Cohen: Get Real on Health Care

Monday, September 14, 2009

Roger Cohen: Why would the United States cling to the dubious distinction of being the only wealthy nation that does not afford basic health insurance to all? The answer can be found only in myths and misleading stereotypes, so let's try to dispel a few in the interest of having a more fruitful discussion.

Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 09:33 AM | 142 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry

Front Page
News Weblog
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Edit Account
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

RSS Feed

Author Info

Doc_Sarvis

Kojo Reshay Obermeier

Contact User
Visit Home Page

Joined 2006/01/26
Visited 2009/11/20

Status: user

Fox News Runs More Bogus Crowd Footage (123 comments) ...

Oklahoma Plans 'Christian' Prison (49 comments) ...

GOP Group Got $200,000 from Accused Fraudster (20 comments) ...

Remnants of 50,000-Man Army Lost for 2,500 Years Found? (8 comments) ...

Palin Angered by Newsweek Cover (372 comments) ...

'Equalizer' Edward Woodward Dies (16 comments) ...

In Cold Blood, 50 Years on (42 comments) ...

Rich: Missking Link From Killeen to Kabul (4 comments) ...

Disgraced Fundie Ted Haggard's Comeback Starts With a Lie (10 comments) ...

9/11 Trial Poses Unparalleled Legal Obstacles for Both Sides (9 comments) ...

Florida Man Dials 911 for Phone Sex (24 comments) ...

Sullivan: Obama Has Strength Not Seen Since Reagan (22 comments) ...

Key 9/11 Suspect to Be Tried in New York (2 comments) ...

Egan: The Social Contract Has Been Broken (111 comments) ...

Special Features

Daily Nooner

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

"Why would the United States cling to the dubious distinction of being the only wealthy nation that does not afford basic health insurance to all?"

Because we are not socialist euro-weenies, jerk. Move to France if you hate it so much.

#1 | Posted by Diablo at 2009-09-14 09:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ain't it great to live in a nation where health is a business, in which "success" is measured by holding costs down in order to maximize profits? I mean, is this a great situation or what? Soma! I want my soma!
~I Got Mine, Fuck You Riighties

#2 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-09-14 09:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Why would the United States cling to the dubious distinction of being the only wealthy nation that does not afford basic health insurance to all?"

It's called Greed MOFO. Since there is too much money involved worthless scum bags would rather deny coverage because as long as money wheels are getting theirs the rest of society can go to hell for all they care. Same ole song and dance.

Larry

#3 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 09:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

The myth is that we don't have an affordable basic health care available to all.

Some people make a decision not to buy it.

Others decide to use the E/R as their health care facility.

And plenty of others are on Medicaid.

I'm calling B.S. on the whole issue.

Now, if you want NON-basic health care, there is a price to pay. But basic health care? Already covered.

#4 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 09:42 AM | Reply | Flag:

~I Got Mine, Fuck You Riighties
#2 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-09-14 09:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ignoring the fact that they already are paying for all those uninsureds through higher premiums... they'd rather line the dead up along the side of the road rather than cover people.

BRING OUT YER DEAD!!!

#5 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 09:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Cohen: Get Real on Health Care
Ted Kennedy
POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2009-09-14 09:39 AM

God bless you!

Santorum Eyes White House Run
Ted Kennedy
POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2009-09-14 09:34 AM

Gesundheit!

Whistleblower: Insurance Dumps Patients for Profits
Ted Kennedy
POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2009-09-14 09:31 AM

Cover your mouth.

Kentucky Lawmaker Arrested in Ex's Murder
Ted Kennedy
POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2009-09-14 09:30 AM

Here's a hanky.

#6 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-09-14 09:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ah,

I forgot...many charities are out there that provide funding or care. Yep, private organizations that get funding from private donors to take care of citizens.

Many religious-based health care facilities take care of people who "can't afford" health care.

Now, if you want to drop the cost of health care, let's consider tort reform for non-economic damages.

And maybe everyone here could donate to their favorite "health care" charity. I know I do every year. I challenge you to do the same.

#7 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 09:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

Now, if you want to drop the cost of health care, let's consider tort reform for non-economic damages.

And maybe everyone here could donate to their favorite "health care" charity. I know I do every year. I challenge you to do the same.

Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 09:45 AM | Reply

I just "Love" You people. You would desire tort reform for everyone up until the bad shit happens to You then the mantra would be "Tort reform what tort reform I am taking that Doctor And Or Hospital to the cleaners for their medical malpractice. Same shit different day.

Larry

#8 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 09:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

And maybe everyone here could donate to their favorite "health care" charity. I know I do every year. I challenge you to do the same.

#9 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 09:45 AM | Reply | Flag: Does it out of the kindness of his heart and doesn't even take the deduction on his taxes.

#9 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 09:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

#9 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 09:45 AM | Reply | Flag: Does it out of the kindness of his heart and doesn't even take the deduction on his taxes.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 09:49 AM | Reply

You know that's what fucking irks Me. They claim to give to charities but yet they will write it off of their taxes negating the charitable donation by doing so and violating what Conservatives like to declare their Christian Right's own Bible. Matthew Chapter 6 verses 1 thru 4.

Larry

#10 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 09:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

"You are fucking stupid. Not very up on the competitive edge thing are you? Not really up on keeping jobs or attracting new business here eh?"

What jobs are attracted by socialism except more government regulators? By your "logic," the USSR or England should have long ago left our economy in the dust.

#11 | Posted by Diablo at 2009-09-14 09:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

What jobs are attracted by socialism except more government regulators? By your "logic," the USSR or England should have long ago left our economy in the dust.

#13 | Posted by Diablo

The whole "socialism" mantra is laughable. It truly shows a lack of intelligence.

#12 | Posted by Legio at 2009-09-14 10:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

Larry

Okay Larry, I read your tripe from time to time and I usually ignore it but I feel compelled to respond your crap this morning.

First of all, where do you get off pulling bible quotes out of your ass to negate the good works done by folks?

Second, why do you assume reading the bible and understanding it is a conservative thing? YOu are liberal as well as many others here who believe in God. Furthermore, many outspoken conservatives here are agnostic/atheistic. (Zat, Goatman etc..)

You suck at painting with a wide brush.

You probably don't even make enough money to qualify for anything less than the standard deduction anyway so STFU you fat lardass.

#13 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 10:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

"They claim to give to charities but yet they will write it off of their taxes negating the charitable donation..."

Larry, you are an idiot.

If I give $1,000 to St. Jude (one of my favorites) and take a $100 deduction, how does that negate the $1,000 that St. Jude has?

You didn't know that the deduction is not dollar-for-dollar, did you? It's a percentage of the gift.

That's because you are a greedy fuck who gives nothing, but expects free insurance paid for by everyone else.

Numerous studies and real world examples show that people do not give for the charitable deductions, but because they believe in the mission of the charity.

If the IRS allows a deduction for this behavior people are fools not to take advantage of it. Why should I give one penny more than I have to, when I disagree with how my money is wasted?

Since you only understand personal greed, let's put it in context. Do people buy a house just so they can get the mortgage deduction? Or do they want to own their own home?

#14 | Posted by vernon at 2009-09-14 10:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

Struck a nerve did I Eberly?? What I thought,

Larry

#15 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 10:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

That's because you are a greedy fuck who gives nothing, but expects free insurance paid for by everyone else.

I'm beginning to wonder if all liberals here are the same way.

Always got their fucking hand out waiting for someone else to help them.

Rather than curse at the folks who actually feed your large ass why don't you just say "thank you" and go back to your hovel?

WHOOOOOOO!!! I need my coffee!

#16 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 10:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Numerous studies and real world examples show that people do not give for the charitable deductions, but because they believe in the mission of the charity."

I've seen at least one study that showed that people do it to be able to say that they did, which is why I made the deduction comment. It was a side finding to a study that determined that it's more efficient to give to one charity than it is to give smaller amounts to multiple charities.

#17 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 10:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

Struck a nerve did I Eberly?? What I thought,

Larry

translation = I hit the nail on the head.

#18 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 10:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

I've seen at least one study that showed that people do it to be able to say that they did,

Fatass Larry can say "thank you" anyway.

this shouldn't be news to folks. I know a number of wealthy people who are constantly in the paper for their time spent on "causes". They love the attention and noteriety. Many philanthropists are like that.

so what?

Just STFU and say "THANK YOU".

#19 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 10:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The whole "socialism" mantra is laughable. It truly shows a lack of intelligence."

So does making a snide comment and avoiding the point: socialism has never worked. It does not, as your earlier post alleged, attract business or create jobs. Nice try.

#20 | Posted by Diablo at 2009-09-14 10:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

Heard recently it ia a "right" to pursue happiness. Not a promise. For those who really can't afford, fine. But take away their cell phones beer and cable first and put that money in the pot. Then make sure they can't work or aren't being paid under the table. Oh yeah. After we treat an illegal in the hospital againat our cost. I'll pay for a one way ticket over a "real" boarder. And do away with the born in this country to two illegals equals a legal BS

#21 | Posted by NonDLR at 2009-09-14 10:29 AM | Reply | Flag:

DIABLO obviously didn't read the article before his knee jerked in response to ideas he doesn't understand.

#22 | Posted by AndyB62 at 2009-09-14 10:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

"So does making a snide comment and avoiding the point: socialism has never worked."

Huh??? That will be quite a surprise to the many nations that have socialized medicine right now.

Single payer health care is like gay marriage.

It's inevitable.

Not it but when.

Sooner or later even the dummies will have to realize we can't afford anything else.

Meanwhile, we will continue to slide to a lower living standard. When it gets low enough for you talking point braniacs let me know.

It is simply pointless to argue with people who think ideology will trump reality.

#23 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 10:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

It is simply pointless to argue with people who think ideology will trump reality.

Posted by danni

LOL

#24 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 10:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

The myth is that we don't have an affordable basic health care available to all.

Some people make a decision not to buy it. DAPROF

Maybe the dumbest thing I've ever read. And of course, let's blame those who can't afford health care for the high cost. The repub's political philosopy is to keep minimum wage at a sub-poverty level, keep health care expensive to boost CEO profits, blame poor folks for economic troubles.

#25 | Posted by AndyB62 at 2009-09-14 10:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

It is simply pointless to argue with people who think ideology will trump reality.

Posted by danni

What the hell was your Obama vote based on? His experience?lol

#26 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-09-14 10:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

The repub's political philosopy is to keep minimum wage at a sub-poverty level, keep health care expensive to boost CEO profits, blame poor folks for economic troubles.

I think they put that slogan on their letterhead.

LOL

cry us a river

#27 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 10:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

President Obama will be signing Healthcare legislation into law by the end of the year. Deal with it rightwingers.

#28 | Posted by moder8 at 2009-09-14 10:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Some people make a decision not to buy it. DAPROF

"Maybe the dumbest thing I've ever read. And of course, let's blame those who can't afford health care for the high cost."
#29 | Posted by AndyB62 at 2009-09-14 10:43 AM |

So you understand the word "dumb" but are obtuse to the meaning of a simple sentence? Is it possible daprof meant those who CAN AFFORD INSURANCE but choose not to have a policy? They are part of the equation just like those who can't afford it, right? You know, the 47 millon uninsured?

#29 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-09-14 10:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

President Obama will be signing Healthcare legislation into law by the end of the year......

....that will still involve insurance companies, their CEOs and their private jets.

deal with it leftwingers.

#30 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 10:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

"They claim to give to charities but yet they will write it off of their taxes negating the charitable donation..."
* * *

Ummm . . . so? It still costs me money. If I'm in the 20% tax bracket and send a charity a thousand dollars, it still costs me $800 out of pocket. It's a deduction, not a tax credit.

If you want to pull selective Bible quotes out, how about, if you don't work, you don't eat? How about some of several dozen regarding homosexuality? You really wanna go there?

#31 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 10:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

"deal with it leftwingers."

You'll be dealing with it too. Surprise here, left winger's premiums are unaffected by political leaning. When you can't afford it you'll feel like a dope.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 10:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

"You really wanna go there?"

God I hope not. Larry's definition of the 14th amendment still has me scratching my head. I can't imagine what his religious take would be.

#33 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-09-14 11:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

"They claim to give to charities but yet they will write it off of their taxes negating the charitable donation..."
* * *

Ummm . . . so? It still costs me money. If I'm in the 20% tax bracket and send a charity a thousand dollars, it still costs me $800 out of pocket. It's a deduction, not a tax credit.

He's talking in the eyes of the lord, RIR, not economically.

#34 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 11:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

In the eyes of the Lord, I'm out $800. He's good at math too.

#35 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 11:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

When you can't afford it you'll feel like a dope.

If I can't afford it then you and many others will be in much worse trouble.

And yes, thanks for point out the obvious "you'll be dealing with it too".

Where do you think I have been living the past 40 years Danni? I understand the problems and have worked through them myself.

#36 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 11:04 AM | Reply | Flag:

President Obama will be signing Healthcare legislation into law by the end of the year. Deal with it rightwingers.

#32 | Posted by moder8 at 2009-09-14 10:50 AM
* * * *

Oh, I know. And he'll pull a battalion or so out of Iraq to show the 42-percenters that he's true to his word to withdraw our forces from there.
But it'll be hollow. The so-called public option is DOA, and good riddance to that stupid idea. Obama is a dog-and-pony president, and so he'll have his Rose Garden ceremony for his legislation that doesn't do much.

#37 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 11:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

Affordable? Affordable? Ye gods, in the early 90s, I was self-employed. Sure, I could access COBRA--at 800 DOLLARS A MONTH.

Yes, I'm sure that there are those who could afford it but don't get it (stupid, really), but I"m equally certain that they fuck over the rest of us. When a catastrophic illness hits and they're uninsured, who picks up the tab?

And Diablo--read the fucking article (well, editorial), willya? France is not a socialist country, and their medicine is not socialized, either--it's a mix.

Do you critics know about the Swedish model? That might be interesting here--sure, it's regulation (boo, hiss), but it's also capitalism, just not unfettered. No companies outta business--but everyone covered. (I haven't done research on my own--this is my very basic understanding.)

#38 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-14 11:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

The public option, as explained by President Obama the other night, actually makes some sense. I'd have to see details and oversight (where the immigrant issue got in trouble), but you know, it doesn't matter because the Republicans have pretty much said they'll vote against any change that's not sponsored from within their ranks.

And lobbyists and insurance companies should _not_ be at the table. It is Congress's job to regulate, not ask permission.

#39 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-14 11:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

In the eyes of the Lord, I'm out $800. He's good at math too.
#39 | Posted by rightisright

Missing or purposely ignoring the point.

#40 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 11:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

It is Congress's job to regulate, not ask permission.
#43 | Posted by pragmatist

What planet have you been living on?

#41 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 11:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

I understand the problems and have worked through them myself.

#40 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 11:04 AM |

There's a sentence foreign to the likes of danni. They don't want to understand and work through problems. They would rather piss and moan about why there are problems, and blame everyone and everything but themselves for having them.

#42 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-09-14 11:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

Harkin says 'strong public option' will pass by Christmas

In striking contrast to comments made this weekend by GOP Sen. Olympia Snowe, Tom Harkin (D-IA), the new chairman of the Senate Health, Education and Labor Committee, declared Sunday that a public option will pass.

"Mark my word I'm the chairman it's going to have a strong public option," Harkin said at an Iowa fundraiser, adding that it would pass "by Christmas." Harkin replaced Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) as the committee's chair upon Kennedy's passing.

"[It] now falls to me to pick up the torch," he added. Harkin's remarks were picked up by the Iowa Independent.

rawstory.com

#43 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-14 11:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

I love it when the libs here decide on what the motives are for others. And how they just assume things not in evidence.
---

Larry -- Bullshit. Economic damages with a limited punitive damages would be just fine. Or are you a lawyer that makes a living chasing ambulances for your 30%?

--
Larry/ Hagbard -- Hell yes I deduct it. Because that's part of the tax code. The REAL question is do either of you even donate anything? And as Eberly & Vernon point out, it still comes out of my pocket.

PS: I'm not a "Christian" so the bible doesn't apply. Yep, an ATHEIST that actually donates for the care of their fellow human beings.

---

Andy -- People make that decision all the time. Not ALL people, Andy. And those that can't afford to make that decision have other charitable and existing governmental options.

---
Danni -- If for some reason I end up unable to pay for my health care, then I probably have a few financial other problems. But I already know there are charitable organizations out there that will help me in my possible time of need. And they did help me in my ancient past, which is one reason I contribute to them now.

-----

So Larry, Andy, Danni & Hagbard....Do any of YOU contribute to any charities that take care of your fellow citizens? And do YOU take it off your taxes?

#44 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 11:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Yep, an ATHEIST that actually donates for the care of their fellow human beings."

Sounds like me, though I'm not fool enough to be sure there is no god.

but most of my donations go toward helping family members. no deductions for me there. :(

#45 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 11:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

Danni and moder8 how big a hole do you want to dig? Your own admission is the whole was huge because of the prior idiot. I'll agree on that, but you have exteremely large non partisan groups protesting the Sociization and people like you two want to support it. I wish we could have two separate countries, those who want the gov't to take care of them and those who want very limited gov't. I know where I would head. And resposibilty would rule. It would not be a left right thing, but a real make your bed you lie in it. With all the poeple on your side looking for someone to take care of them you would have anarchy, and would look a lot like 1776. Real history you morons. Too much gov't will not be good. Hard work will pay off, not hand outs.

#46 | Posted by NonDLR at 2009-09-14 11:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

"So Larry, Andy, Danni & Hagbard....Do any of YOU contribute to any charities that take care of your fellow citizens? And do YOU take it off your taxes?"

If I give to charities it is my business, and I'm not the kind of person that would brag about it when I do. I wouldn't deduct it though because it wouldn't be a large enough amount.

"But I already know there are charitable organizations out there that will help me in my possible time of need."

So, you'd rather depend on charity than reform helth care. Now that's not just brilliant but sort of pathetic as well. I'd much rather be responsible for myself as I always have been and change the way we do healthcare so that I always will be able to.

#47 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

"but a real make your bed you lie in it."

BRING OUT YER DEAD!!!

#48 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 11:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Danni and moder8 how big a hole do you want to dig?"

Obviously not as deep as you do and obviously you don't even bother to listen to the President when he tells all of us that reforming health care is absolutely necessary to reduce deficits in the long run. Rising health care costs are the fastest growing portion of the budget. Maybe if y'all shut up for a minute and listened you might learn something.

#49 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 11:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Obviously not as deep as you do and obviously you don't even bother to listen to the President when he tells all of us that reforming health care is absolutely necessary to reduce deficits in the long run."

Soooooo... If on one hand the Pres. is willing to increase the deficit now, in order to bring it down in the long run, then on the other hand he says he won't sign a bill that increases the deficit....lol

#50 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-09-14 11:31 AM | Reply | Flag:

So, you'd rather depend on charity than reform helth care.

in one way or the other, it really is just the same thing.

#51 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 11:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

My proposal on the public option: Legislate that they must charge premiums such that they make a 'profit' after expenses and payout of 5%. Return that 'profit' to the US general fund. This should end the right-wing bellyaching about 'unfair' competition from the public option. If they are as efficient, then they will be able to make a decent profit without losing market share.

#52 | Posted by mad_as_hell at 2009-09-14 11:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Legislate that they must charge premiums such that they make a 'profit' after expenses and payout of 5%."

I think that's a good idea but the only thing is even if they make the "profit" the right wing will always claim they are lying about the figures. You will never please them because this argument isn't really about reforming health care, it's about destroying Obama's presidency. They did the same thing to Clinton. It's what they do when they are not in power to try and prevent any change.
It's also why the country is in the desperate straits that it is.

#53 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 11:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

The sad thing about this whole debate is there is too much politics in it and not enough of doing the right thing. We will just end up with a convoluted cluster bomb that will make us worse off and not better off in the end.

Medicine and Insurance is big business here. Congress will do what is right for them and not the people. Doesn't matter what side of the isle you are on, more people are interested in the campaign dollars then doing the right thing. They all have their interests to protect when they should focus on the American People and really do something momentous. Just saying everyone gets health care does not take this far enough. Medicine, Insurance and Lawsuits as a whole need to be re re-examined and dealt with together. Like I said too much influence by these industries to get what is right for the country done though.

#54 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2009-09-14 11:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

Some people are just ignorant as Larry proves here.

#55 | Posted by rwebst at 2009-09-14 12:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

The main point Cohen is making has to with the level of misperception. Many here scream that France is "socialist" without taking into account just how "socialist" the U.S. already is, - including on issues of healthcare. What he is tactfully trying to point is just how stupid and ill informed rightwingers are. This of course is no surprise. In fact it is something the rightwing leadership and the corporations who control them are counting on.

#56 | Posted by moder8 at 2009-09-14 12:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

How many teabaggers were out in their motorized chairs yesterday protesting the very socialism that paid for them???

#57 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 12:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What planet have you been living on?"

LMAO. Thanks, Hag, for the reality check. You're right--it doesn't happen, not without lobbying interference. But as it turns out, they do have the power to do so, no matter what the so-called free marketeers want us to believe.

And to whomever said they have the money to pay for health care, well, I wish I had your income--or your wealth. 50% of bankruptcies in this country (well, that's the common stat, and not put forth by Obama--I was reading that two years ago) are due to medical costs. You are one catastrophic illness away from that, if you don't have insurance or if your provider plays fast and loose with your preexisting condition (life).

And btw, I think it's part of the social contract: police, fire, school, health. I also think that we need to pay more attention to preventive (or preventative, as the medical field redundantly insists on saying) medicine. Of course, that's awfully hard to legislate.

#58 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-14 12:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

As a nation, we should take care of each other---that's the concept behind a socialized military, and socialized schools---to extend the concept of helping and protecting fellow Americans from diseases and illness would seem to follow logically. Many Christians seem to fail to see the connection.

#59 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-09-14 12:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Bob, many _Americans_ fail to see the connection, no matter their religious affiliation.

And I don't know about "socialized"--at least not if it means "socialistic." Of course, it seems most Americans don't know what socialism is, and too easily conflate it with totalitarianism. Never mind the cult of the individual in this country (and in much of Western society).

#60 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-14 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Bob,
I think you fail to see the connection that a Biblical model would be free from the government control over things, and would be voluntary not manditory.

Once it becomes manditory it does not work.

#61 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2009-09-14 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

An ideal Biblical model would be voluntary communism.

#62 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2009-09-14 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

We like to think of that as "single-payer", thank you ever do much.

#63 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-14 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Exps: Your "biblical model" sound a lot like Karl Marx's version of Communism. LOL. We all saw how well that worked. But on the other hand, with equal success (meaning failure) from time to time we have also seen how well the biblical model works in various parts of the world.

#64 | Posted by moder8 at 2009-09-14 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

SO much, lol

#65 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-14 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Once it becomes manditory it does not work."

Yeah, we should just eliminate the government and let Christian charity be the primary health care provider. Riiiight.

#66 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Once it becomes manditory it does not work."

Yeah, we should just eliminate the government and let Christian charity be the primary health care provider. Riiiight

Danni, we all udnerstand that you like to take things out of context and attribute statments and thoughts to people of which they never had, you can stop at this point.

I am talking about the Biblical Context... you took it to another context to make yourself look witty. We understand that some people just need to feel good about themselves every once in a while.

#67 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2009-09-14 12:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Legislate that they must charge premiums such that they make a 'profit' after expenses and payout of 5%.
* * *

LMAO. Go ahead. Right now their profit margins average 3.8%.

Maybe you could do the same thing for the airline industry, grocery stores, chemical companies, furniture, and big oil. Profits for everyone!

#68 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

How many teabaggers were out in their motorized chairs yesterday protesting the very socialism that paid for them???

#61 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 12:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't know danni...how many did you count and validate they weren't paid for by the individual and their own health insurance?

Oh wait, was that just meant as a distractor?

#69 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

"LMAO. Go ahead. Right now their profit margins average 3.8%."

Figured with advertising, bloated administration and huge compensation for executives.

#70 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Go ahead. Right now their profit margins average 3.8%.

I hate to tell you dufus but that's just what the corporations earn on every dollar spent. Don't you wish you could get that kind of return on a bank account or CD these days? Apparently you are another ding dong that doesn't realize that most of the profit went to corporate administrators in the form of ridiculously high salaries and bonuses.

It's because of dip shits like you that they get away with it, not in spite of you. If we had a public option for health care these companies would all clean up their act and start acting competitively instead of robbing the till with every single transaction and at the suffering of the masses.

#71 | Posted by RingMaster at 2009-09-14 01:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Oh wait, was that just meant as a distractor?"

Just pointing out that many of those protesting are already enjoying the benefits of socialized medicine that they say is so horrible. Just don't ever try to take it away from them though.

#72 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 01:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, Ring. Because we all know how much better the government is at running things, and holding costs down.

So you're 24, and you still believe in leprechauns?

#73 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 01:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Danni, it is not a right wing thing and you're a nut job to want to follow the mighty one without looking at relistic alternatives. This is just the current cause. What happen to the Illegal debate that was so important two years ago. That one should be taken care of first as it will impact the health care amount, but go ahead take more of mine you deserve it. That is such a lazy go nowhere fast position. And brings us all down. People who work hard typically make it if you don't give them excuses. Who you going to blame, that's all you bring to the table. Us (for the most part) Teabaggers, (I'll use your attempted derrogatory name) want accountability, not thievery by elected officials.

#74 | Posted by NonDLR at 2009-09-14 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

So you're 24, and you still believe in leprechauns?

#77 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 01:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Believes in "God"

#75 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-09-14 01:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, Ring. didn't you know that the gub'mint is ebil? We know because Ronnie Reagan told us so.

All that crap about government of, by, and for the people?

It's a Commie Plot.

#76 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-14 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

How about some of several dozen regarding homosexuality? You really wanna go there?

#35 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 10:55 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

I just love You swinging dicks here. Your folks on the Right are the ones who keep bragging out of their asses that they are the ones who give more to charity. It's those same assholes who profess to being better Christians than We heathenous Liberals. Seems to Me when You give monies to charity and then report it in ANY Venue You are just a walking talking contridiction in terms. I find it blatantly funny to say the very least. Oh and RIR it ain't the Liberals who profess to being upstanding holier than thou Christians. It ain't the Moral Majority Left. It ain't the Christian Liberals. It's not the Compassionate Liberals. You wouldn't understand RIR.

Larry

#77 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

If we had a public option for health care these companies would all clean up their act and start acting competitively instead of robbing the till with every single transaction and at the suffering of the masses.

#75 | Posted by RingMaster
* * * *

Well let's think about that. I remember in the 1990's when you libbies were all beating the drum on Big Pharma, when they DO have government competition, in the form of the NEH. GM is now government-owned--now what do you think is more likely to happen? That Toyota will lose market share because there's no longer a profit motive at GM? Or that the quality of GM will suffer, because they don't care about making money anymore, and that will INCREASE sales at Ford, Toyota Motor, and BMW?
Your confidence in the government is cute. They can do so many things so well, I don't know why I'm concerned at all . . .

#78 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 01:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Apparently you are another ding dong that doesn't realize that most of the profit went to corporate administrators in the form of ridiculously high salaries and bonuses.

Are you another ding dong that doesn't realize that other industries such as oil, airlines, grocery stores etc... do the same thing? You can't just hold up insurance companies as an industry that pays it's executives huge salaries and bonuses. It is a stupid argument and it shows that what you are interested in most is getting those fuckers instead of actually helping all Americans.

Recognizing profits of insurance companies and the salaries of it's executives is fine with me and I'm glad that it has gotten some press but it would appear that it is the only thing you and folks like danni are really interested in. If it weren't then it wouldn't be mentioned here 24-7 after pointing out that the profit margin is lower than many other industries and that if the executives worked for free then it would make no significant difference in anybody's premiums. It is just fucking envy and nothing more and it has nothing to do with real solutions.

And before you clean out your depends and try to throw it on me I will advise you that I am for a public option to force insurance companies to place more competitive products into the market.

#79 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 01:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

It ain't the Christian Liberals. It's not the Compassionate Liberals. You wouldn't understand RIR.

Larry

#81 | Posted by LarryMohr
* * * *

I guess I don't. It's only charity if you don't claim it as a tax deduction? The surveys regarding political affiliation and charitable donations of money and time don't come from the IRS; they come from the agencies themselves. Even if the libbies didn't feel like writing a check and claiming a deduction, what's to stop them from volunteering?
So, why don't they, at least in the numbers conservatives do?

I know. It's because you've decided to outsource your charity to the government, paid for by people making more money than you, in the form of higher taxes. Maybe that's what Jesus had in mind.

Or maybe not.

#80 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 01:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obviously has no clues RIR. If Your Right Hand is Your Charity hand You aren't supposed to let Your left hand know the Right gave anything. Oh whats the use anymore . Sighhhhhhhhhhhhh

Larry

#81 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Are you another ding dong that doesn't realize that other industries such as oil, airlines, grocery stores etc... do the same thing?"

Are you another ding dong that doesn't realize that unlike other industries such as oil, airlines, grocery stores etc, the government is on the hook for the payments, with that number set to spike in the coming years?

"the profit margin is lower than many other industries and that if the executives worked for free then it would make no significant difference in anybody's premiums"

Then it must be the administrative overhead. I guess it costs a lot for all those death panels to deny all that care.

#82 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-09-14 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

I just love You swinging dicks here.

this would represent the only thing that larry posted that is true.

#83 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

I just love You swinging dicks here.

What about the DR womenfolk? Don't we get any love too?

LOL

#84 | Posted by CalifChris at 2009-09-14 01:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

no.

I guess it costs a lot for all those death panels to deny all that care.

not really.

In any case, you just can't understand that high cost healthcare is MORE than just an insurance company problem.

#85 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 01:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Andy -- People make that decision all the time. Not ALL people, Andy. And those that can't afford to make that decision have other charitable and existing governmental options. DAPROF

You still don't get it. Where are these wonderful charities that cover all of the people who can't afford health insurance and make too much to qualify for Medicare? I know Bush I and II made big shows of supporting "faith based" charity, but the fact is these charities barely make a dent in the families (including children that repbus are so concerned about) without insurance. I have first hand knowledge of families without insurance and why they don't have insurance. The reason isn't because they don't want it. And as a preemptive answer to your next question, it's none of your business where my charitable constributions go.

#86 | Posted by AndyB62 at 2009-09-14 01:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

What about the DR womenfolk? Don't we get any love too?

LOL

Posted by CalifChris at 2009-09-14 01:52 PM | Reply

Sorry Christine that is a favourate saying around here for when we get pissed. It goes all the way back to My Grandpa. If He was ever highly pissed off He would say You know what fucking irks Me about those swinging dicks. There's (Insert pissed off rant here) Oh and before anyone gets lippy He was very straight. So no Gay jokes. Next time I won't leave You out Christine.

Larry

#87 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obviously has no clues RIR. If Your Right Hand is Your Charity hand You aren't supposed to let Your left hand know the Right gave anything. Oh whats the use anymore . Sighhhhhhhhhhhhh

Larry

#85 | Posted by LarryMohr
* * * *

There's no use. You're trying to convince me that it's not really charity if I take an income tax deduction, never mind that I can do no such thing for my time, only if I write a check. And even in that case, my tax return is supposed to be confidential--nobody DOES know what I'm doing.
But you use it as a justification to give nothing at all, and pretend that militating for the government to give away stuff with other people's money is the same thing as the Great Samaritan. It isn't, and neither are you.

#88 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 01:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

You know Eberly You used to be Top Notch. When You lived in the city just west of Wichita. You weren't so removed from Your upbringing in Western kansas. Dude what the fuck happened to You between Maize and Kentucky?? Now You're just the drizzling sharts.

Larry

#89 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 01:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

well as we all know, the govt isn't involved in oil companies with special tax subsidies (which still exist unless I'm mistaken...no comment from the left) and the govt has never gotten involved into the airline industry and it's problems..

:-(

#90 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 01:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

You know Eberly You used to be Top Notch.

I haven't changed one bit. If anything, I'm less conservative.

#91 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 02:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"In any case, you just can't understand that high cost healthcare is MORE than just an insurance company problem."

I'm sure you're joking. I've posted dozens of times about the myriad of problems.

"the govt isn't involved in oil companies with special tax subsidies "

Huh? They got billions in the last round of Bush tax codes.

"...and the govt has never gotten involved into the airline industry and it's problems.."

Probably because there is no government program covering airline travel for everyone over 65, all Veterans, all government employees, etc.

#92 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-09-14 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

I haven't changed one bit. If anything, I'm less conservative.

Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 02:00 PM | Reply

Like hell You haven't. You weren't so much removed from Your upbringing. It always happens it seems when people get promoted to the big time. They forget where they came from. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with Right or Left either. Sighhhhhhhhhhhh

Larry

#93 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-14 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

GM is now government-owned--now RIGHTISWRONG

No, GM isn't government owned. Do you ever post anything that is correct?

#94 | Posted by AndyB62 at 2009-09-14 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm sure you're joking. I've posted dozens of times about the myriad of problems.

And I have posted them as well and others here have too. But I'm not aware of any reform that addresses those problems.....just insurance companies. It's easier for Obama to just make speeches about the villian and then go backstage and shake hands with them while laughing about some of the idiots here who think making a villian out of insurance companies will really do very much.

Those other problems need to be on the table right now.

#95 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Huh? They got billions in the last round of Bush tax codes.

sarcasm Danforth. Airlines, oil companies, car companies, banks etc....all of them have had govt involvement. that was my point.

#96 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

"sarcasm Danforth"

Sorry...I've barely had 8 hours of sleep in the last three nights. I need to recalibrate my meter.

#97 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-09-14 02:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I also think that we need to pay more attention to preventive (or preventative, as the medical field redundantly insists on saying) medicine. Of course, that's awfully hard to legislate."

How does one legislate exercise and proper diet? A law of common sense? Of course there would be no lobby money, IE tobacco, alcohol, insurance etc. so that idea won't get far.

#98 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-09-14 02:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

GM is now government-owned--now RIGHTISWRONG

No, GM isn't government owned. Do you ever post anything that is correct?

#98 | Posted by AndyB62
* * * *

You're right. The government owns 60% of it. It's not like a majority stake or anything . . .

And how's that big investment in AIG working out? Or Fannie and Freddie? What we really need is for the government to buy out like 60% of America's hospitals. That would be a great idea.

#99 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 02:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

The government-orchestrated shrinkage will cost taxpayers $30 billion, on top of $20 billion in U.S. funds already put into the company. In exchange, the U.S. will own 60% of the new GM. In all, the rescue of the car industry could cost taxpayers close to $100 billion.
online.wsj.com

* * * *

Here's a link for you Andy. I know it's hard to be well-informed when your only information source is Air America. Fortunately, others of us have a clue.

#100 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 02:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

This guys doesn't mention insurance companies directly although we can argue their fingerprints on some of his reasons.

finance.yahoo.com

#101 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 02:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

President Obama defended his decision to take a majority stake in GM, saying it was unavoidable and temporary. "We are acting as reluctant shareholders," he said in a televised address.
* * *

You don't watch TV, either?

#102 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 02:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

What we really need is for the government to buy out like 60% of America's hospitals. That would be a great idea.

Dont' forget the oil companies and Pharma industry.

All of the corruption and greed is now over.

Utopia has now been established.

#103 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 02:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Good news for the socialists: Obama will probably get his health care bill to sign.

Bad news for the socialists: it will reward the Democrat's corporate and union sponsors.

Lesson: there is no problem that government can't make worse.

#104 | Posted by Ray at 2009-09-14 03:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Too bad for Ray that a move to socialism isn't on any American politician's agenda (well, maybe Bernie Sanders)...

#105 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-14 04:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

"So Larry, Andy, Danni & Hagbard....Do any of YOU contribute to any charities that take care of your fellow citizens? And do YOU take it off your taxes?"

If I give to charities it is my business, and I'm not the kind of person that would brag about it when I do. I wouldn't deduct it though because it wouldn't be a large enough amount.

"But I already know there are charitable organizations out there that will help me in my possible time of need."

#51 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 11:20 AM | Reply | Fla

I see ... your answer is NO then.

#106 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 04:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

So you're 24, and you still believe in leprechauns?

The age is wrong, and my belief in leprechauns? You mean Shawn Hannity?

Your really slipping rightsright. I'll have to start calling you rightswrong if you don't come up with something plausable soon.

As for the comment that, "Because we all know how much better the government is at running things, and holding costs down.", I guess you never compared the price of postage and freight to the cost from UPS or Fedup.

#107 | Posted by RingMaster at 2009-09-14 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Move to France if you hate it so much.

Diablo, you think France or any other modern country just lets people move there?

If the labor force were free to simply relocate where prevailing conditions are better, that would scuttle the whole point of globalization.

Does your ideology so blind you that you renounce a cheaper, more effective, and more comprehensive method of delivering health care, simply because it's not the way we do things in America? That's just sad.

Did you feel this way when LBJ proposed Medicare, a Socialist single-payer system of which I rather hesitantly assume you are a beneficiary today?

#108 | Posted by snoofy at 2009-09-14 04:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Move to France if you hate it so much."

That's actually pretty funny when you think about it.

How would Diablo react if he heard, "Hey, Pedro, you don't like it here in Guanajuato? Sheet, man, why don't you just move to El Norte?"

#109 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-09-14 04:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

I guess you never compared the price of postage and freight to the cost from UPS or Fedup.

do you want to reconsider that retarded example.....the post office?

I'm not anti-govt services and not even anti-post office but that is a piss poor example.

#110 | Posted by eberly at 2009-09-14 04:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oh wait, was that just meant as a distractor?"

Just pointing out that many of those protesting are already enjoying the benefits of socialized medicine that they say is so horrible. Just don't ever try to take it away from them though.

#76 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 01:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

----
No danni, it means you can't answer the question nor prove your assumption regarding those in attendance.

#111 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 04:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

Andy -- People make that decision all the time. Not ALL people, Andy. And those that can't afford to make that decision have other charitable and existing governmental options. DAPROF

#90 | Posted by AndyB62 at 2009-09-14 01:54 PM | Reply

No Andy, you don't seem to understand that it is not the place of government to do what charities do. There is no provision in the Constitution for such an action. And the discussions in the Federalist Papers and other notes of the day indicate that the Federal government was NOT to be such a source.

You want to make it so? Then get an Amendment to make it so. But know that it is in opposition to what our country was meant to be.

#112 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 04:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Andy -- People make that decision all the time. Not ALL people, Andy. And those that can't afford to make that decision have other charitable and existing governmental options. DAPROF

And I see your answer is NO as well to the question.

Additionally, where are those charities? Just go to a local church/temple and ask.

Spend a few minutes checking out: http://
www.charitynavigator.org

#113 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 04:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Yep, an ATHEIST that actually donates for the care of their fellow human beings."

Sounds like me, though I'm not fool enough to be sure there is no god.

but most of my donations go toward helping family members. no deductions for me there. :(

#49 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-14 11:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

2 pts for honesty, Hagbard.

#114 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-14 04:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Awesome reponse!

#115 | Posted by chustz at 2009-09-14 05:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

So you're 24, and you still believe in leprechauns?

The age is wrong, and my belief in leprechauns? You mean Shawn Hannity?

#111 | Posted by RingMaster

* * * *

It's the punchline of a famous joke. I know, I know . . . they don't tell jokes on Air America.

#116 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-09-14 05:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

why is america the richest nation on earth

hint...it wasnt because of presidents like obama...

and his 60 min infomercial

he STATES

ILL OWN IT>.

I am sure we will have to remind you leftys of this comment when its gone under.
HOWEVER..as a smart pundit has also mentioned
this is a ploy...
his translation..
this is a means to use reconciliation because he will say..well I have to pass something.......

and then lets listen to liberals whine about THAT later when repubicans use the same thing because that barn door will be open on both sides.............hey what a mataphor.

#117 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-09-14 06:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Doesn't his plan take effect in 2013. That's convenient. After the next presidential election. He knows once it begins he's done for.

#118 | Posted by mysterytoy at 2009-09-14 06:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Doesn't his plan take effect in 2013. That's convenient. After the next presidential election. He knows once it begins he's done for.

#122 | Posted by mysterytoy

And the Republican plan took effect in 1973.

#119 | Posted by donnerboy at 2009-09-14 07:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Bob,
I think you fail to see the connection that a Biblical model would be free from the government control over things, and would be voluntary not manditory.

1 Peter 2:13
Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man.

You seem to be mistaken. Do you think Jesus would say--Health care for those who can afford it only---or do you think He would say--Health care for all, even the most poor among you. I think I know which Jesus you worship.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Once it becomes manditory it does not work.

You would have a point if every industrialized nation on the planet hadn't proven you wrong long ago. Canada and even Mexico protects all their citizens from disease and illness as best they can.

America--#37 in health care.

America--#50 in longevity.

America--#1 in health care expenses.

#61 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2009-09-14 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag

#120 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-09-14 09:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

"and then lets listen to liberals whine about THAT later when repubicans use the same thing because that barn door will be open on both sides............."

A bit late for that, the Republicans used it many times during Bush's presidency including when they passed that huge, irresponsible starve the beast tax cut of theirs.

I just realized something, all these years we have called the Bush tax cuts the "tax cuts for the rich", which was true but really we might have been smarter to have labeled them as the "Starve the Beast TAx Cuts" because perhaps by now enough people would understand what "starve the beast" actually means.

#121 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-14 10:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

our government was SUPPOSE to protect us from greedy [tyrannical] corporations.

payback is a bitch, "righties".

#122 | Posted by ichiro at 2009-09-15 02:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

President Obama's speech to Wall Street was awesome! Take heed!

#123 | Posted by ichiro at 2009-09-15 02:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

Elizabeth Warren is awesome! Take heed!

#124 | Posted by ichiro at 2009-09-15 02:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

I guess you never compared the price of postage and freight to the cost from UPS or Fedup.

do you want to reconsider that retarded example.....the post office?

I'm not anti-govt services and not even anti-post office but that is a piss poor example.

Yea? Well screw you. I live in Hawaii. Go back and look it up again. Gottcha Houlie.

#125 | Posted by RingMaster at 2009-09-15 02:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

Eberly... equal parts arrogance and ignorance.
Truly a well rounded conservative.

"He has lulled himself into a false sense of competence."
Unknown

#126 | Posted by BillyChan at 2009-09-15 04:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Oh, no--we have to wait in line for service! Gasp! You mean we can't have it _now_?!?! Holy shit!

The post office does good work, in my experience. I haven't suffered delayed packages or crappy service in well over fifteen years. Lines, yes. But hello--someone has to do the work. My experience with UPS and FedEx are both worse, in recent history. And this from a guy who used to use express mail services all the time.

Of course, your mileage may vary.

#127 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-15 08:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

There is no denying that the Health Care System needs some "fixing", but the government isn't the plumber we need to call.

Enter analogy hell:
The purpose of the gov't was to be more analogous to being the umpire in a baseball game, making sure the rules of the game (laws) are being followed and penalizing those that don't play according to those established rules(laws.)

In the same way, the umpire should NOT be the pitcher as well.

The rules can change by process and become part of the written rules that are adopted and followed.

There can even be different rulebooks for different games, such as the Major League vs T-ball.

But the Umpires don't pitch! Gov't job is to make sure the game is played within the rules and penalize those that don't.

And yes,sometimes the Ump needs glasses.

#128 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-15 08:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

Like hell we need the Government Option. We won't gbet anywhere in the Private Sector. Those fuck weasels only care about profits they never care about the citizenry. You God damned right we need a Government Option. Fuck those private Sector bastards. They had their chance to service the WHOLE populace. They failed miserably.

Larry

#129 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-09-15 09:02 AM | Reply | Flag:

"In the same way, the umpire should NOT be the pitcher as well.

The rules can change by process and become part of the written rules that are adopted and followed."

That's already happening now, Professor. We'd just be eliminating the middleman, i.e. lobbyists who contribute to the right legislators to get exactly the kind of legislation they are looking for, if they aren't just providing a copy of the bill they wrote themselves.

#130 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-15 09:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

You didn't know that the deduction is not dollar-for-dollar, did you?

#14 | Posted by vernon at 2009-09-14 10:08 AM

Of course that's what he thought. He's a fucking idiot. What else would you expect?

Further, I'm sure he's just down-playing the contributions of others to sate his own dirty conscience.

#131 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-09-15 10:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

Bob,
I think you fail to see the connection that a Biblical model would be free from the government control over things, and would be voluntary not manditory.

"1 Peter 2:13
Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man.

Bob, I think that Jesus would say, as he taught the apostles, "if a man does not work, he does not eat." You don't just sit back and relax, life was about hard work. If you couldn't work a job, you farmed, if you couldn't farm, you fished, if you could not fish, you were a carpenter or another trade. If you could not do anything you were at the mercy of those around you. It is not their requirement to take care of you on a governmental level.

It was required if one is to claim they are in Christ. However taking charitable acts in terms of the Bible and applying them to the government is laughable.

#132 | Posted by expsredemption at 2009-09-15 11:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

"if a man does not work, he does not eat."

Thinks millions of uninsured people don't work.

Also thinks that the proposed public option is an ebil gub'mint giveaway, instead of a premium-based system that allows for enterprise level buying power.

(am giving the benefit of the doubt on whole "thinks" thing)

#133 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-15 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

In the same way, the umpire should NOT be the pitcher as well.

The rules can change by process and become part of the written rules that are adopted and followed."

#130 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-15 09:11 AM | Reply | Flag

=======

Yeah...hence "analogy hell" :)

So would they be the mobsters "encouraging" a certain outcome of the game with a stick or a carrot?

#134 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-15 11:29 AM | Reply | Flag:

Also thinks that the proposed public option is an ebil gub'mint giveaway

#133 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-15 11:20 AM

Thinks a subsidy isn't a giveaway.

#135 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-09-15 11:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

Thinks that a subsidy for the few percent that can't afford a low premium will break him.

#136 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-15 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

Thinks that a subsidy for the few percent that can't afford a low premium will break him.

#136 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-15 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag: Oops, Strawman

#137 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-09-15 11:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

DAPROF when someone is sick it isn't a game.
Sports analogies have no place in the health care debate.

#138 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-15 12:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

America is not about goodness and generosity for the have-nots, it is about greed for the mega-haves. It is not about America anymore it is about the competition of greed and having more wealth than God.

Wall Street is about greed just as is the US Chamber of Commerce. Their motto is "I've got my Manhattan Penthouse and beach houses on the east and west coast and on the Mediterranean and fuck you if you don't have yours".

#139 | Posted by Robson at 2009-09-15 07:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

I was watching this mega bitch (I'll call her that, you may think differently) today on CNBC and her name is Diana Furchtgott-Roth. IMHO she is a rich snob neocon capitalist with a special accent, and she was giving an opinion that American sheeple should be happy (to paraphrase) just to have a job and that unions are not in their interests.

The biggest joke of all was she once worked for the US Dept of Labor. I think you could say having her discuss what's good for American labor is akin to having Hitler discuss what is good for the Jews. She belonged in the Department of Labor like Hitler belonged in the JDL.

She and her neocon peers at AEI and Hudson represent a significant part of the problem that has resulted in America outsourcing its manufacturing sector so that the Wall Street casino can strip more wealth from average Americans. Her interests are about more money for a chosen few and less for the masses.

#140 | Posted by Robson at 2009-09-15 07:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Four of nine doctors, or 45%, said they "would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement" if Congress passes the plan the Democratic majority and White House have in mind.

More than 800,000 doctors were practicing in 2006, the government says. Projecting the poll's finding onto that population, 360,000 doctors would consider quitting.

More than seven in 10 doctors, or 71% the most lopsided response in the poll answered "no" when asked if they believed "the government can cover 47 million more people and that it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better."

#141 | Posted by mysterytoy at 2009-09-15 11:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

DAPROF when someone is sick it isn't a game.
Sports analogies have no place in the health care debate.

#138 | Posted by danni at 2009-09-15 12:32 PM | Reply | Flag

Danni,
There is no "game" here. You just like to try to twist the argument and deflect. Try to stay on task....or is that asking too much?

#142 | Posted by daprof at 2009-09-17 06:44 PM | Reply | Flag: