for health insurance for millions of alien immigrants (already asked above) and people who make enough to pay for their own coverage but choose not to?
2) Can’t Congress and the 0bama Administration devise a way to cover the “chronically uninsured” without upending a system that covers close to 90 percent of the population and with which nearly 70 percent of those covered tell pollsters they are satisfied?
3) Why is there no talk about tort reform to curb outlandish malpractice awards?
Patrick #52. Yes, in a heartbeat. If you want to inquire as to whether I served in the military, the answer is no. I am and have always been a poor physical specimen, but I respect the people who can and do serve their country that way.
T. Witten, if I lost credibility with you, that just makes us even. You present talking points and then decry them, you present misinformation then dare call someone else on it. As for the “ObamaScare”, I cannot believe that people who have protesters and former governors taking about “death panels” can BEGIN to accuse anyone else of scare tactics. Glass houses, folks! As usual your anger, arrogance and yes, partisan politics are completely clouding your reason and good sense IMO. We have people who are suffering and struggling mightily against a completely immovable object and we have the power to help them, the economy, the GDP and the future generations and we should not because it will interfere with the monopoly and control of corporate interests? Sad!
T Witten, Yep. That’s what Democrats do. They take a bankrupt inefficient ineffective system like Medicare and multiply it by ten. The reason the breathtakingly obvious cost cutter like tort reform isn’t mentioned is because the DEMOCRATS HAVE NO DESIRE OR INTENTION OF CUTTING COSTS. Effectiveness and cost reduction are non-factors. If they were, Medicare would have died a slow painful death decades ago.
Sandi, you didn’t answer the first part of my question. Who is the “we” in your comment, “we work to defeat all enemies, foreign and domestic”?
T Witten, I am an unelected spokesperson who has not read any of the bills proposed in entirety but I will give it a shot:
1) Will illegals be covered under this plan?
YES. I cannot imagine a plan that does not address the huge problem of illegal aliens and the unemployed seeking health care at the ER’s in this country.
2) Will all of Congress be leading by example and using the Public Option, if there is one?
Why don’t you try renegotiating the pay and benefits for Congress. I will certainly agree that they get far too much for far too little, no matter the side of the aisle. It just rubs a little more when you are opposed. I can back them all getting onto another public financed plan.
3) When health care rationing begins (it will have to, it is in EVERY country with Socilaized medicine) what should we tell our elederly relatives who really want to LIVE a while longer, maybe to see there grandchild get married?
Since health care rationing is and has been a fact of life for many years now, I would suggest they continue as they always have. The Death Panels will be humane I am sure
4) Is MY money going to be used for others to have abortions? Period. Yes or No.
YES, I can imagine that will be included in some form or fashion as the vast majority of the upper class really do support the abortion of the lower classes they are just afraid to say it out loud.
1) One very big question is, should U.S. taxpayers be required to pay for health insurance for millions of alien immigrants (already asked above) and people who make enough to pay for their own coverage but choose not to?
Answered above on the aliens, yes we will continue to pay as we do now. But no, from what I understand EVERYONE will have to pay what they are able to pay with subsidies for whomever cannot pay all or any.
2) Can’t Congress and the 0bama Administration devise a way to cover the “chronically uninsured” without upending a system that covers close to 90 percent of the population and with which nearly 70 percent of those covered tell pollsters they are satisfied?
I dispute your figures, but sure they could have, if the Repbs in Congress had agreed to come to the table and offered to actually work on solving only the most pressing of the issues, it probably had a good size window of opportunity but that was closed by the vitriol and Party of No.
3) Why is there no talk about tort reform to curb outlandish malpractice awards.
My guess is that because it is such a small percentage of the overall costs, and most Congress people are lawyers or suck up to their lobbyists, therefore they will not cripple such a generous industry. At least that is my take from past Congress’ actions.
Patrick, #74, yet again, over my simple little head…The WE in my comments was collective America. The history I have read always points to the brave and self-sacrificing Americans here at home and on the fronts who sucked it up and did what we needed to do. While I agree that there would be riots in the street if we had bread lines and rationing cards today, America has pulled together when needed and I believe would do so again to some extent. Of course the vitriol, distrust and disdain was not so high nor so well stoked back then.
Patrick, laid off.
Sandi, I’m sure that what goes on in your head is far from simple. My question was asked for a reason…thanks for answering it.
Sandi, in #74 you said: “1) Will illegals be covered under this plan?
YES. I cannot imagine a plan that does not address the huge problem of illegal aliens and the unemployed seeking health care at the ER’s in this country.”
Why must illegals be included? Why should someone who is here illegally have their healthcare be paid for with taxpayer money?
Sandi, you obviously have all your WH talking points in front of you.
#1 – The Republicans were never asked to participate. Don’t you remember “I Won”? It was right there in front of you in black & white.
#2 – As a student of history, not just US, I have to say that you sure do use the facts to your advantage. Breadlines were in the result of the Great Depression and rationing was the result of the war effort needed scarce items to fight the Axis and the Japanese. The current protests can be likened to the beginning of the Revolution in this country. The Boston Tea Party took place in response to another tax on tea that was imported to the Colonies, thus, the Boston Tea Party made it’s way into our history books.
#3 – The vitriol, distrust, and disdain you speak of has been showered upon Conservatives to the point that the word is now used as a derogatory.
The fact of the matter is this, the current occupant of the WH is, has been and always will be a bold-faced liar. Truth is an inconvenience. It is all a matter of perception and I Won perceives that he is always correct.
BTW…there is a little matter of Constitutional rights that is being tread on daily by the WH. But I’m sure that isn’t of any concern to you, is it?
Sandi, Thanks for TRYING to answer my qestions…but I still give you an F+
At least you stand by your lack of judgement and flawed philosophy. More than I can say for most.
I have more question fo you or any others….
A) Why do we need to increase spending on health care by at least $1.6 trillion and steal prosperity from our children and grandchildren when we spend nearly twice per person what other industrialized nations spend on health care?
B) Will you vote for a public option that requires taxpayer-funded abortion? (Sandi, I know you would…this is aimed at Reps, because they wont admit it)
C) Will you vote for a plan that will allow a board of politicians and bureaucrats to override decisions made by you and your doctor?
D) If you support a “comparative effectiveness” board, what qualifies you, as a politician, to practice medicine? Have you delivered health care to a single person, much less entire classes of people you claim to represent, such as the poor, the uninsured, or children?
E) How will a government-run public option perform better than other failing government programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Indian Health Care?
Danny, where are you? Why don’t YOU try to answer some of these? You’re part of the government media, you get their orders every day.
People…really this type of venue can be fun, mean, helpful, etc. Please read the Bill that is out there right now to be READ. Make up your OWN mind.
The Democrats WON’T answer these questions HONESTLY, why?
I’ve been posting on The Roanoke Times for a couple years now. With the same email address. Why did I just receive this email (below)? Am I being reported to the Fishstapo?
————————————–
We require a valid e-mail address to post to The RT. Please verify your address by replying to this message.
Thanks,
Dan
Dan Radmacher
Editorial Page Editor
The Roanoke Times
(540) 981-3356
“Actually Dan, my insurance only covers medically necessary abortions, not the “oops I really wish I would have been more careful” kind undertaken solely for the sake of convenience”
Wow, have to love the judgemental tone there. I was completely unaware that it was the job of bean counters at BCBS et al to sit and make “moral” judgements when a woman and her doctor decide on a procedure. I guess we can’t trust Obama to make this sort of decisions…we’re supposed to let some second rate CPA make them for us. Glad I’m clear on that.
The Roanoke Times doesn’t realize that there is software that verifies email addresses.
So they end up spending time manually verifying email addresses and have less time to verify information in their stories.
Actually, no you have not been posting here for a couple of years with the same e-mail address. A search of our comments shows that you’ve been posting for three days, with all your posts on health care reform. We’ve run across several bogus e-mail addresses from such recent posters.
TWitten…I’m more than happy to address these questions!
A) Why do we need to increase spending on health care by at least $1.6 trillion and steal prosperity from our children and grandchildren when we spend nearly twice per person what other industrialized nations spend on health care?
We already spend double what the rest of the world is and STILL have a substantial population lacking coverage. I also have to wonder what sort of “prosperity” we’re handing down to our children et al, in a country where one serious illness can mean homelessness. Shallow at best.
B) Will you vote for a public option that requires taxpayer-funded abortion? (Sandi, I know you would…this is aimed at Reps, because they wont admit it)
Yes. It’s no one’s friggen business what goes on between a woman and her doctor. I get stuck paying for a bunch of other garbage (Iraq, for example) I’d like a refund on. Welcome to democracy…sometimes you get stuck paying for stuff you don’t like. You can always move.
C) Will you vote for a plan that will allow a board of politicians and bureaucrats to override decisions made by you and your doctor?
Um…who do you think is making these decisions now? I’d suggest you review some of the testimony given to Congress by “health specialists” from the health insurance companies.
D) If you support a “comparative effectiveness” board, what qualifies you, as a politician, to practice medicine? Have you delivered health care to a single person, much less entire classes of people you claim to represent, such as the poor, the uninsured, or children?
Ditto. And I seriously doubt our politicians will be sitting on these boards themselves. Politicians are in charge of administering plenty of things they haven’t engaged in themselves. If they were only allowed to legislate based on their own specialties, they’d be doing nothing but fine tuning our legal system ( as most of them are attorneys).
E) How will a government-run public option perform better than other failing government programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Indian Health Care?
Define how they’re failing? Ask an old person with no other insurance if Medicare is “failing”. Ask a poor single mother who uses Medicaid for her children if it’s “failing”. Insufficient funding and less than perfect oversight don’t mean they’re “failing”. It means they need to be adjusted. They’re the same people that oversee our military, FYI, and surely to imply that our military is “failing” would be heresy.
Next question?
I dont know where you are getting your info from…although the company I work for DOES have a couple domain names.
You can see postings from this address all the way back to 2005 I would imagine. Check the message boards. Of course I have a screen name for those.
I can assure you, I LIVE here and while I SHOULD be paid to comment for the GOP, I am not.
The blog software is separate from the message board software (one of the many inconveniences with our current system). I can only check for e-mail addresses on The RT blog, so I’ll take your word for it.
Maybe if all the people who bash here on a regular basis but never bother to subscribe to The Roanoke Times, would do so, the RTEB could afford the snazzy software that weeds through the posers.
THANKS KRISTEN, I could not have done it half as well as you! I appreciate the back up.
TWitten…I’m more than happy to address these questions!
A) Why do we need to increase spending on health care by at least $1.6 trillion and steal prosperity from our children…
“We already spend double what the rest of the world is and STILL have a substantial population lacking coverage. I also have to wonder what sort of “prosperity” we’re handing down to our children et al, in a country where one serious illness can mean homelessness. Shallow at best.”
So, you want to double down on inefficiency, or take it to a higher level. As we all know, the government is a model of efficiency.
B) Will you vote for a public option that requires taxpayer-funded abortion?
“Yes. It’s no one’s friggen business what goes on between a woman and her doctor. Welcome to democracy…sometimes you get stuck paying for stuff you don’t like. You can always move.”
Ok, so you want a board of Bureacrats deciding on your Health Issues for you. Sweet. We live in a Democratic Republic ma’am, if this were a PURE Democracy… abortion would be illegal altogether. Since Canada already has the health care YOU want, why dont you move?
C) Your answers to C and D were fair in comparison…remember this isnt an all or nothing debate. Who do you think will be on these boards? More Czars?
E) How will a government-run public option perform better than other failing government programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Indian Health Care?
“Define how they’re failing? Ask an old person with no other insurance if Medicare is “failing”. Ask a poor single mother who uses Medicaid for her children if it’s “failing”. Insufficient funding and less than perfect oversight don’t mean they’re “failing”. It means they need to be adjusted. They’re the same people that oversee our military, FYI, and surely to imply that our military is “failing” would be heresy.”
Are you serious? I think your “adjustment” advice could be better used for our CURRENT health care setup, as opposed to destroying it altogether.
The govt. makes things bigger, more expensive and LESS effective.
TWitten, you pick and choose the points you prefer to address. Just endlessly chanting “Government is inefficient! Government is inefficient!” offers nothing.
Sandi, on no planet have you ever earned less than an A. Anytime.
I addressed all of your points, even said a few were fair.
By your last post, I would have to assume that YOU think the government is EFFICIENT.
Do you really believe that?
Just read a new poll: 32% Favor Single-Payer Health Care
57% Oppose Single Payer Health Care
I guess that means WE win…
Single-payer is not even an option under discussion in Congress.
Kristen, I’ve summarized your responses to T Witten’s questions:
Question A. “Because our failed health care system costs double what other industrialized nation pays, we should increase that vast amount by another $1.6 trillion dollars.”
Question B. “Abortion is a decision made between a patient and her doctor.”
Question C. “You idiot, since when are decisions made by a patient or doctor?”
Question D. “Even though Medicare is rife with fraud (Need a Powerchair?)scheduled to go bankrupt within a decade it’s a resounding success.”
“Supply and demand rule the free market economy.”
Who are you trying to impress, Witten? There is no such thing as a free market. Supply is always manipulated to the advantage of the suppliers. Unfortunately, you are right in one respect. The supply of money in the pockets of of consumers is no longer adequate to support our economy. The fat cats are still trying to figure how to keep all the money for themselves and still have customers.
The govt. makes things bigger, more expensive and LESS effective than free market products like AIG, Lehman Bros., GM, etc. Need I go on?
Suzie, I liked your take on C, but had I phrased it that way my response would surely have hit the ether never to be seen.
I’ve weighed in on that powerchair garbage before and at length. Nothing that is paid for with insurance/public dollars should be allowed to be advertised. If a patient needs it, a doctor will prescribe it; patients shouldn’t be allowed to circumvent their PCP and bill the system on demand.
I would more than welcome a moratorium on public pharm advertising. I think it’s disgusting, and if this would make its way into Obama’s plan I would be thrilled to support it.
“The fat cats are still trying to figure how to keep all the money for themselves and still have customers.”
Exactly. Hence, the Govt. takeover of Health Care, The “stimulus”, etc.
Mr. Radmacher,
You just said “Single-payer is not even an option under discussion in Congress.”
You say that like you KNOW it. Which is hilarious.
Of COURSE they aren’t actually DISCUSSING it aloud. But, Single-payer is the the short-term goal for the Democrat party. (for those who haven’t been paying attention)
0bama has SAID it himself on VIDEO. Many others in the party have also said the same thing. Some won’t sign on unless Single-payer is in there.
I have another question.
Why, when this issue was originally brought forth by 0bama, he referred to it as Health CARE Reform…but, NOW, he keeps referring to it as Health INSURANCE Reform…why the change?
Kristen, It’s pretty tough sledding following your responses to T Witten’s questions. If America is already paying twice as much for health care, how is the solution to pile even more spending on it, no questions asked? I also notice in Question B you think abortions should be between a patient and her doctor, then on the very next question, you say the patient and her doctor don’t make decisions. Which is it? Finally, how can a system like Medicare be on the verge of bankruptcy, yet you think its a resounding success?
“What do they need to do beyond making it a felony for giving a false statement on voter eligibility?”
The short answer is that they need to REQUIRE that everyone show a picture ID to verify that they are who they say they are in order to vote. I know I’m un-Christian in Sandi’s eyes and I’ll freely admit to being cynical, but I have no doubt that someone who went to the polls intending to commit election fraud would have no qualms about signing an affidavit saying he was someone else. (Hint-That may be why ACORN registered all those dead people to vote, so unscrupulous frauds could vote and no one would challenge their vote.)
“I know people without insurance who will settle for “not much of a solution” as opposed to no solution.”
I also know people, people with and without insurance who work and pay taxes and are not really excited about the idea of paying a trillion dollars for “not much of a solution.”
Editors of Roanoke Times Hostile At ObamaCare concerns
-
See blog items for a view of how biased, slanted and unprofessional the Editors of the Roanoke Times are on the healthcare subject:
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2009/08/editors-of-roanoke-times-hostile-at.html
-
LBHagen@roanokeslant.org
-
I also know people, people with and without insurance who work and pay taxes and are not really excited about the idea of paying a trillion dollars for “not much of a solution.”
Comment by C Ramsey — August 10, 2009 @ 9:45 pm
Yes, until they or their children get sick.
Jeez Lars…got spare time much? Hilarious.
I also know people, people with and without political affiliations who work and pay taxes and are not really excited about the idea of paying a trillion dollars for “a war of convenience.” But it sure didn’t stop that train either.
Good job, Lars. Bookmarked.
“Yes, until they or their children get sick.”
Got a roof over your head and food on the table? Then spend what you need to for health insurance. Do you have to have a TV? Internet? A cell phone? Absolutely not…that’s why they are called luxuries.
Why should someone who has lived and planned responsibly pay for someone who has not?
“Why should someone who has lived and planned responsibly pay for someone who has not?” Well Patrick, if we are some sort of Christian Nation as many insist on a regular basis when we discuss abortion or the Ten Commandments in the courthouse, then we are to do the old ‘if you have two coats, give one away’ mentality and be your brother’s keeper, lead by example, turn the other cheek. Which is it, we cannot be so shy and retiring, either we are a Christian Nation that “takes care of it’s own” or we are not. I am all for admitting the truth about America, I am just not sure that you “bootstraps” folks are. You simply cannot have it both ways. If you believe in the Bible and the basic Christian teachings, they apply to “the least of us” as well as the “most of us”.
I cannot imagine a life lived with the attitude you present, but that is not my cross to bear. There are plenty of people who live and plan responsibly and still end up in dire straights. There are plenty of people without a cell phone, the internet or cable TV (ergo the need for the converter boxes…) AND they work every day AND they STILL cannot afford health care or health insurance. Are you really so intent on punishing the “unworthy” that you will punish the worthy as well? Sad.
Yes Lars, feed the frenzy, there is not nearly enough hatred and distrust in this world. Maybe you will be the “johnny appleseed” for planting the seeds of discord in a community, just what we all need.
Does it ever really occur to any of you that people are suffering in this community? Does it ever occur to you that some truly minor discomfort might be worth the self esteem of knowing that some child might not have to go to bed hungry or in pain because of your small sacrifice? Does it ever occur to you that this reform might not enrich you with dollars (time will tell) but with the promise of a better tomorrow for that neighbor you are supposed to love as yourself?
I think that is a gross over-generalization Patrick. There was a lenghty period where I did have a roof over my head and a modest amount of food on the table while I was working. My employer did not make any insurance available to me until I became a full-time classified employee, and purchasing private insurance on my own was far too cost prohibitive. I did not have cable or a cell phone at the time either (actually no real luxury in a one-room basement studio for that matter), just simple dial-up internet and a local-only phone. The cost for such a plan would have been about as much as my rent for my apartment, a cost that I simply could not afford at the time. I got very lucky in that I was in good health and did not need a doctor for anything, and was able to home-treat for a lot of minor issues. Not everyone who cannot afford their own insurance or get it through their employer is irresponsible, and not everyone who has their own insurance acts all that responsible either.
“I also know people, people with and without political affiliations who work and pay taxes and are not really excited about the idea of paying a trillion dollars for “a war of convenience.” But it sure didn’t stop that train either.”
Not that I agree or disagree with the “war” comment. But, when did two wrongs start making a RIGHT?
I want to remnind everyone here of a few things.
0bama is supposedly one of the most POPULAR Presidents ever, if you read or watch any of the state-run media out there.
The Democrats OWN Congress, they don’t need a SINGLE Republican to get this done, yesterday.
What’s the hold-up?
The HOLD-UP is that they CANNOT and WILL NOT be honest about their plans. It would KILL them politically. 0bama is supposedly a great orator (I’ve never agreed with that), but he just can’t seem to EXPLAIN, in REAL, clear terms what his plan is. It’s always the same platitudes and generalities aimed at 5th graders.
“We can’t allow our children to go without health care”
We AREN’T, by the way, but that beside the point.
He KNOWS he cannot be honest and it comes out when he speaks on the topic. He looks PHONY.
The Dems need COVER on this, that’s why they want GOP support. So, when it all goes to hades, they can’t point over at Lindsey Freakin’ Graham and Olympia Snow and say, “THEY did it also!”
Bottom line…this IS 0bama’s either way. And they could have had it done by now.
Sandi, If you really want to help the poor, stop trying to foil the rich. They’re the ones who give most of the money to all these charities. Many charities serving the desperately poor and homeless are down in donations 20%. I realize your apparent hatred for the rich blinds you to the harm that’s being done to the poor, but you have to look at the big picture.
Suzie, I am looking at the big picture. I do not hate rich people, many of them are Democrats and Liberals so that would be very self defeating. You can make that charge all you want but it won’t stick. This proposal does not harm the rich and I resent the class warfare frame you are trying to put on my position. It is not true and it is not fair.
As to the question of why this is not done, T. Witten, it is not done because Congress is not in session. It will get done in the fall and if needed we will get it done without Republican votes, same as we won the elections without Republican votes. Yes, we will take the credit from those willing to give it and blame from those willing to give that. So what else is new, it is called politics. You do not wish success on anything Obama, and that is plane. Success, like good works is an eye of the beholder evidently. Health Care Reform will pass. It may well be not as good as it could have been, it may well be only the beginning of the overhaul, it may be without the help of people tasked with legislating even when they are in the minority, (again, what else is new), and it may well include things we could have compromised on, but it will pass.
Sandi-
Your “reasoning” validates many of my preconceived notions.
I want AMERICA to succeed. I want it to succeed in the manner that it has for the past 200+ years. America needs to continue to be the land of liberty that it has been. This proposed bill takes away our liberties.
I am for making our Health Care better. This is NOT the way to do it.
Nobody touched my question about 0bama’s change from Health Care to Health Insurance. I guess everybody knows why he did it.
The Republicans ignored health care when they had a chance to do something about it…that’s bad enough. What’s worse is that they want to refuse to let anyone ELSE do something about it.
The party of “no” rocks on.
Donations dropped because portfolios dropped. Nothing to do with health care.
“First of all, you CAN keep your current coverage as long as you like. If the coverage changes, the new program will have to be certified as meeting the minimum standards set out in the law. That’s it.” Comment by Dan Radmacher
Not necessarily. This is what supporters of the bill are claiming, but I actually read the part of the bill that pertains to this. It wasn’t easy, I have a slight headache now.
You can keep you current coverage, as is, for now. The bill defines “Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage”, which is any health care plan created prior to January 1st, 2013 (for some convoluted reason the year 2013 in the bill is referred to only as Y1). After 2013, your health insurance plan must meet the requirements of a “qualified health benefits plan”, as determined by the government. If it does not, the health insurance provider has a grace period (defined by the Health Choices Commissioner, whoever that shall be)to bring their plan up to speed, or you will be forced to find a plan that meets government standards. That will mean either purchasing an individual plan that qualifies, or taking the public option.
Your coverage doesn’t have to change to not be qualified after 2013…in fact if it DOESN’T change to meet the requirements of a QHBP, you will not be able to keep it. This is in the actual text of the bill.
I won’t bore you right now with what the requirements of a QHBP are (truthfully I haven’t managed to plow through all of them just yet), but from what I’ve read so far, I know that most health insurance companies right now are NOT going to be very willing to accommodate, some of the requirements could put them out of business. I know no one is going to cry about that, poor poor mistreated insurance companies, but you realize that leaves you with only the public option.
The GOP isn’t keeping ANYone from doing anything…the PEOPLE are making their voices be heard on the matter. Dishonest and cowardly Democrats are the people in control of this whole spectacle.
As I write this, 0bama is telling a gym-full of political friends what he THINKS the people want to hear.
If this is SUCH a great plan (the invisible, yet to be written plan)…why is he having to sell it?
Better yet, BECAUSE their technically is NO plan right now…why should ANYone sign on to anything he says?
I don’t know about you, but I like to know what I am buying before I sign on that line.
Everything about this stinks. 0bama gets smaller and smaller every time he gets out there stumbling around, trying to avoid actually saying anything of substance.
You have to admire how the major changes the bill will bring about will take place after Obama’s term in office is over…the next administration will get blamed for whatever the resulting fallout is.
VT Hokie I am sure that Obama fully expects to serve a second term and oversee the execution of this plan.
Perhaps Kristen, but the bill calls for a lot of the changes to become permanent effective 5 years after Y1, which means 2017, at which time Obama will definitely no longer be in office.
“I know that most health insurance companies right now are NOT going to be very willing to accommodate, some of the requirements could put them out of business. I know no one is going to cry about that, poor poor mistreated insurance companies, but you realize that leaves you with only the public option.”
Comment by VT Hokie
THIS is exactly why 0bama CHANGED his tune…from Health CARE Reform to Health INSURANCE Reform.
Demonizing insurance companies is far easier than demonizing nurses and doctors.
And, as you said, they’ve set it up so that the providers will be at fault for NOT accomodating. The Dems WANT them out of business.
The people who are showing up at the town hall meetings KNOW this. It is the reason for their anger.
I’m no fan of insurance companies, but the utter DECEPTION and LYING that is occuring, at the highest levels of our government is beyond disturbing.
“Demonizing insurance companies is far easier than demonizing nurses and doctors.”
I wonder why that might be?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26664727/ A woman on the hook for $15K in hospital bills. I’m sure someone at IAC had a little something extra in THEIR envelope that week!
http://www.examiner.com/x-5738-St-Louis-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m8d10-Video–Idaho-fat-man-denial-of-cancer-treatment-proves-health-care-rationing-happening-already
The link labels itself. But we ALL KNOW that there’s no rationing of health care in our fine country today! Surely a publically held company with stock holders to suck to would never try to boost their bottom line by….oops…..saving money by…er….
Want more? I can post links like this until next week. I realize they’re ALL “isolated incidents”. After all, the King of Jordan was given EXCELLENT treatment here.
Heath insurance companies today, under the current system, routinely refuse to cover various medical expenses, which either prevents people from getting needed treatments or causes them to end up owing more than they can ever pay for same treatments. There are, as Kristen points out, many “isolate incidents” one could cite to support this.
So, someone out there please tell me, exactly what HR 3200 is going to do about that. Tell me how this bill fixes those problems.
There’s no need to artificially support the bottom line by denying treatment. With no stockholders to answer to, there’s no reason not to spend the money available in treatment for patients, instead of dividends and sweetheart deals for the executives.
I just went to my Doctor today at lunch. I asked her about this very issue. She said, “well, I don’t like having insurance companies deciding what treatments they will cover right now, BUT, I would much rather have it the way it is if the alternative is the GOVT deciding who gets what treatment.”
Its the same old “two-wrongs = right” argument. “Well, insurance companies are rationing…so why can’t the govt?”
“Bush made us go to war, I didnt vote for that”
The people don’t believe 0bama, as evidenced by recent polling data.
T Witten,
“…but the utter DECEPTION and LYING that is occuring, at the highest levels of our government is beyond disturbing.”
DECEPTION and LYING
See: “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.”
See: “The United State does not torture.”
See: “Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way.”
See: “If there’s a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is.”
See: “The worst of the worst.”
See: “I Can’t Recall.”
See: “No One Could Have Predicted…”
See: “If someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.”
See: “I will restore honor and dignity to the White House.”
See: “…roving wiretaps were available for chasing down drug lords. They weren’t available for chasing down terrorists, see?”
See: “The way I viewed it, if I can just put it in simple terms, is that one part of the FBI couldn’t tell the other part of the FBI vital information because of the law. And the CIA and the FBI couldn’t talk.”
See: “…there’s something called delayed-notification search warrants. … We couldn’t use these against terrorists [before the Patriot Act], but we could use against gangs.”
See: “Veterans are a priority of this administration . . . and that priority is reflected in my budget.”
See: “I propose larger Pell Grants for students who prepare for college with demanding courses in high school.”
See: “…we can proceed with tax relief without fear of budget deficits even if the economy softens.”
See: “My tax relief plan is a fair one, lowering the rate for all taxpayers.”
See: “Death Panels”
See: “To keep farms in the family, we are going to get rid of the death tax.”
See: “…tax cuts, starting with Kennedy, as we all know, increase revenues.”
See: “The GOP is the party of fiscal discipline.”
See: “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.”
I agree, T Witten.
The GOP fiscal discipline is one I can definitely agree with…they abandoned their conservative principles.
Which Left-wing website did you pull this from?
Sourcing would be nice…
Regardless, Bush is loving life in Crawford now. God bless him.
0bama has the job now…his LIES are what matter NOW. The people are starting to see through his facade. The polls are telling the story.
His approval hovers at 50%…0bamacare is at 32%
The Democrats can pass this on their own. They don’t NEED any GOP votes. Why didn’t they pass it before the break? What are they afraid of?
Oh yeah, I forgot, the PEOPLE don’t want it.
0bama OWNS this…and the people DON’T want it. Nice isn’t it.
See: “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.”
Steve
Are you saying the Democrats lied to us??
“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998
“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.” — Robert Byrd, October 2002
Even Obama’s Secretary of State says he had WMD’s
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
Henry,
“Are you saying the Democrats lied to us??”
Yep. Care to comment on the other deception and lying?
“The PUBLIC option is not your enemy…it is your friend, I believe. Uh uh…let me also address, uh, uh, a illegitimate concern that is being put forward…by those that are claiming that a PUBLIC option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system.”
0bama 6/09
“My commitment is to make sure that we’ve got UNIVERSAL Health Care, for all Americans by the end of my first term as President.”
“I would HOPE that we set up a system, uh, that…allows those who can’t go through their employer to access a FEDERAL system or a…state pool of some sort. But, I don’t think we are going to be able to ELIMINATE employer coverage IMMEDIATELY.
There’s going to be, potentially, some transition process. I can envision a decade out, or 15 years out, or 20 years out.”
0bama 3/07
“I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer Universal Health Care plan. THAT’s what I’d like to see.”
0bama 2003
These are all direct quotes from this guy. He’s SAID what he wants, in his OWN words. They HAVE to start with a PUBLIC option first…a GOVERNMENT-run option.
THEN they can move from there to single-payer.
Opponents are all focused on SINGLE-PAYER, SINGLE-PAYER…the Democrats and 0bama are waiting on that. They want the PUBLIC OPTION first…
The Public option is our focus right now.
T Witten, you appear to be confusing universal health care coverage with a single-payer system. They are not the same (though single-payer systems do generally offer universal coverage).
Kristen: “There’s no need to artificially support the bottom line by denying treatment. With no stockholders to answer to, there’s no reason not to spend the money available in treatment for patients, instead of dividends and sweetheart deals for the executives.”
True, there would be no need to deny treatment to make more money for shareholders. But how is this health plan being paid for? If at some point the government plan starts running out of money, THAT would be a reason to deny treatment.
Dan R. “T Witten, you appear to be confusing universal health care coverage with a single-payer system. They are not the same (though single-payer systems do generally offer universal coverage).”
Quote from Obama “”I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer Universal Health Care plan. THAT’s what I’d like to see.” – 0bama 2003
How is that confused? Obama calls is a SINGLE-PAYER universal health care plan. I see no confusion here. It’s pretty clear what he means.
Yes, VT, Obama has said that he would prefer a single-payer system. He has also said that it would be too traumatic of a transition:
“If I were starting a system from scratch, then I think that the idea of moving towards a single-payer system could very well make sense,” the president replied. “That’s the kind of system that you have in most industrialized countries around the world.
“The only problem is that we’re not starting from scratch. We have historically a tradition of employer-based healthcare. And although there are a lot of people who are not satisfied with their healthcare, the truth is, is that the vast majority of people currently get healthcare from their employers and you’ve got this system that’s already in place. We don’t want a huge disruption as we go into healthcare reform where suddenly we’re trying to completely reinvent one-sixth of the economy.”
When he has talked about universal coverage during the campaign for health care reform, he is NOT talking about single payer.
Alas.
And Barney Frank thinks a Public Option is the best way to Single Payer. I wonder what he’s talking about?
If at some point the government plan starts running out of money, THAT would be a reason to deny treatment.
Comment by VT Hokie — August 11, 2009 @ 5:03 pm
True, but I think we’re finding out that the government never actually runs out of money! And if the US government would truly go belly up and go into default, we’re in much bigger trouble than just our health care delivery.
“Sourcing would be nice…”
Right. Sourcing sort of like…”I just happened to pose this very question to my doctor today, and oddly enough my doctor agrees with my position verbatim!”
As for people not wanting health care reform…people elected health care reform. McCain lost. Obama won, running hard on reforming health care. This is exactly what people wanted.
“UnitedHealthcare CEO Stephen Hemsley owns $744,232,068 in unexercised stock options. CIGNA’s Edward Hanway spends his holidays in a $13 million beach house in New Jersey.”
This quote Kristen used is found in at least half a dozen liberal blogs. I doubt any of those people know how options work, but in order for options to have value, stock prices have to rise. Hemsley received most of his options, according to the original source, Forbes, in 2005 and 2006 when United was trading at $40 to $50 a share. Today, it’s at $27, which makes the options worthless as of this moment. Sorry a nagging little detail like this destroys the envy-mongerers’ straw puppy.
Then there is the matter of Edward Hanway and the $13 million beach home.” Gee, he doesn’t even own it. Just spends time in it. My family rented a pretty nice beach house at Myrtle Beach last year. Beach property expensive. This house might have been worth, I don’t know, a million? My husband isn’t a CEO, but for somebody earning a million or two a year like Hanway, renting a $13 million beach house doesn’t sound like that big a deal.
Ok Suzie…you don’t like that info? Try this.
http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/story/aetnas-ron-williams-ceo-compensation/2009-05-14
“Details: Williams earned $24,300,112 in total compensation for 2008″
Why do we need single-payer? Because, in the case of just Aetna, it would mean……$24 million more going towards actual patient health care and not fat pay envelopes.
Aetna and other companies which you can find for yourself. Before you begin wailing about “liberal sites”..this is actually a site for people in the industry.
. Edward Hanway – CIGNA
Total Compensation: $12,236,740
Details: Hanway took a significant pay cut from 2007 to 2008, due mainly to a drop off of more than $11 million in his non-equity incentive plan compensation. Still, his base salary of $1,142,885 surpasses that of Aetna’s Williams, and is supplemented by just over $3.6 million in option awards, and just over $820,000 in non-qualified deferred compensation earnings.
Read more: http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/story/cignas-h-edward-hanway-ceo-compensation/2009-05-14#ixzz0Ny9JTB9A
Hanway could surely have afforded to BUY that $13 mill house if he felt like it. Why is health insurance so expensive again? Again….millions that would be far better used towards getting the sick people healthy.
Suzie, in your zeal to make this about class warfare and hating the rich, you completely missed the point. Some people here are constantly snipping about Michele Obama’s shoes and handbags, the vacation plans, trips on the planes as being things that they should not do in a down economy, that they should not ask for us to sacrifice when they are not. So the POINT of http://sickforprofit.com/ is to show the money being made by the top health care insurance executives while they denied care, coverage and life saving procedures under the current system you all keep defending as the best. I have no problem with a gifted surgeon, heart specialist etc, making that kind of money, but an insurance executive? That is beyond the pale. That is if you people really believe that the folks at the top need to sacrifice when those below them are suffering as you have indicated. Guess I misunderstood, and that your problem is only with Obama not the wealthy or even the President. Wow, who could have seen that one coming?
Sandi
Check into the Democrats financial backer George Soros. See how he made his money. Then come and lecture us about other CEO’s.
Demonizing CEO’s is so 1980′s.
I dont understand why people wont leave this health care alone.
70% of americans dont want it touched while 93% of seniors dont
wont to screw with this. Dont you people get it. Americans
are not europeans or canadians. They want what they have and like it.
This is nothing more then more govt control.
Go ahead and vote it in. We will be glad to take the house back in 2010
and gains in the senate.
Kristen, Thanks for backing off your parroting of that ridiculous $744 billion figure for Hemsley. You really have to be careful when you rely on sites run by uneducated jealous hate-mongers. They can rob you of credibility. As far as Hanway’s salary, first $2 million or $3 million or $12 million is a drop in the bucket compared to $1.5 trillion. (I know it’s an awful lot of zeroes but bear with me.) You seem to be oblivious to the fact that any corporation or business has to be profitable in order to continue. You want CIGNA to give all of its profits to its customers. Great. If it did that, it would go belly up in a few months, thousands of people would lose jobs, and CIGNA would no longer be able to offer services that customers willingly pay for. In order for CIGNA or any corporation to serve people, it has to attract top leaders, and to do that, it has to pay competitive compensation. Liberals seem to think CEOs should work for minimum wage like they do. “I lift more crates than a CEO does during my shift. He just sits in his cushy office.”
Herb, have the respect to site your sources. Seniors already have socialized, universal health care and it is VERY telling that they do not want that touched AND that so many do not want the same for others. I will not believe that 70% of Americans are satisfied with the health care or the health care coverage they receive. Site the source or stop throwing out numbers.
For those of you who actually believe that 70% satisfied number, please site a source for it and also tell me why ANYONE would want to turn this country into Vietnam style public protests for just 30% of the electorate? What is the percentage in such a move? President Obama is many things, but he is no fool and he is a politician to the core. Why on earth would he or anyone else who wants to get re-elected go against 70% of the electorate?
Sandi, I suppose it’s the same as Democrats jumping all over GOP for sexual scandals. Republicans tend to talk moral values, so when the relatively few of them have illicit sex (compared to the many times more liberals who do it) liberals jump on them. Liberals, of course, hold themselves exempt from criticism because they never said sex outside of marriage is wrong.
Republicans have never said it’s wrong to make money or spend it. That’s what capitalism is all about. It’s the Democrats who call for everybody else to cut back and “do your fair share”, so then when they are living lives of luxury, especially on the public dime, they are open to charges of hypocrisy.
“As for people not wanting health care reform…people elected health care reform. McCain lost. Obama won, running hard on reforming health care. This is exactly what people wanted.”
First, REFORM doesn’t mean…let’s DUMP the whole thing and move to Socialized medicine.
Second, 0bama didn’t run as the HARD-CORE Leftist that he IS, Kristen. He couldn’t, he would have NEVER been elected.
I KNOW, and even intellectually honest liberals (Dan) KNOW that the people DO NOT want THIS current plan. You are dreaming if you believe otherwise.
Why do you think 0bama is back-tracking on all of the quotes that I put up above? Why has he even moved away from a PUBLIC OPTION? The people DON’T want it.
That doesn’t mean the Dems aren’t trying to figure out a way to get the Public Option without the rest of us noticing, but for now, they have to lay off of it.
Mr. Krebs, you hit the nail on the head!
Lars Hagen, where are you? You made some sense earlier…join us.
0bama will use the next month or so to play DOWN his GOVT-run health care plan. While at the same time he is going to continue demonizing Insurance companies.
This is in hopes that his numbers will go back up and then they can try to pass the “only viable option, the Public Option”.
Don’t be fooled folks…this guy is as FAR LEFT as anyone that has EVER been involved in our political system. Our PRESIDENT, for God’s sake.
I guess next time around people will take it more seriously if a candidate has surrounded himself with anti-American zealots his entire life.
“As for people not wanting health care reform…people elected health care reform. McCain lost. Obama won, running hard on reforming health care. This is exactly what people wanted.”
What’d Obama win with? 52% of the vote? I don’t recall, but it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t accurately reflect on what people want…only those who bothered to vote.
Suzie, I actually lifted that piece from this blog, which oddly enough I HAVE noticed is populated with some uneducated hate-mongers! Your assessment of my credibilty is of less interest to me – no offense intended.
“You seem to be oblivious to the fact that any corporation or business has to be profitable in order to continue.”
Wrong. It has to break even. Take the profit motive and obligations to stock holders out of the equation and – voila! – you’ve freed up millions of premium dollars paid in good faith by premium holders for the use they were intended. Health care. Not stock options, worthless or not. I would interject that the fact that those stock options ARE indeed worthless is an excellent measure of exactly how much those hard-working “top leaders!” – CEOS are actually worth. But that’s another discussion.
“In order for CIGNA or any corporation to serve people”
“Serve” whom? They have no obligations higher than those to their stock holders.
I’m sorry that you surround yourself with such low-performing individuals, but I can’t help that.
The whole idea that Obama was elected to nationalise health insurance is rather foolish. He never outlined these plans in public and the media certainly wouldn’t have covered it if he did. It might have cost him the election. The health care debate before the election just involved the children who didn’t have health insurance and no plans were offered.
He was not elected to do this.
No, Henry, the whole idea that Obama is proposing to nationalize health care is what is foolish, not to mention untrue.
Obama’s nationalized GM. What makes anyone think he won’t do the same to health care?
Maybe you should have paid a little more attention to the politickin there Henry, oh yes he said he would reform the health care industry in America AND he was elected to do just that. He never said ‘nationalize’ because that is not what he wants, not what he is doing and not what he was elected to do. I know you have your own definitions for words, kind of like how you interpret the language in a bill, but you are wrong.
Dan
That’s what he said. He said he wanted to push out private insurers and preferred a single-payer system. Congress has ensured that by offering a public plan that undercuts private insurers.
And no, I’m not going to just trust them. Obama is lying constantly. He said he has AARP backing. They said he does not. He said he was not for a single-payer system after he said he was for a single payer system.
Obama has a trust problem
http://news-political.com/2009/08/11/obamas-trust-problem-and-those-steps-in-the-left-direction/
Dan-
The proposal that has been put forth…contains MORE than enough for one to assume that their INTENT is to move to a nationalized health system.
0bama has said as much in the past. You are arguing semantics. We are disagreeing with his INTENT, spoken (video-taped) and otherwise.
He isn’t trusted with this. That’s HIS problem right now.
We ALL know that if he actually came out and said, “I am for NATIONALIZED Universal Health Care,” he would be ruined politically, right now.
0bama is playing games with semantics…like you. We know his INTENT, hence our anger and mistrust.
We want improvements on our current Health Care system, not a RE-MAKING of it.
We want improvements on our current Health Care system, not a RE-MAKING of it.
Comment by T Witten — August 12, 2009 @ 10:45 am
Speak for yourself. There are plenty who DO want a “remaking” of it. There will be no fixing as long as the insurance/pharm lobbies stonewall every attempt. They’ve put themselves out of the discussion.
There’s very little baby and plenty of bathwater. They brought it on themselves.
“I mean, if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are. It’s the POST OFFICE that’s always having problems.”
I cannot believe Captain Teleprompter said this…as an example as to why private insurers should do fine competing with a PUBLIC OPTION health plan.
FedEx and UPS run just fine because their business success is dependent on EXCELLENT service, AND they have to watch the bottom line. They have to change on the fly when things are trending in the wrong direction.
The USPS, on the other hand, is like EVERY local, state, and federal government service. They DON’T have a bottom line, just one enormous bottomless pit to keep tossing our hard earned money into.
And, in typical government employee fashion, they aren’t as focused on being service oriented. They’re just…THERE!!!
For the record…I LOVE my local post office. I am upset that they are talking about shutting it down. BUT, when I need something done QUICKLY and I have to MAKE SURE it gets there, I use Fed EX.
Great T Witten…maybe next time you’re in the hospital you can get FedEx to pay your bills.
I pay my OWN bills…I don’t need or want YOU or anyone else to do it for me.
Well good then T Witten you don’t need to worry about health insurance reform since you apparently don’t want health insurance anyway.
Kristen…wow.
Kinda sums up the whole Democrat opinion of the citizens.
Congressman Sheila Jackson-Lee answers her cell phone while being asked a question during a town hall meeting. Reporter told to sign in or leave. “Ve need your names. Ve must have that man’s name”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/12/rep_sheila_jackson-lee_answers_cell_phone_during_town_hall.html
T Witten, I thought it was very funny Obama bashed the government-run post office and praised the private sector. He just unwittingly told us why government-run health care would be a failure. Obama may end up being our biggest ally.
Henry…those were my thoughts EXACTLY…they simply don’t care what the people have to say. We are only supposed to LISTEN at these meetings. Unless…you happened to be bused in with the Organizing for America (0bama’s Paid Protesters) crowd…then you can speak your mind, beat somebody up…whatever you want.
Suzie…I’ve always said that the more 0bama talks, the less people like him. You’re right.
“Take the profit motive and obligations to stock holders out of the equation and – voila! – you’ve freed up millions of premium dollars paid in good faith by premium holders for the use they were intended.”
Take the profit motive out, and why would employees and employers do anything more than listlessly punch a clock? This is what socialist countries and government agencies do.
“I would interject that the fact that those stock options ARE indeed worthless is an excellent measure of exactly how much those hard-working “top leaders!” – CEOS are actually worth.”
Great. So if Hemsley got what he deserved, why the demonizing based on lies?
This is a GREAT video that covers what we are talking about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxCuUcutmcI
“Take the profit motive out, and why would employees and employers do anything more than listlessly punch a clock?”
I don’t know…maybe do their jobs? Pay out on claims? No one’s looking for them to move and shake particularly. I’m ignoring the “socialist countries and government agencies” pro forma boilerplate.
“So if Hemsley got what he deserved, why the demonizing based on lies?”
I’m not demonizing him, and I don’t see any “lies”…just maybe facts you don’t like. If he was paid per the contract he signed, more power to him. I don’t blame him. His position should not exist.
T Witten,
You aren’t actually looking to Fox and the editorial pages of the WSJ for accurate information, are you? They have both been proven again and again, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to be untrustworthy and ideologically skewed. You do yourself a great disservice if you believe anything coming from such people.
So Steve,
I guess you believe things such as the huffington post and daily kos.
The fox news channel if so untrustworthy, why do they beat all other
channels in there time slot combined and beat katie curic last weak.
Reason people are tired of lying and left leaning editorial pages such
as the NYT, LAT an RT times.
If you believe in them so much I have a bridge for you.
“I don’t know…maybe do their jobs? Pay out on claims? No one’s looking for them to move and shake particularly.”
This might be how a nine-to-fiver thinks, but if you are any level up in management, you think of ways to increase business which translates to doing a better job and serving more customers. Does this come as a surprise to you?
“I’m not demonizing him, and I don’t see any “lies”…just maybe facts you don’t like.”
You are. These sites are putting out the figure, and the unsophisticated libs already throbbing with class envy, put it out there: “Can you believe this SOB gets three-quarters of a billion while I’m at the SPCA cleaning out pet cages for seven bucks an hour?”
“His position should not exist.”
That’s brilliant; a vast corporation without a leader. I wish we could try that in America for the next 3 1/2 years.
Steve-
I believe my eyes and my heart. I’ve READ the proposed bill and SEEN the President talk in the past about his INTENTIONS (PUBLIC OPTION -> SINGLE PAYER). I KNOW in my heart that it is WRONG.
I’ve never said anything about the GOP being perfect. Their fiscal arrogance helped to get the people here as well. But, the false 0bama has pushed us over the edge.
The ideas the Democrats are talking about are an abomination as far as LIBERTY is concerned.
Great article here. What the Media won’t tell you about 0bamaCare. It WILL hurt SENIORS.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/08/14/what-media-wont-tell-you-about-obamacare-it-will-hurt-seniors
I believe my eyes and my heart. I have read the proposed bill and listened to the President talk about his intentions. I know in my heart that it is the right thing to do for America.
The ideas the Democrats are talking about are in furtherance of the life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and promoting the general welfare ideology. The lies and distortions the Conservative are talking about are an abomination for all except the wealthy and powerful people in this country and that is surely NOT what our Founding Fathers wanted for us or our nation. The shame should run deep.
Sandy-
Nothing in our founding documents backs up what you say. In fact, you literally have it backwards. FORCING me to pay for the health care of someone else is the OPPOSITE of LIBERTY. I would also have to say that FORCING me to pay for an abortion is the OPPOSITE of “furtherance of LIFE”.
I give to charities on my own, I decide who and where my money should go. You should be ashamed for mis-representing our Founder’s written words.
In other news…0bama has turned tail and run away from the PUBLIC OPTION, for now. Let’s hope the PEOPLE keep the pressure on him and other leftists, they cannot simply shelve this for a fews weeks and then try to pull it out again.
I will be ready. Tooth and nail.
You will need more than teeth and nails, but true colors run deep for us all.
I believe I have exactly captured the essence and the whole point of the Founding Fathers. Why not simply stay independent colonies? Why bother forming a representative government if it is not to represent us? Why bother having bills debated, voted on and signed or vetoed? Why bother having elections and telling people what you want to do FOR the country and FOR them? Why bother with having rules of law? Yours is the silly argument of freedom bordering on anarchy (I’ll pay for what I want to pay for, I’ll support what I want to support, I’ll refuse to give to help someone I disagree with) that is revolutionary, reactionary, and contrary to the “will of the people” and “for the greater good”.
The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves at the idea of federal income tax, much less socialized health care.
“FORCING me to pay for the health care of someone else is the OPPOSITE of LIBERTY. I would also have to say that FORCING me to pay for an abortion is the OPPOSITE of “furtherance of LIFE”.”
TWitten, you can say whatever you like. Fact is, you and your party – and whatever it was they were standing for last fall – lost. You can fight “tooth and nail” all you like, but sad to say, short of moving, you’re bound by whatever our current legally and duly elected representatives elect to do. No one’s going to stop you from giving to whatever charities you like, but these do not relieve you of your tax obligation.
Imagine that, I disagree completely Suzie. I think the Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at the Bush Doctrine, “preemptive” wars to spread democracy, people dying in our streets, good decent people having to do without in a land of plenty and hard working ethical decent folks losing all they have worked for if they become sick or have a catastrophic accident. Everything ever written in some form or fashion from the Founders points to the need for the government to be an instrument of the people and to serve the United States not the estates of special interests or greed. This was to be a common good union in every sense of the word, not a monarchy, oligarchy, anarchy, theocratic, or business venture. Perhaps they only meant, promoting the general welfare of the wealthy, but the fact remains that is not what they said and they were quite the wordsmiths IMO.
Sandi…Kristen,
We simply see the Constitution differently. You see as a barrier for the Government to overcome. It was written to LIMIT government. To protect the PEOPLE from BIG government.
YOU, and people who agree with YOUR side, are LOSING this debate every single day. Why do you think 0bama’s poll numbers are sinking like the Titanic? Why can’t the White House get its nmessage straight? They are in panic mode.
We are a Democratic Republic. The PEOPLE depend on their representatives to reflect the views of the PEOPLE. When the representatives STOP doing their jobs, you get what we are seeing today.
Sandi, your view of the Constitution and Declaration of Indpendence is off. Read them again and don’t put your own spin on the words they used.
Remember, THEY revolted from England because of TAXES and oppressive laws, similar to what the current President is attempting to ram down our throats. Wake up. This isn’t France.
Interesting how Obama is spelled with a zero instead of the letter O there TWitten. I thought maybe it was a typo, but you’ve been pretty consistent at using it after looking in your older postings. Nothing like taking a swipe at someone you don’t like when trying to explain an opposing viewpoint. That really helps give an air of legitimacy to your case.
T Witten is right. The Constitution is one of “negative liberties”. The founders were scared to death of an all-powerful central government. That’s the reason for the Second Amenedment, it’s why the government was not given the power to collect taxes. The Founders wanted a weak central government with limited powers.
T Witten and Suzie, we do indeed see the Constitution, The Bill of Rights and the historic documents of the Founders in a different light. Much like the commentary in Sunday’s paper, I am more the Hamiltonian view that the government IS us. We elect representatives to do what we want, we charge the government with carrying out “the will of the people”. Does that mean that some “wills” are less than “willing” participants? Sure, and I know that pain, but that is how our government has always worked. In the beginning the interests and “will of the people” were so closely tied and generic as to be not a problem. Diversity, technology, information, science and good old change have worked to make the frame stretch to still meet the “will of the people” and some of you cannot accept that change or redefining of goals and purpose, but it is clearly in the documents and the mechanisms by which they operate as was the futuristic predictions and admissions of the founders of the need for the changes when they came. Cling as long as you like, “time and tides wait for no man” as they say. Mayhap it is you who should read them again with the prevailing thought being THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA not the individual liberties of people who don’t like or accept that concept. Within the construct of the Constitution and all other founding documents and ideologies is the America we have become even if they did not put Medicare to parchment.
Suzie: “it’s why the government was not given the power to collect taxes.”
It wasn’t?
You need to read Article I, Section 8 (“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”).
“Interesting how Obama is spelled with a zero instead of the letter O there TWitten. I thought maybe it was a typo, but you’ve been pretty consistent at using it after looking in your older postings. Nothing like taking a swipe at someone you don’t like when trying to explain an opposing viewpoint.”
Oh, wow. It IS a zero! 0 bama. I think that’s hilarous. 0 = cipher which is what 0bama is. It’s a very subtle tweak by T Witten. I love understated intelligence.
So, the founding fathers were “scared to death of strong central government” but were in general completely sanguine with government enforced Christian worship practices being imposed.
“We simply see the Constitution differently. You see as a barrier for the Government to overcome. It was written to LIMIT government. To protect the PEOPLE from BIG government.”
Really, TWitten. Would you reject federal law banning abortion? How about federal law banning same-sex marriage? I suspect that you, like most RWers, are only against “big government” when you find your POV on the losing end of it.
Dan, Congress was not given the power to assess unrestricted income tax. That’s why a constitutional amendment was needed.
“We are a Democratic Republic. The PEOPLE depend on their representatives to reflect the views of the PEOPLE. When the representatives STOP doing their jobs, you get what we are seeing today.”
We elected them. You don’t like them because your guy lost, but that doesn’t change the fact that a happy majority put this Congress, Senate, and White House in place. They do in large part represent the “view of the PEOPLE”…who elected them.
I understand the original concept for the Constitution was for a very weak central government basically forming a confederation of independent states that handled the bulk of the governence in the US. Had that model not been changed up to where the Federal side has the current power it does, would you be ok if each state was tackling the initiatives we see being handled at rhe Federal level, say like healthcare and education? Those specific items were not called for at the Federal level and were left to the states to theoretically be involved in, but I see the same folks arguing that the Feds ought to not be involved in them also saying the states have no business being involved in them either. So I think many of us are left to assume that many folks on the right are more just anti-government than anything else, since there seems to be scant few things many conservatives want the government to do, if anything at all.
Suzie: Dan, Congress was not given the power to assess unrestricted income tax. That’s why a constitutional amendment was needed.
Actually, the problem was that an income tax could not be levied in proportion to the population (as required by Article I, Section 2).
Regardless, you did not say, the Constitution didn’t give the government power to collect income taxes, you said, “the government was not given the power to collect taxes,” period.
Sandi, Kristen…0ther John, Dan, et al.
Once again, why is 0-bama twisting in the wind right now? Why are his poll numbers sinking like the Titanic? Why is the “public option” being withdrawn, potentially?
Because…your argument is LOSING. The PEOPLE don’t agree with it.
Just because 0-bama won the election, it doesn’t make him the KING… Kristen. You guys need a civics lesson bigtime.
We may disagree with what the Constitution means, what the best way to make Health Care better is, why the Revolutionary War was started, etc. But, you are LYING to yourself if you can sit there and say…
“The People are buying what 0bama is selling right now and people like how he is leading us currently.”
They aren’t…and they don’t.
0-bama needs to get his head out of his Socialist rear and LEAD the country. Right now, he is performing to his resume.
“Actually, the problem was that an income tax could not be levied in proportion to the population”
Not only that, it couldn’t be levied on certain types of personal income
“Regardless, you did not say, the Constitution didn’t give the government power to collect income taxes, you said, “the government was not given the power to collect taxes,” period.”
I guess I thought it was obvious enough tariffs and other taxes were in place that I didn’t have to specify “income”.
Suzie,
Don’t be lured into silly fights. This is about 0-bama’s failed attempt to Socialize Health Care…or uh, er Health Insurance. Desperation is setting in.
“Just because 0-bama won the election, it doesn’t make him the KING… Kristen. You guys need a civics lesson bigtime.”
Oh yeah? Tell it to the Senate and House…where Obama currently holds majorities. And stop being such a sore loser…it’s unbecoming.
See, I was distracted myself. I meant to add this link. GREAT piece of truth from VDH.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWRmMjAxNmNhZDRhMjllYmFjYTZjYmRlYTZmYWNjYTA=&w=MA==
Kristen-
Why haven’t they passed the bill yet? I asked you all that a week ago. No response.
Congress can do it YESTERDAY if they want. You’re right there.
Why haven’t they?
Because the PEOPLE don’t want it. It’s self-preservation. The Dems have lost faith in 0-bama. They KNOW it is a LOSER bill.
Talk about twisting in the wind… It is one thing to nurse a skewed vision of the Constitution and the Founders, it is quite another to dismiss what the non-corporate backed and non-politically ideological citizens want from their government. People are sick and tired of rising costs and lessening benefits with control in the hands of employers and insurance bureaucrats, the citizenry wants health care reform and some form of public option has to be in it or it will be like NCLB and leave many right where they are, suffering. Your dislike of all things Obama, even to the point of insulting his name shows where your credibility is on any issue.
Like it was so obvious that murderers, rapists and child abusers could “make it right”? Is that the kind of obvious you mean?
“Really, TWitten. Would you reject federal law banning abortion? How about federal law banning same-sex marriage? I suspect that you, like most RWers, are only against “big government” when you find your POV on the losing end of it.”
Kristen, First, T Witten separates his/her initial and hisher last name. Yes, we all see your snarky little “twit” insult, and have largely chosen to ignore it. Please stop insulting other posters.
The government has always protected larger rights such as the right to life. There would no conflict whatsoever with a law banning abortion. That’s where civilized society is headed.
“Congress can do it YESTERDAY if they want. You’re right there.”
Yes, except for the small fact that they’re in recess.
I use a ZERO for his name purposefully…he is a ZERO. I do NOT support what he is trying to do, as I oppose Socialism and support our founding documents as they were written. I would certainly change my opinion, if his actions and philosophy were to change to one that supports America.
“it is quite another to dismiss what the non-corporate backed and non-politically ideological citizens want from their government”
0-bama and supporters have out-spent those opposed to this bill by a count of 3 to 1. That says it all.
He, and people like you are LOSING the debate. That is CLEAR for all to see.
As for this, “Like it was so obvious that murderers, rapists and child abusers could “make it right”? Is that the kind of obvious you mean?”
I haven’t a clue what you are referring to.
I’ve accepted the fact that I am not changing YOUR minds on the matter.
I hope you all see that I am steadfast as well. So, in the interest of saving YOUR time. Wouldn’t your side be better served if you got an early start on the voter registration forgings for 2010 or by attending a town hall somewhere, I here 0-bama is paying up to $15/hour these days?
“Congress can do it YESTERDAY if they want. You’re right there.”
“Yes, except for the small fact that they’re in recess.”
We all know this Kristen. Pretty sure my point was made. They could have done it BEFORE. They didnt because it would be political suicide.
T Witten, talk about silly fights… “Why haven’t they passed the bill yet? I asked you all that a week ago. No response. Congress can do it YESTERDAY if they want. You’re right there. Why haven’t they?”
THEY ARE NOT IN SESSION. They will pass a bill and it will get signed.
TWitten, before you go lumping me with everyone else, I’m not in favor of the plan as put forth. I don’t like the language in it, nor what it’s intended to accomplish, and I’ve been pretty consistent in my opposition to the bill as it has been advertised. I want some reforms for sure because the system has some pretty noticable flaws that I think can be easily corrected, but what is out there goes beyond reform and I’ve read enough of the actual bill to oppose it. I did not gather my opinion from Cliff’s Notes of the bill or partisan websites either, I sat and read a fair amount of the bill itself, probably more than most elected officials have bothered to do. Believe me, it was mind-numbing at many points.
“Nothing in our founding documents backs up what you say. In fact, you literally have it backwards.”
Wrong again Witten. Why don’t you try actually reading the Constitution instead of just claiming that it says what you would like for it to say.
Listen up Suzie, this has a bearing on your conclusion that the founding fathers would be averse to a federal income tax.
“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform through out the United States.”
Both of you should consider starting or moving to a country that does not empower government to lay and collect taxes to pay for general welfare… Of course you could always use the route of redress provided for by Suzie’s favorite. You guessed it, the founding fathers.
Who would have thought the ‘founding fathers’ had that much foresight? My, my, I do believe that Article V of the Constitution explains how to change our government so that it will no longer have the power to tax and pay for ‘general welfare’. Unfortunately, that is a lot of work. If you can get Herb on board, I’m sure his 126 cohorts will come in handy. You may think that it is time for a revolt, but I would have thought we would at least try a couple of amendments first. Maybe you should get a little help from the people who used this route, prescribed by the ‘founding fathers’, to enact the, who would have thought it, income tax.
“FORCING me to pay for the health care of someone else is the OPPOSITE of LIBERTY.”
Forcing myself and millions of other Americans to fight for ‘LIBERTY’ for other people, was that the ‘OPPOSITE’ of ‘LIBERTY’? Does that mean that the draft is now considered unconstitutional by “YOU, and people who agree with YOUR side”?
Sandi, I’m guessing you missed my post before yours.
Anyhow, they COULD have signed it PRIOR to the recess. They didn’t. Why?
Because it would have been political SUICIDE.
If you think the PEOPLE are angry now…wait and see what happens if anything remotely like it is passed.
Other John, your writing is far too coherent to be lumped in with the others, even though we may disagree on a few things. Oh well.
T Witten,
“They didnt because it would be political suicide.”
Wrong. No bill has been passed because conservative democrats and republicans ave prevented it from passing. The conservatives delayed it long enough so the insurance industry lies could be spread. The notion that it has to be bipartisan is ridiculous.
Ross brags that the Blue Dogs “held the bill hostage in committee for 10 days” – http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/08/07/mike-ross-brags-about-killing-single-payer/#comments
After Bragging ‘Our Effort Is To Slow This Down,’ Sen. Kyl Claims Republicans Are Not Holding Up Health Reform – http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/28/kyl-pretends-notobstructing/
Blue Dog Dem Dan Boren Echoes GOP Line: Health Care Reform Won’t Happen Unless It’s “Bipartisan” – http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/bipartisanship/blue-dog-dem-dan-boren-echoes-gop-line-health-care-reform-wont-happen-unless-its-bipartisan/
The GOP has no power to stop it Steve. It’s the Dems doing it. Thank God.
No problem TWitten, I just wanted to make it clear if it hadn’t been done so previously, that I don’t like the bill out there. I’m fairly liberal on many counts, but this is one that I’m leaning away from the solution offered up by the Democrats because I think it will create more problems than it fixes, by a large margin. I’m glad to see that extra time is being taken on this debate, because I can think of no other pressing domestic issue out there at this point that has so much riding on getting it right. Fixing Social Security and Medicare and reforming them would be up there though, it’s high time those programs got overhauled. I’m not even 30, and as it stands now, I am not betting on either system being around when I hit retirement, so I’m planning to do it myself.
T Witten,
Did you actually read what I posted?
Did I say the GOP has the power to stop it? No, T Witten, I did not.
The combination of conservative dems, republicans, and the idiotic need for bipartisanship is to blame. As I said.
Did you read the info in the links? If you had, perhaps you wouldn’t have accused me of saying something that I obviously did not.
The combination of factors is giving the republicans far more power than they deserve in this debate, however.
Perhaps you can explain the lack of affordable healthcare to the millions of desperate people and to our small businesses and the continued lack of competitiveness with countries that actually have some common sense and give a damn about their fellow citizens. Maybe one of these days republicans could put their country ahead of their political party. That’s probably asking far too much, however…
T Witten, “FORCING me to pay for the health care of someone else is the OPPOSITE of LIBERTY.”
“Forcing myself and millions of other Americans to fight for ‘LIBERTY’ for other people, was that the ‘OPPOSITE’ of ‘LIBERTY’? Does that mean that the draft is now considered unconstitutional by “YOU, and people who agree with YOUR side”?
Steve, we are having communication issues. What I meant to say is that…the Dems could have passed it, without a single vote from the GOP. My point is this…it’s 0bama’s baby and the Dems won’t pass it because they know it is horrid.
Regardless of why it has not been passed yet. The people (majority) DON’T want it.
Round and round we go.
T Witten,
“the Dems could have passed it, without a single vote from the GOP” – Agreed.
As to why, refer to the links I posted.
But, of course, the underlying reason, as it is the reason for almost everything in our government, is the lobbying. For healthcare it is at least 6 lobbyists for every member of Congress – http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aqMce51JoZWw
I think the majority of the people in America do want and know we need health care reform. I do not know where you get your perspective or basis for thinking otherwise. Our system is broken for millions of people. Do you not watch the news shows about this struggle? How can you deny there is a serious and worsening problem that has been ignored too long? We have insurance bureaucrats deciding on grandma’s plug right now and yet you and others have chosen to demonize the people working to help grandma and the whole family with the backing and blessing of those insurance bureaucrats. Yes, we can do this alone and we are smart enough to craft it in a palatable manner for the electorate as well, but we want at least some bi-partisan input and ideas if there are any good ones out there. If you kill this, who do you seriously think wins?
Sandi,
I think there is an opportunity for agreement here. But, first let me say this. Roughly 85% of us have health insurance. Of those with insurance, nearly 70% are content or VERY happy with their coverage. Those are BIG numbers.
Many elect NOT to get coverage.
Does that mean we shouldnt try to help the remaining small percentage of people that want it, but cant afford it?
Of course not. But, Why not create a government run program specifically for those people that are too poor to afford it? Isn’t that what Medicaid is anyways? How is Medicaid doing these days?
Let’s have an honest discussion here. There have been plans offered by the GOP. The GOP was locked out of House discussions by Pelosi. Several Blue Dogs ratted her out for it. So, don’t tell me they want bi-partisan input. Pelosi didn’t.
Anyways.
Here’s where we agree in principle. Health Care is WAY too expensive. It remains BIG money for two different groups (there are more obviously, but these are the slimiest). The first are Insurance companies. They aren’t evil, just too damn big and they are a BUSINESS. There needs to be some reeling in there, for sure.
The quickest way to open up competition would be to CUT restrictions of health insurance companies. There are plans in other states that would help YOU more here in Va., but you can’t use them due to red tape. Cut that tape. Open them ALL up to everyone. The best will survive and HAVE to compete with each other.
Second, would be TRIAL Lawyers. They make a KILLING off of going after doctors and pharmaceutical companies. We’re talking lottery type winnings. If they lose in court…ah, they can try again later, no biggie. There needs to be a PENALTY for these frivolous lawsuits. Physicians are paying out a killing each year just to cover their malpractice insurance. It’s messed up. So, TORT reform would have to be included in ANY serious bill.
T. Witten, I appreciate the effort to find some way to agree with me on something, that is certainly not something many even attempt so I will give you points for sincerity.
I find this an excellent quick read on the insured and uninsured in America: http://www.nchc.org/documents/Kellogg%20General%20Coverage%20Fact%20Sheet%2008-11-2009.pdf
I cannot find your 85% have and 70% content numbers but I did find this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/11/AR2009081100048.html Which says 64% are content and 29% are under insured, yet freely admits it is hard to quantify the numbers. What I know is that competition is quashed, control is in the wrong hands, and accountability seems non-existent and WE are the ping-pong ball.
You are correct in that many elect not to get coverage and that needs to be changed for those who can afford some level of paying into a system we all need and count on. This is a huge portion of profit that is untapped. Young and healthy people also need to have insurance. everyone must pay something or have a method to subsidize the payment. Nothing is free and that is not my goal.
For those who are under insured and those who cannot afford coverage even if it is “offered” we need to find a way to give them access even if it means a subsidy. I am not sure I agree that is a small percentage, but it is certainly doable.
I am not necessarily “backing” a government run program and certainly not a take over unless we are going to the single payer and calling it done. There are regulations and minimum standards that we can require of the insurance industry to cover more people and the volume should cover the added cost to a very great extent IMO. Pre-existing and wait periods are another hardship that can be addressed. Overhead and wasteful advertising, gouging and lack of competition all can certainly be fixed. I have no qualms saying there is much we can do short of a government “takeover”. Insurance companies need to step up and be a part of the solution as well. We also must address the medical bankruptcy issue that is strangling so many in the working class. We need to be sure dental and vision care is included in insurance packages. Not cosmetic stuff, but decent dental care and being able to see well are also health issues.
My biggest peeve is the “no way, no how” attitude that was dead set on a political victory even at the expense of the people who need relief.
If you are familiar with a GOP plan, rejected or not, please share the information, I will listen.
I have no problem with the “tort reform” idea although I tackle that from the “incentive” side. If a medical error or accident causes real damage, that needs to be compensable but the trial lawyer should NOT get the lion’s share nor even the ridiculous amounts that lawyers pocket now. That alone will stop the frivolous lawsuits yet allow for the real cases to be judged.
Despite the obvious barbs, I am not a monster after your or anyone else’s money. The waste and fraud in the systems are always a great place to start. Common ground is not nearly as hard as some people want to make it. You just have to want to try.
My point is this…Twitter, you should consider starting or moving to a country that does not empower government to lay and collect taxes to pay for general welfare… Of course you could always use the route of redress provided for by Suzie’s favorite. You guessed it, the founding fathers. If the majority do not want it as you claim, it should be no problem to amend the Constitution to ban health care reform.
Sandi, we found SOME common ground. Although I point to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security as examples thath the govt. should not run anything this important again.
Allen, you crack me up. I think it is YOU who will want to leave the country before I.
“General welfare” doesn’t mean what you think it means. It certainly doesn’t mean a person who works hard…does it, so that others don’t have to. That’s essentially what we have now. Democrats have fostered an entitled class for the past 50 years. Forever dependent on the state (their party). This bill is just more of it.
Bills like THIS are akin to the actions of England prior to the Revolutionary War.
Both parties are to blame for the enormous build-up of mistrust and disdain with govt. But, the Democrats are piling on. The “stimulus” and this bill are the last straw.
It’s the truth, like it or not. The PEOPLE are standing up.
A recent New York Times/CBS poll. Among the lowlights:
* 69% believe Obamacare will HURT the quality of their own health care.
* 73% believe they will have LESS access to tests and treatment.
* 62% believe Democrats’ proposals would FORCE them to CHANGE doctors.
* 76% believe Obama’s changes will mean HIGHER TAXES for them.
* 77% expect their health care COSTS to RISE.
All those findings run counter to the claims 0bama makes.
Now, imagine if this poll was done by a non-biased, respected polling group…say, like Rasmussen. My guess is that those very high numbers would be even HIGHER.
0bama has jumped the shark on this.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/08/19/2009-08-19_health_care_debate_confirms_this_is_not_the_barack_we_elected.html#ixzz0OdLmu7LA
“One of my liberal readers sent me an e-mail stating that the health care system in America is in terrible shape and needs a huge overhaul, which is why he was supporting Obama’s plan. I wrote back to say that I agreed that the system needed fine-tuning, but, like Charles Krauthammer, I felt that the work consisted mainly of separating health insurance from employment and bringing about radical tort reform so that doctors didn’t have to spend more time worrying about being sued than they did about the health of their patients.”
This is from Burt Prelutsky, a great, conservative writer…he makes an EXCELLENT point below.
“I went on to add that if I was wrong, things could always be changed, but if he and Obama were wrong, a huge federal bureaucracy would be created and you can’t kill one of those even with a silver bullet or a wooden stake through its heart.”
Once the GI-NORMOUS, Gubmint-run bohemoth kneels at the trough of the taxpayer…it is ALL over. Life as we know, over.
“General welfare” doesn’t mean what you think it means”
No, I’m sure “general welfare” means defecating all over the poor, further enriching the rich, concentrating power in the hands of a few wealthy white males, etc….
TWitten I can figure out for myself what ‘general welfare’ means. It means health care for all.
“Once the GI-NORMOUS, Gubmint-run bohemoth kneels at the trough of the taxpayer…it is ALL over. Life as we know, over.”
Thank God you’re not being overly histrionic. Pssst…if you think your clever use of the word “gubmint” enhances your credibilty, you’d be wrong.
“No, I’m sure “general welfare” means defecating all over the poor, further enriching the rich, concentrating power in the hands of a few wealthy white males, etc….
TWitten I can figure out for myself what ‘general welfare’ means. It means health care for all.”
Kristen, I don’t think you can. General welfare, in the context that we are discussing, means that the government endeavors to allow us the basic OPPORTUNITY to take care of OURSELVES.
It reads in part, “PROMOTE the general welfare, and SECURE the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity”
I find it slightly ironic that this bill (as you say) will “pay for general welfare” for all…while at the SAME time, it will absolutely DESTROY the blessings of LIBERTY for us and our posterity…FOREVER.
Do you think for a second that the FOUNDERS wanted the HUGE government powers and controls that you espouse? What do you think the Declaration of Indpendence and Constitution were written for?
The Constitution was written to keep the government SMALL and out of our way.
—-
Anyways…are you happy that 0bama has essentially ditched the Public Option? I think it is funny that with COMPLETE control of Congress…he is impotent. Thanks be to God for that.
It has already been proven that the opposition to national healthcare is coming from the insurance companies, and why should anyone doubt it? They are the ones that stand to lose billions. I am always amazed that these staunch “individualists” are so easily manipulated by corporations who disseminate propaganda. They know just the right buttons to push to blind these folks.
The “FOUNDERS” couldn’t possibly comprehend or have anticipated the rise of huge CORPORATIONS that control and THREATEN individuals rights and property more than any government ever has in the US.
“It has already been PROVEN that the opposition to national healthcare is coming from the insurance companies”
Abner,
Nonsense. There is no such PROOF. The PEOPLE have simply had enough of GOVERNMENT interference and growth. 0bama is just the sucker to think he could KEEP it going. Bush grew government exorbitantly as well, this is just the last straw. What 0bama is attempting is OPPRESSION of our liberty. Period.
I couldn’t care any less about insurance companies…I’m not beholden to them. We can deal with THEM later.
I’m not handing the keys over to the IDIOTS who STILL think Medicare and Social Security are running GREAT! What they’ll do will be irreversible.
It’s a damn shame we have to fight OUR OWN freaking GOVERNMENT to prevent them from enslaving us further.
This piece is good and further backs up what I just said.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/08222009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_real_reason_americans_are_angry_185998.htm
T Witten, an “op-ed” that happens to agree with you isn’t the same thing as actual empirical evidence.
Kristen, never said it was empirical evidence. I said it “backs up what I just said.” It ALSO happens to be common sense.
What did YOU tell people who REFUSED to believe people weren’t happy with George W. Bush?
What did YOU tell people who REFUSED to believe people weren’t happy with George W. Bush?
Comment by T Witten — August 24, 2009 @ 12:44 pm
I don’t know anyone who didn’t figure that out on their own.
This is from the LINK I posted:
“An ABC/Washington Post poll from June showed people preferred “smaller government with fewer services” over “larger government with more services” by 54% to 41%, up from 50%-45% a year earlier (independents were even more pronounced, at 61%-35%).
A Rasmussen poll from April showed that 77% of Americans preferred a “free market” economy over a “government managed” economy, up seven percentage points from just last December.
After 11 months of federal bailouts and freakouts, Americans have become bone tired of panicky power grabs from Washington. It’s the big government, stupid.”
While Op/Eds typically are not empirical, I’d say the POLLING DATA mentioned in it very much IS.
0bama is sinking FASTER than any President in the last 50 years (Carter MIGHT have been quicker, not sure about that).
Public perception is everything…how do you suppose he got elected?
“What did YOU tell people who REFUSED to believe people weren’t happy with George W. Bush?”
Ir’s easy to be happier when you have a job.
Same old Republican talking points, tort reform, immigrants, electronic records, business disconnect, yada yada yada. Most polls show Americans are solidly in favor of health care reform and the public option. It all boils down to a battle between the people and the insurance companies, who run their own “death panels” everyday, refusing coverage to anyone with a “pre-existing conditions.” August is nearly over, and despite the millions of dollars spent on disinformation, reform is still standing, bloodied, but alive. Write your legislators and tell them it’s now time to pass
meaningful health care reform for ALL Americans, including a robust public option.
It never fails to amaze me that the people who hate “big government” are the biggest supporters of Big Business, Big Insurance, Big Pharma, Big Finance and Big BS. When you deny known and proven facts your own credibility has to suffer.
I never met anyone who “REFUSED to believe people weren’t happy with George W. Bush” so I can only imagine that someone so delusional would be beyond any suggestion or comment from me.
This reform has been needed for generations and like many other things we needed to deal with, it was swept under the rug because it was only the little people and most of them don’t vote. Of course as bad things are apt to do, it spread into the working class and then people who actually voted started listening to the horror stories and even middle class people with good coverage could not financially survive a bout with cancer or other catastrophe and noticed the “relief camps of doctors being brought into American cities and the ball was off and rolling. The press could certainly have done a better job, but I guess there were bigger fish to fry.
This reform cannot be stopped now. It might be stymied and it might well be crippled by amendments from people who then have no intention of supporting it, but it will come to pass.
Fear is a powerful tool and so is inertia. This pendulum is swinging and this change, like Medicare and Social Security before it, is coming. Obama is doing what he was elected to do and that is all.
I have no doubt that the anti-government crowd will someday be able to scare enough people into voting for them to get back in there and kill more government, but that day is not today. Which makes it a good day for me.
I have walked in your shoes, fearing my own government, hating the decisions being made and feeling like my voice was useless against the tide. I am very thankful that tide turned, but I sincerely hope yours does not. America cannot survive with such an abyss between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots and losing more’ Revolutions have been fought over government ignoring the needs of the people. Have any been fought over government meeting the needs of the people?
Sandi,
You need to look into some of the history of how the country was founded. Contrary to some belief, it didn’t happen in 1776 when we declared independence nor when Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown. There were several years when the primary governing document was the Articles of Confederation. The central government had no authority to tax. War veterans were losing their farms to foreclosure (did you think that just started happening under Bush), read up on Shays Rebellion.
Many of the states were considering secession.
Even when a document was finally drafted and signed, they were very careful to not give the Federal Government much power.
What’s the point? Suspicion about the government goes deep into our blood. It is part of our history. And, in many cases is justified…..
Social security may have sounded like a good idea at the time, but what’s going to happen to the people who depend on it when the money runs out? http://www.socialsecurity.org
I am afraid the same thing will happen with a public health option…the government projections will be inaccurate, the plan will become underfunded, and when the money runs out the people who have come to depend on the public option will be the ones to suffer…the very people the plan is intended to help.
VT,
Social Security is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme. Madoff went to jail over that.
Bob H, I do know and respect history to a great degree. I also know that the things facing this huge nation and the people of this country were not in the conscious brains of the Founding Fathers to any real extent. The dichotomy is there. How, on this earth do you propose that a country this size be run? What other way of doing things would work better? Even with the safety nets and the regulations, the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer and the middle class is shrinking. The trickle has not come down and no tide is lifting all boats. The suspicion of government is certainly understandable since we have managed to elect more than a prudent share of charlatans, scoundrels and idiots. However the sheer size and scope of the United States (and the Civil War) decided that there are things that must be federalized and uniform and for very good reason. Some things simply are too big for any other method of handling. Anything that big is bound to offer safe haven for shenanigans, fraud and abuse and we must be ever vigilant. I posit that there is a difference in a healthy and wise suspicion and an out right fear and loathing of your government. I further submit that those who hate and disdain their government are making hay while the sun shines on this debate and this administration. Being suspicious is not the same as hating. Being cautious is not the same as wanting to kill it either.
VT Hokie, I ask you the same thing. What system do you propose to keep the working class in this country out of destitution when they can no longer work for their meager living and care? Maybe you can save for retirement and pay your way on 10 dollars an hour or less, but I do not fathom that most people can when I see the prices at Kroger. It is our duty to see that they have a decent existence and basic medical, vision and dental care and I cannot accept less of America when other countries already have been doing so for decades. I will not accept that we cannot and I will not accept that we should not.
Bob H, I agree. I have paid out almost twice as much Social Security tax this year as I have federal income tax. Yet by the time I retire Social Security will be in the hole
I am afraid a public health option would eventually come to the same end.
BobH…
You do realize that Social Security was never designed to be then end all be all for retirement. In it’s original form as written in 1935, it was knows as “Old Age Assistance.”
Will,
I realize a whole heck of alot about Social Security. It ain’t much security and it is a whole lot of socialism.
The definition of a Ponzi scheme is that the distributions being paid out coem from those currently contributing to the plan (sound familiar). One has to continue to grow the “investors” or get more $ from them in the plan for it to stay afloat (like social security).
The problem is that the money was NEVER set aside in a trust where it could earn anything. So I, at age 53, am seeing a statement from SS on what I paid into it in 1972 and the $ I will get back out are based on the $ that went in. Except, I ain’t getting paid (at age 65) with 1972 dollars, I will be getting paid with 2020 dollars. A gallon of gas cost 25cents back in 1972…..
And not to pop any liberal’s bubble out there, but this was the democratic party every step of the way. It had control of congress until 1994 and by then it was too late.
To answer your question Sandi,
None of us would need to make the incomes we presently do if we were not working for some form of government from Jan 1 to June 1 each year. And we want to grow it bigger with health care? No thanks!
You popped no bubbles Bob H. I am very well aware of who pushed for and won Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, AFDC, Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance, and now Health Care Coverage for all. I am very proud of those facts as well. If this country cannot take care of those in need, it has no success to me. How you treat “the least of these” is not a lesson lost on me. Call it any insult you like, just do not try to take it away from people who need it until you have a better plan in mind and so far that is not being heard. You want the gap to grow and I do not.
BobH…
At 53, I would expect you to know better. I’m 53 as well and knew when I was 16 exactly what social security payments were.
Your trite description of Social Security being a Ponzi scheme is cute and all that but is so far from the truth, I’m suprised that you can even discuss it as such with a semi straight face.
The obvious flaw in your “Ponzi” scheme is that Maddoff’s clients didn’t know they were being scammed. People who pay into Social Security know where the money is going.
Sandi,
I just want us to go back to how we handled things for the first 159 years of our existence (before social security), 189 years before Medicare, etc. It was never the role of government to do that, and based on how they have handled it, we can all see why. And don’t tell me how great Medicare is and what a success it is. Their board says it will go broke in less than a decade and I don’t see sufficient separation of funds or allocation of costs that would allow the program can be adequately evaluated on its own.
Maybe what you wrote in the post is accurate about the country not being able to take care of those in need would apply if we weren’t talking about taking care of illegal aliens and a host of other issues. Maybe if it was only taking care of our own it could be done.
I am not taking anything away from people who need it I am trying to hang on to what I have and avoid confiscation so that a a poorly run govt. program doesn’t apply my $ where I don’t want it to go.
Lastly, I am getting a little tired of words being placed in my mouth. I never said I wanted the “gap” to grow. Democrats are those who play the class envy game. That’s where BH0 says “don’t worry, the rich are paying for this”. Big time class warfare, that is what we have now. For me, I just want government to stop at its present size before this country implodes.
BobH..are you aware that widows, orphans, and the disabled receive SS as well as senior citizens? What should we do with these folks…reopen the poor houses? Let them die in the streets? The way we “handled things for the first 159 years of our existence”?
What happened is the US is what’s called progress and civilization. For a good portion of those 159 years, blacks and women couldn’t vote. There was plenty about that 159 that was flat wrong and needed correction.
The old ways aren’t necessarily the best ways. In fact, they rarely are. Change happens for a reason…it’s needed.
Bob H, I want to go back to 16 and make some different decisions for myself, much less America, but that is not how reality works and frankly, it ain’t gonna happen for either of us. Your gloom and doom song has been sung by opponents of SS and the Medi’s since their inception and the people rescued from destitution and the wealthy who only want what they paid into it back are all still drawing those precious checks every month and that will not change. No other industrial country that offers universal health care has gone bankrupt and neither will we. The costs will be born like all costs before them. We could not afford the two wars of Bush/Cheney but we did them anyway and we did not wait until we had the troops and the equipment and the plan to make them work either. Same for the Medicare Rx Plan. America has no plans to close up shop and if we do, the cost of health care will be the last concern any of us will have.
I mentioned the still growing gap not to put words into your mouth but to point out that your plan (or rather choice of no plan) will continue that trend. If you do not support that, offer a solution that changes it. It is not class warfare to point out the truth and it is not the Dems/Libs that pull that card anyway. How often am I accused of being jealous of the rich and only wanting to punish the rich on this site? You may not like it, you may in fact hate the idea, but we are all in this together. The “let ‘em eat cake” mentality might lose someone their head, at least metaphorically.
“Most polls show Americans are solidly in favor of health care reform and the public option.”
Please cite said polls. I’ve posted several reputable polls that say the EXACT opposite. Look back at my link. 77% want NOTHING close to a PUBLIC OPTION.
“August is nearly over, and despite the millions of dollars spent on disinformation, reform is still standing, bloodied, but alive.
Art,
You need to get your info from somewhere other than the DNC. They are LYING to you. 0bama has outspent the opposition 3 to 1 on this. Why do you think his poll numbers are at ALL TIME lows?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Check it out.
The PUBLIC OPTION is DEAD as far as the PEOPLE are concerned. It will sound the political death knell for ANYONE who supports it…if they have the gall to do so.
“Democrats are those who play the class envy game. That’s where BH0 says “don’t worry, the rich are paying for this”. Big time class warfare, that is what we have now. For me, I just want government to stop at its present size before this country implodes.”
Amen Bob!
And Bob…your just a regular, average American citizen, right?
Your not paid by the BIG, EVIL, Insurance companies are you?
Unsurprisingly, T Witten, poll results depend on how the question is written. Bottom line, if a poll question describes the public option as it is actually going to be offered, support is through the roof. If a question reflects the scare-mongering “what-might-happen-if-every-bad-thing-Republicans-predict-comes-true,” support takes a nose-dive.
SInce Republicans have a history of incorrectly predicting disaster for public health programs, I’d say the American people want what Democrats are proposing.
Dan-
You’re right that “poll results depend on how the question is written”…the results also depend heavily upon the sample that is polled. In most main-stream polls (ABC, CNN, etc), the sample is Democrat-heavy. They OVER-represent Democrats. It tends to skew the results as well, or BALANCE it…according to them. Either way, I get your point.
The poll that was cited (77% AGAINST the govt. running it) was taken back in APRIL. I’d say it’s fair to assume that public opinion has changed since April.
All you have to do is look at the polling data on the President. That’s it. He is SINKING fast.
Don’t try to tell me it doesn’t reflect his inability to sell the people on his Health Care ideas. Sure, he ahs been incompetent on SO many other issues, but THIS is THE issue for him. If you control someone access to health care…you control EVERYTHING.
Folks, the Dems are DESPERATE to regain control of PUBLIC OPINION on this.
That’s why you are hearing attacks, from all quarters, on BIG, BAD, Insurance companies and flailing attempts to deny reality eg. “The people DO want this bill, REALLY they do!”
The President’s numbers tell the tale on this…
BY THE WAY…remember BIG PHARMA, the enemy of the Left? Well, 0bama has made a DEAL with them and you are about to see a HUGE ad blitz by them PUSHING for Socialized Medicine.
“None of us would need to make the incomes we presently do if we were not working for some form of government from Jan 1 to June 1 each year. And we want to grow it bigger with health care? No thanks!”
Comment by B0b H — August 24, 2009 @ 4:40 pm
No, B0b H, we would need to make a whole lot more to build our own highways, supply our own law enforcement, provide education, etc. Is there some contest to see just how far out you people can get?
Dan
The American people don’t seem to be agreeing with you. Harry Reid is in trouble in his bid for reelection and he is Senate Majority Leader. But by all means, please keep pushing this plan. Maybe Dick Morris will be right. He says that the current policies could put 100 new Republicans into Congress.
I can’t believe you told us that polls can be cooked after years of trumpeting Bush’s low poll numbers. You’ll be seeing that post again.
Not to mention
“As was reported last week, the Obama administration announced today that it has revised its 10-year cumulative budget deficit projection to around $9.051 trillion, up from its February projection of $7.1 trillion. ”
Also predicting increasing unemployment numbers although I predict unemployment will fall.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/white-house-budget-deficit-will-be-2-trillion-higher-than-projected.html
Note Bush’s “massive deficit” was about $500 billion.
More of the same. Sinking.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/122468/Obama-Weekly-Approval-Average-New-Low.aspx
Nice misdirection there, Henry, touting Bush’s annual deficit against Obama’s 10-year deficit projection.
T Witten, #248
No, I work for a manufacturing company. We have insurance through Anthem on a self insured plan (plus admin costs).
And Dan,
I am disappointed in you. There is no groundswell of support for this legislation. Check out Nevada Senate race polls, a guy named Tarkanian announces his intention to run 2 weeks ago and he leads Reid by double digits already.
If Americans want this plan let us all vote on it.
BTW, latest 10 year BH0 numbers for projected deficit rose from 7.1 trillion to 9 trillion. That is news, even if the RTEB doesn’t want to report it. We don’t want the govt. involved in the health care business period. We don’t need another Ponzi scheme like social security, a “business” like the post office, banking like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, or the “successful” influence that govt. has had on public education (where does BH0 send his daughters).
Sorry if I dissed Obama’s current $1.58 trillion deficit. Funny you don’t hear Democrats decrying deficits anymore. They used to drone endlessly about them.
Henry,
Democrats may not be going on about deficits much anymore (Republicans fell silent about them, too, when they controlled the purse strings), but we still try to call attention to them.
Here is the latest from the CBO (Congressional Budget Office)
“The White House Office of Management and Budget leaked word that, sometime this week, it will revise its projection of the federal budget deficit over the next 10 years from $7 trillion to $9 trillion.
That $2 trillion UPward revision will put the White House’s numbers in line with the $9.1 trillion deficit that the Congressional Budget Office projected in June.
Back then, 0bama criticized CBO’s analysis; now he’s admitting that CBO was right after all. (Of course, CBO might yet revise its projection upward even more, in light of current economic realities.)”
http://www.nypost.com/seven/08252009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/bams_2_trillion_friday_surprise_186337.htm
Bottom line, WHY should we trust this guy to RUN our Health Care?
The PEOPLE don’t. That is EVIDENT.
Question for all…is it CONSTITUTIONAL for 0bama to FORCE us to buy personal Health Care Insurance from him?
So, Dan, you’re a Democrat?
T Witten, perhaps you should read my comment again.
I said Democrats may not be calling attention to deficits, but we still are.
From that you conclude that I’m a Democrat?
I’m really kind of messing with you Dan…but, I’m guessing you vote Democrat 99%. No big deal.
I think the “we” in this case means the RTEB.
T,
I’d bet you good money that you’re a more reliable Republican vote than I am Democratic.
No doubt in my mind. THAT is part of the problem. Liberals and Progressives are notoriously easy to distract and divide. It does not take nearly the effort to get a Democrat to back the wrong horse as it does the Republicans and Conservatives. In fact, our disorganization and self immolation is legendary. Dan, proves the past is never past on that score.
I have never envied the message, but the zealotry is a thing to behold. If we could harness our support the way ‘the right’ does, we could really change the world.
Dan…your might be right about that. But, I will tell you, I’d vote for a Democrat if he was more CONSERVATIVE than the Republican candidate. I am not a party man.
“It does not take nearly the effort to get a Democrat to back the wrong horse as it does the Republicans and Conservatives”
Well, your statement is supported by the support for 0bama. But, I will say that the GOP was DUPED bigtime in supporting McCain. The primary’s were flawed to boot.
I can’t believe it was so close between the two, actually.
A VERY large portion of people vote on their principles…that’s why you see a constant swing in polls and during campaigns. It’s also why, even though 0bama won in November by a few % points, he is LOSING big right NOW.
Many have no loyalty to party and go simply by their gut. The people don’t like the direction he is taking us.
He is failing the smell test.
T,
BH0 beats Hillary any day.
I can think of democrats I have voted for, Henry Howell and Chuck Robb among them.
Perhaps Dan doesn’t vote for dems liek he maintains, but the RTEB sure endorses them wholeheartedly (Sam Rasoul).
And they will endorse Deeds and the entire Democratic ticket.
“BH0 beats Hillary any day.”
I’m not so sure about that…they are BOTH dismally under-qualified… and leftists to boot. But, I’d argue that our country has NEVER had someone like BH0 in this high an office.
The guy cannot be honest and straightforward with his plans because NOBODY (except the RTEB) would support him
. Oh, and the ACORN, ANSWER, OFA, SEIU, etc.
When he said, “we will REMAKE America”, he meant it.
And his goal is to make it a SOCIALIST state. Everything he has done so far betrays his words denying that fact. Action are everything.
This Health Care mess is just the last straw with the PEOPLE.
“But, I will say that the GOP was DUPED bigtime in supporting McCain”.
And who was responsible for this ‘duping’?
Now I will grant you that it is not possible to take lectures on honesty, integrity and doing what was promised from anyone who supported Bush/Cheney or McCain/Palin seriously, but, it really defies reality to keep insisting that President Obama with his mandate from the people, his overwhelming support in the House and what was that phrase…”bullet proof” majority in the Senate, is a Socialist. If he was, he had the PERFECT opportunity to take the crisis and the fear that was palpable when the economy crashed and run with it and quite literally and frankly quite easily taken over more, nationalized all and virtually become the King of America if he had been so inclined. Sure there would have been the hue and cry (like when Bush/Cheney colored outside the lines) but when he calmly came on TV and explained it was all for our own good and that he was assuring America’s future by ridding the world of bad financial actors and the Wall Street Axis of evil and then thrown in how glad he was that those scoundrels were not able to get Social Security into the stacked market like they wanted… Well, the point is, it could have been done and he did not do it BECAUSE he is not a Socialist. That is not what he wants for his children and that is not what he wants for our children. He promised to tackle the hard things and he certainly has done so. I do not expect any of you to give him any credit but some intellectual honesty would be nice. We can go round and round on real things and real events, let go of the lies, please?
“he had the PERFECT opportunity to take the crisis and the fear that was palpable when the economy crashed and run with it and quite literally and frankly quite easily taken over more, nationalized all and virtually become the King of America”
What do you think he is doing pray tell?
There are “smart” ways to do things and there are, let’s say, politically damaging ways to do things. 0bama elected to use a combination.
He THOUGHT he was being “smart” by SPEAKING conservatively (or moderately), but he has BEHAVED as a Socialist since taking office. His ACTIONS betray his words.
Most intellectually honest people would look at his actions thus far and say, “yeah, i can see where people might think he is a Socialist.”
Stop denying actual events. If you see them in a different way, fine. But to somehow imply they didn’t happen is silly and dishonest.
It doesn’t help his case that he was raised by Marxists and then sought these types of people out the rest of his life.
Great op/ed piece on the same discussion.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWQ2NWJkN2M3ZmJjYWQwMDZlMWQyM2FjNWI4ZWJkNGI=
Ah…so I just read that in the Senate’s Health Bill, that the IRS MUST divulge TAXPAYER info.
“Section 431(a) of the bill says that the IRS must divulge taxpayer identity information, including the filing status, the modified adjusted gross income, the number of dependents, and “other information as is prescribed by” regulation. That information will be provided to the new Health Choices Commissioner and state health programs and used to determine who qualifies for “affordability credits.” ”
Who’s for THIS out there in the wide world of sports?!?!
Surely no LIBERAL, ever concerned with privacy, would be for this!
More…
“Section 245(b)(2)(A) says the IRS must divulge tax return details — there’s no specified limit on what’s available or unavailable — to the Health Choices Commissioner. The purpose, again, is to verify “affordability credits.”
Section 1801(a) says that the Social Security Administration can obtain tax return data on anyone who may be eligible for a “low-income prescription drug subsidy” but has not applied for it.”
Amazingly, the famously liberal and Rather-esque, CBS ended the piece with a fair conclusion.
“If we’re going to have such significant additional government intrusion into our health care system, we will have to draw the privacy line somewhere. Maybe the House Democrats’ current bill gets it right. Maybe it doesn’t. But this vignette should be reason to be skeptical of claims that a massive and complex bill must be enacted as rapidly as its backers would have you believe.”
Like the pervasive STENCH, that was the Lewinsky debacle, this corpse of a Bill is finally getting too rank for even the most LEFTIST of media propagandists.
Every day in the news, we hear from 0bama and the Dems, “the GOP is walking away from the table…they don’t wan a bi-partisan bill.”
Gimme a break…bi-partisan to them means bend to our will and sign your name here.
I’ll ask this question again. What’s the hold-up guys? Pass the bill! The Dems don’t need a single vote from the GOP to pass this thing.
Why don’t they just do it?
Um, because they’ve been in recess for the past month?
I think that answer has already been offered and rejected.
Dan…Kristen,
You BOTH know they won’t pass this bill (HR 3200) by themselves. They can’t.
The debate has already been won. 0bama and Pelosi LOST. Now, they need to go back and write something else.
They’d better get their heads on straight or the polls numbers will continue to plummet and they won’t be able to do ANYTHING over the next few years.
Victory is SWEET.
#277 “Victory is SWEET.” Yessirree Bob, getting the Affordable Care Act passed, having it withstand a SCOTUS challenge, and having the Democrats remain firmly in charge of both the White House and the Senate — assuring that the ACA is here to stay — proves that victory is most certainly SWEET.