Healthcare Debate Is Sicko

What are you doing tonight, Max Baucus, Kent Conrad, Ben Nelson, and other Blue Dog Dems blocking real healthcare reform? If you can spare two hours, you ought to catch Michael Moore's newly hyperpertinent documentary Sicko on The Movie Channel at 8 p.m. Tonight doesn't work for you? You can also catch it on these dates.

We know it's extra hard for lawmakers like yourselves to sit for two hours and watch the 2007 Oscar-nominated expose without squirming, if only because corporate and rightwing propagandists have successfully painted Moore as anathema to mainstream thought and any public option as "rationed" care with commie bureaucrats standing between you and your blah blah blah. You've been brainwashed to think this way because, as Wendell Potter, former head of PR for the insurance company CIGNA, explained to Bill Moyers the other night, flacks like him specifically targeted Democratic centrists like you:

BILL MOYERS (reading from an industry memo): And there was a political strategy. "Position Sicko as a threat to Democrats' larger agenda." What does that mean?

WENDELL POTTER: That means that part of the effort to discredit this film was to use lobbyists and their own staff to go onto Capitol Hill and say, "Look, you don't want to believe this movie. You don't want to talk about it. You don't want to endorse it. And if you do, we can make things tough for you."

As for the truckloads of dirt that Moore uncovered in the industry and the superiority of government-run systems in other countries, Potter says, "I thought that he hit the nail on the head."

It's stuff like this that proves that not only is Michael Moore well within the mainstream on healthcare solutions, but that Bill Moyers is almost single-handedly keeping PBS relevant to modern journalism, though his techniques are as old-fashioned as a 1964 NBC "White Paper" report--just Bill, a guest, and a camera.

Senators, you can check out the full episode here. It'll only hurt a little.

Comments (158)

1. "hard for lawmakers like yourselves to sit for two hours and watch the 2007 Oscar-nominated expose without squirming"

   Nah, it's easy, utterly painless when insulated by all that grand loot flowing to lawmakers, their family & friends.

   God bless the US&A.

   Posted by sloper at 07/16/2009 @ 2:40pm

2. Nothing revealed by Wendell Potter is new. That the H-C insurers deny claims and coverages in order to raise profits is elementary.

   What is not recognized by most journalists, including good ones like Bill Moyers is that H-C is just part of our big problem: the problem of political campaign finance. It cannot be solved for many reasons, but one lies in the SCOTUS decision equating campaign spending with freedom of speech. That done, there is little left that can be done. It opens the door to circumventions and evasions of any laws that are passed to prevent wealthy interests running the country.

   This is true with regard to foreign policy, defense, financial regulation, environmental regulation and tax policy. Why should H-C be an exception? It isn't.

   What is needed is not new legislation. What is needed is a political revolution. That is not in store.

   Posted by goedel at 07/16/2009 @ 3:17pm

3. Posted by goedel at 07/16/2009 @ 3:17pm |

   I find your answer to be either incomplete or inconsistent.

   Can't congress make an amendment to the Constitution to rectify that particular interpretation of `speech' (and they say, "Money WALKS...")?

   Unlikely as all get-out, but a possible solution that doesn't require `revolution', no?

   Posted by snowball777 at 07/16/2009 @ 4:03pm

4. "the problem of political campaign finance."

   Posted by goedel at 07/16/2009 @ 3:17pm

   I will say this. I find it ironic that members of congress believe physicians receiving a pen or post-it notes with a drug's name on it will influence said physician's decision-making, but a congressman getting thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars from corporations only ensures impartial judgment.

   Posted by plainbruce at 07/16/2009 @ 4:18pm

5. I'm trying to figure out whether Ms Savan's article is a joke or she actually believes in Michael Moores thoroughly debunked "movie"?

   I lean towards joke when she calls his views "mainstream".

   Posted by antisocialist at 07/16/2009 @ 5:26pm

6. The progressive Left is in shock!

   Thanks to the "working as planned" & deficit-fueled Obamanomics, the healthcare "debate" is being preped for the cooler....to chill out awhile. Maybe it needs some kinda adrenalin shots to the heart? Quick, somebody call MJ's doctor!

   Posted by Happy at 07/16/2009 @ 5:51pm

7. Posted by plainbruce at 07/16/2009 @ 4:18pm |

   How about golf trips...or plain old cash kick-backs...or the likelihood of not being excluded from the next drug trial...or...

   Posted by snowball777 at 07/16/2009 @ 6:02pm

8. How about golf trips...or plain old cash kick-backs...or the likelihood of not being excluded from the next drug trial...or...

   Posted by snowball777 at 07/16/2009 @ 6:02pm

   Still on your elitist kick of demanding that doctors pay be set by govt while you have no such restrictions on your own income?

   Posted by antisocialist at 07/16/2009 @ 6:13pm

9. Posted by snowball777 at 07/16/2009 @ 6:02pm

   Still on your elitist kick of demanding that doctors pay be set by govt while you have no such restrictions on your own income?

   Posted by antisocialist at 07/16/2009 @ 6:13pm

   Oh, there will be market-based restrictions on snowball's income.

   I've still got one Chinese software stock...they are growing rapidly and includes gaming software in their businesses. Give them at most, another few years, before American game programmers will have their own Hopey and Changey! Their own market for gamers is huge!

   Posted by Happy at 07/16/2009 @ 6:32pm

10. I love how the nation is now using satire.

    That must be it. Because this article most certainly can't be considered serious.

    There's a little more to this story for anyone interested in the truth, courtesy of MRC: "Wendell Potter is a senior fellow at the left wing group "Center for Media and Democracy". Moyers is more than a public endorser of CMD. He's been a financial supporter, through his other job as the president of the Schumann Center for Media & Democracy (formerly the Schumann Foundation). This interview is merely the latest in a long line of Moyers PBS interviews that he hands out like candy to his Schumann grantees -- without disclosing the glaring conflict of interest to the viewers or the taxpayers.

    Welcome to situational socialist ethics. The left thinks its own non-disclosures aren't malicious because they're in the "public interest." They have no profit motive -- just power lust. Hiding your affiliations isn't dishonest when you seek to abolish the insurance industry and put the government in charge of everyone's life-and-death decisions.

    In the last two months, Moyers has featured three one-sided interview segments, pleading to impose a Canadian-style "single payer" system. He even insisted "Armageddon" was coming on health care, casting Obama as the Messiah and Rupert Murdoch, the Business Roundtable and the Chamber of Commerce as the Antichrists.

    If Moyers ever gets his way and America gets shackled to such a rigid and rationing system, you can be sure that if he ever gets denied care by the government, that hypocrite Moyers will take his PBS merchandising millions (that isn't disclosed to his audience, either) and buy better health care for himself."

    Posted by freiheit1 at 07/16/2009 @ 6:36pm

11. by freiheit1 at 07/16/2009 @ 6:36pm...

    Sure... but you are overlooking a few things... like...

    Fear of health problems leads many Americans to make career choices that will ultimately make them unhappy... just so they will have decent coverage...

    Catastrophic illness causes bankruptcies... even for those considered 'well off'...

    Complete Health care today is priced right out of 'regular' people's lives when they need it most... during a bad economy... when unemployed... when a preexisting condition disqualifies... when companies 'restructure' under preditatious new management...

    Our country spends way too much on health care while many suffer and die due to lack of affordable care...

    Most people who have government care in the world today are quietly proud of it, relaxed about their long-term health care concerns, and definitely satisfied with how easy the system is to use...

    Single payer is cheaper for clients, doctors and hospitals... easier for everyone... more respectful of the well being we all deserve... and will free small business to invest more in American jobs and competitiveness around the world.

    Posted by ttr at 07/16/2009 @ 7:47pm

12. Bill Moyers and Charlie Rose, though different, are at the pinnacle of journalistic integrity. Moyers' show always has serious people discussing serious topics seriously. This is why the right can't stand him. He isn't a clown like Beck, Limbaugh, O'reilly et al.

    Posted by erazma at 07/16/2009 @ 7:49pm

13. ttr has it right. The price of missing this opportunity on health care will be disastrous.

    The US will excel once again economically with a more just and affordable system. There is no one magic system to solve all problems, but I do believe that a public plan competing with private plans is a necessary component.

    Posted by erazma at 07/16/2009 @ 7:56pm

14. Pelosi wanted to wait to hear from the CBO, well now she has heard and so have we all!

    The Congressional Budget Office told lawmakers on Thursday that Democratic legislation to cut healthcare costs would have the opposite effect: federal healthcare costs would increase to "to a significant degree." And the massive tax increases already envisioned won't keep up with costs, causing the deficit to rise dramatically.

    What would anyone with a brain expect?

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 8:28pm

15. "Single payer is cheaper for clients, doctors and hospitals... easier for everyone... more respectful of the well being we all deserve... and will free small business to invest more in American jobs and competitiveness around the world.

    Posted by ttr at 07/16/2009 @ 7:47pm

    Sorry, I disagree with your rhetorical fantasy.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 07/16/2009 @ 8:39pm

16. Posted by erazma at 07/16/2009 @ 7:49pm

    Moyers is a shameless propagandist. He is a liar by omission. He is not even close to unbiased and represents a low point in journalistic integrity. Of course you like him. You suck up every drop of his Kool-Aid. That's fine. Just don't call it integrity.

    I will agree with you on Charlie Rose, however. Charlie doesn't secretly fund his guests through his foundation and then present them as objective guests like Moyers does.

    I actually enjoy both programs. I guess the difference is I see Moyers for what he truly is.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 07/16/2009 @ 8:47pm

17. It would be disappointing if the public plan option is removed from the bill. I hope to God it doesn't end up in a watered down bill with no hope for real reform.

    Posted by nursevic at 07/16/2009 @ 8:50pm

18. Yep, the Demoncrat congress is really concerned with the "will of the people"!

    "The year's biggest survey on healthcare reveals most Americans oppose the very reforms that President Obama is trying to push through Congress.

    By 52 percent to 40 percent, voters say they are against the healthcare bill introduced July 14 to the House of Representatives, a new Zogby International poll reports.

    Co-sponsored by the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, the survey is based on interviews with nearly 4,000 adults nationwide – the largest such survey conducted this year.

    The poll's findings: Americans oppose raising tax rates to pay for a new healthcare system. Instead, they favor innovative approaches that would save money, which in turn could be used to fund health benefits for the poor.

    Among those currently insured, Zogby reports, 84 percent are satisfied with their current health care. Also, four out of every five people surveyed agreed that rising healthcare costs are hurting American businesses.

    Pollster John Zogby says the results indicate that Americans want costs reduced and wish for everyone to be insured. But they are deeply divided on how to accomplish those goals.

    "The likelihood of achieving consensus is low," Zogby says. "

    Obamanations ratings and popularity are falling like a rock, guess the Magic is gone!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 8:57pm

19. Criminals have a GOOD friend in Obamanation and the Demoncrats when they already steal over 20% of the taxpayer money from medicare without even trying!

    "Every year, criminals and cheats pilfer over $100 billion -- that's $40 billion more than Bernie Madoff scammed off his investors -- in federal benefits to which they are not legally entitled. Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, refundable tax credits, and many other programs are targets for looting.

    Government fraud has been in the news lately because analysts are expecting major abuses of the Obama administration's $787 billion stimulus plan. One Deloitte expert argued that "swindlers, con men, and thieves could siphon off as much as $50 billion" of stimulus funds, which are vulnerable because policymakers are under pressure to shovel it out the door quickly.

    Even more troubling is the potential for fraud and abuse created by President Obama's other big spending proposals -- particularly his giant health-care plan. Obama wants to inject hundreds of billions more tax dollars into federal health care instead of fundamentally reforming Medicare and Medicaid -- broken programs that are already subject to Madoff-sized larceny. That is incredibly unfair to those of us paying the bills."

    Now thier good friends in D.C. want to give them even greater opportunity to steal with little or no threat of getting caught!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 9:14pm

20. Can anyone on the right give me a solution to the healthcare problem? How can we fix the healthcare problem? I hear a lot about the lefts solution but I never hear anything from the right on how to solve the problem of sky rocketing healthcare costs. So let's hear em all?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/16/2009 @ 9:28pm

21. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/16/2009 @ 9:28pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Easy way to reduce cost immediately to healthcare consumers is close the border to the 30million illegals costing us billions in lost healthcare costs we still have to pay the providers for! Thats #1

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 11:07pm

22. "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has insisted the Senate will deal with immigration and health reform separately. And Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) told the Dallas Morning News in May, "We're not going to cover undocumented aliens, undocumented workers. That's too politically explosive."

    But it's hard to envision how health reform can avoid tripping the immigration booby trap. Approximately 15–22 percent of the 46 million residents of the United States without health coverage are illegal aliens. That's about 9 or 10 million people. More generally, a third of the foreign-born are uninsured, Census data analyzed by the Center for Immigration Studies show. That means something like 12.6 million people, or more than a fourth of the total uninsured, are immigrants, both legal and illegal. Since 1989, immigration is responsible for 71 percent of the rise in those without health insurance. The fact is, the problem of the uninsured would be a more manageable one if the U.S. were not admitting millions of uninsured immigrants."

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 11:11pm

23. Excellent post Ms. Savan.

    I have read the posts here and the wingnuts immediately jump on the bandwagon that it must be a "joke" or "satire". Funny how they attempt to blunt the truth by useless attempts to cheapen the message. But that is all they have and all they are capable of.

    They deny that Michael Moore's Sicko was mainstream, and then attempt to discredit Wendell Potter. Both of which are impossible to do. But they try anyway.

    Posted by goedel at 07/16/2009 @ 3:17pm

    Very cogent post there, goedel. You get it. I'm glad to see that. Without Campaign Finance Reform to rid us of lobbyists and special interests none of the many needed reforms in this country stand a chance.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 12:03am

24. For those of us who have been fortunate enough to experience and benefit, first hand from the healthcare systems of other countries. Michael Moore's Sicko was a breath of fresh air.

    We know from experience how these systems work. And no amount of naysaying from the right can change that.

    We desperately need single payer healthcare in this country. And even more we need campaign finance reform.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 12:11am

25. Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 11:11pm

    So you are trying to blame our healthcare crisis on illegal immigrants? How inane and insipid of you.

    We don't have an illegal immigration problem in this country. We have an illegal employer problem. You know, the greedy unamerican bastards that hire undocumented employees so they can pay them crap wages and exploit them.

    Meanwhile legal American workers stand in the unemployment line.

    Greed is the cause of illegal immigration. Without it we wouldn't have a problem.

    Incarcerate the illegal employers. Then the illegal immigrants will go home. Until that happens we will have to suck up the cost of healthcare for those who are here illegally.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 12:36am

26. Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 9:14pm

    Another misleading post. You seem to infer that medicare fraud is committed by individual patients. That is not the case, in most cases this fraud is committed by physicians, medical assistants, company owners and executives.

    A simple solution to this problem would be to make payments directly to patients which would be specifically earmarked to pay doctors and providers. This would prevent those who are attempting to cheat the system from receiving compensation for treatments not performed or for patients that do not exist.

    You seem to be stuck on always blaming the victim. Weird.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 01:09am

27. "Single payer is cheaper for clients, doctors and hospitals... easier for everyone... more respectful of the well being we all deserve... and will free small business to invest more in American jobs and competitiveness around the world.

    Posted by ttr at 07/16/2009 @ 7:47pm

    Sorry, I disagree with your rhetorical fantasy.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 07/16/2009 @ 8:39pm

    haha!

    americans are stupider than canadians.

    haha!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 01:10am

28. just teasin', frei.

    here, read this. it's "funny":

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com /2009/07/empire-strikes-back-kohn-warns-congress.html

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 01:13am

29. Easy way to reduce cost immediately to healthcare consumers is close the border to the 30million illegals costing us billions in lost healthcare costs we still have to pay the providers for! Thats #1

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/16/2009 @ 11:07pm

    GUEST WORKER PROGRAM!

    sheesh.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 01:15am

30. We don't have an illegal immigration problem in this country. We have an illegal employer problem. You know, the greedy unamerican bastards that hire undocumented employees so they can pay them crap wages and exploit them.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 12:36am

    finally!

    try to work illegally in canada.

    or méxico, for that matter.

    GUEST WORKER PROGRAM!

    sheesh.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 01:17am

31. Sorry, I disagree with your rhetorical fantasy.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 07/16/2009 @ 8:39pm

    If you disagree with the truth, then you are living in a "rhetorical fantasy".

    Amusing.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 01:40am

32. Again I press the question. Who are these people? The rightie tighties who post their drivel here are a mystery to me. I truly cannot understand their arguments.

    Why do they persist in arguing positions that are clearly not in their own best interest? And on top of that, their arguments hold no water. It amazes me. It perplexes me. What sort of mental illness is this?

    The only thing that makes any sense to me is that are being paid to produce this nonsensical babble.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 01:55am

33. Anyone? Can ANYONE give me the "conservative" solution to the healthcare crisis?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 02:09am

34. Can ANYONE give me the "conservative" solution to the healthcare crisis?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 02:09am

    death.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 02:15am

35. Anyone? Can ANYONE give me the "conservative" solution to the healthcare crisis?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 02:09am

    There is no "conservative" solution to the healthcare crisis. Why would you even ask? Conservatives are bought and paid for by the healthcare industry. And many Democrats are aswell. Many democrats are not much better than the Pugs. That is a direct result of lobbyists. And it is why we need camapaign finance reform.

    The call for a "public option" is really a cop out. And falls well short of what is actually needed. Which is a single payer healthcare system. It is not that difficult to introduce a single payer system. We already have one.

    Expand Medicare to include all citizens. The politicians make it sound difficult. It is actually easy. But they will make a big deal out of this sort of change because they are bought and paid for.

    It's not that difficult to understand. That is why we need to march on Washington and demand a single payer system and campaign finance reform.

    But Americans are lazy and afraid. If we want change we will have to demand it.

    But we are weak. Sad.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 02:38am

36. The public option is a half measure. And will likely make things worse. It will end up as a cobbled up mess. Then the right can point to it as a failure. And Obama will point to it as a success.

    And meanwhile the American people will suffer. This is all bullshit. But bullshit will prevail. Because we have politicians who bow down to corporate america and do not serve the needs of the people. That is why the "people" need to show them who is the real boss here. But we probably won't because we are weak and cowardly. We have lost the ability to grab the steering wheel and steer.

    We will get what we deserve unless we stand up.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 02:50am

37. At this point I would call on the Nation Magazine to show some guts and rally the American people to Protest. Spend some money and use your influence to support a massive protest in Washington.

    It is easy to speak words. But much more difficult to produce action. To talk the talk without walking the walk is cowardly.

    Mobilize the people, Nation. Move On should participate also.

    I know this is probably a useless endeavour on my part.

    But it is all I can do.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 03:19am

38. Can ANYONE give me the "conservative" solution to the healthcare crisis?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 02:09am

    death.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 02:15am

    Except for fetuses or frozen embryos.

    Posted by koroviev at 07/17/2009 @ 04:40am

39. But Americans are lazy and afraid. If we want change we will have to demand it.

    But we are weak. Sad.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 02:38am

    We may be weak and sad but we've got I-Pods and I-phones and big macs and NFL and MTV and Starbucks and Hi-Def and Newspapers...Well we still got the MTV and Six Flags and porno and etc... So who cares about health insurance as long as we've got all this useless bullsh*t.

    Posted by koroviev at 07/17/2009 @ 04:47am

40. Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 02:38am

    I didn't ask for the politicians answer. I am asking for any conservative. I don't think all conservatives in the US are bought off by the healthcare industry. That would be impossible.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 05:23am

41. But it is all I can do.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 03:19am

    If politicians are as bought off what would a protest accomplish? You are presuming that Washington doesn't know how many people want universal healthcare. Huge rallies rarely accomplish anything. I went to Anti-War protests before Iraq. Iraq still happened. I know the symbolic stuff is what the left tends to lean on but you need to get some better tactics. Petitions and protests don't accomplish much of anything.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 05:29am

42. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 02:09am

    Actually, CCC, there are no specific "conservative solutions" for anything these days...not even "Obamanomics".

    What CAN they recommend and stay true to their "Reagan principles"?

    Can't suggest tax cuts, with large deficits.

    Can't suggest increased defense spending, same reason.

    And they can't suggest any REAL budget cuts, or face electoral disaster. Look at the budget debate a few weeks ago, House GOP offered up ...

    $23 Billion, with a "B", in cuts. On a 2 Trillion (with a "T") budget. And they knew it was a non-starter due to their minority status.

    Even if they promised to "end all of Obama's stimulus plan"....their numbers don't add up.

    Posted by Mask at 07/17/2009 @ 08:01am

43. I can tell you what conservatives suggest...

    STOP SPENDING...CUT SPENDING AND TAXES

    "And today? Obama's first budget will consume 28 percent of the entire GDP; state and local governments another 15 percent. While there is some overlap, in 2009, government will consume 40 percent of GDP, approaching the peak of World War II.....

    The deficit for 2009 is $1.8 trillion, 13 percent of the whole economy. Obama is pushing a cap-and-trade bill to cut carbon emissions that will impose huge costs on energy production, spike consumer prices and drive production offshore to China, which is opting out of Kyoto II. The Chinese are not fools. ....

    Obama plans to repeal the Bush tax cuts and take the income tax rate to near 40 percent. Combined state and local income tax rates can run to 10 percent. For the self-employed, payroll taxes add up to 15.2 percent on the first $106,800 for all wages of all workers. Medicare takes 2.9 percent of all wages above that. Then there are the state sales taxes that can run to 8 percent, property taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes and "sin taxes" on booze, cigarettes and, soon, hot dogs and soft drinks.

    Comes now national health insurance from Nancy Pelosi's House. A surtax that runs to 5.4 percent of all earnings of the top 1 percent of Americans, who already pay 40 percent of all federal income taxes, has been sent to the Senate. Included also is an 8 percent tax on the entire payroll of small businesses that fail to provide health insurance for employees. ....

    In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson called George III a tyrant for having "erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."

    Oh, yes. Obama also promises everybody a college education

    Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 08:58am

44. thers more....

    Coming to America to feast on this cornucopia of freebies is the world. One million to 2 million immigrants, legal and illegal, arrive every year. They come with fewer skills and less education than Americans, and consume more tax dollars than they contribute by three to one.

    Wise Latina women have more babies north of the border than they do in Mexico and twice as many here as American women.

    As almost all immigrants are now Third World people of color, they qualify for ethnic preferences in hiring and promotions and admissions to college over the children of Americans.

    All of this would have astounded and appalled the Founding Fathers, who after all, created America – as they declared loud and clear in the Constitution – "for ourselves and our posterity."

    These are real numbers....our taxes approach 60%

    Those in power now have killed off the America that made the world gasp in awe...and are giving us France that even the french wouldnt want...

    And we will save the planet? who will save us from the socialist engineers who have us heading for the cliff faster than Bush dreamed?

    ...

    Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 09:01am

45. Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 09:01am

    Okay, MAASCH, speaking of "real numbers"...

    give us some. Come up with a plan to "cut taxes, make no cuts to defense, and balance the budget"...and tell us EXACTLY where you get 100s of billions from.

    Do that....and I'll also guarentee you'd never see a Republican politician run on it.

    Posted by Mask at 07/17/2009 @ 09:05am

46. Did that years ago...

    Anounce 10% cuts across the board to EVERYONE AND EVERY DEPARTMENT IN GOVT AND IN "ENTITLEMENTS"..NO MORE EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT CHECKS..NO PAY NO CHECK.

    THEN ANNOUNCE THE SAME MEASURES WILL BE TAKING PLACE EVERY YEAR FOR 3 YEARS.

    Cut the rate of increase in spending to a real decrease.

    A simple and continuious announcement.,,should be simple for thr MSM to do, just change their message from loving Obama to saving the economy.

    The reason no republicans will run on it is they have begun to play the game the dems have for years.." I will give you more rights in exchange for your vote"

    It will take a conserative with a simple knowlege of check book finance.

    And it will not happen until we crash and we are crashing fast..while the drivers sleep at the wheel..for there are no conservatives in govt today.

    Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 09:29am

47. but a congressman getting thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars from corporations only ensures impartial judgment.

    Posted by plainbruce at 07/16/2009 @ 4:18pm

    Excellent observation.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 07/17/2009 @ 09:48am

48. nyone? Can ANYONE give me the "conservative" solution to the healthcare crisis?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 02:09am

    You won't get a conservative solution for two reasons. 1) They think everything is A okay as it is or 2) the conservatives blogging here can't reason for themselves. If they aren't told what to say and think, they sit on there asses in a similar fashion to their leaders in D.C. No ideas, but a lot of huffing and puffing like Rush Limbaugh.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 07/17/2009 @ 09:55am

49. sit on there...should be their.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 07/17/2009 @ 09:58am

50. Posted by antisocialist at 07/16/2009 @ 6:13pm

    "Still on your elitist kick of demanding that doctors pay be set by govt while you have no such restrictions on your own income?"

    Still engaging in false-characterization as an alternative to substantive debate?

    I consider the ESRB and its ilk to be a constraint on my income.

    Doctors can write all the software they want to, but, somehow, I'm not allowed to write myself prescriptions for antibiotics.

    And who are you to point fingers when you make your living off of state-mandated insurance?

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 10:27am

51. As almost all immigrants are now Third World people of color,

    •• you mean niggers, spics and sand monkeys, ¿right?

    they qualify for ethnic preferences in hiring and promotions and admissions to college over the children of Americans.

    •• boo hoo...

    All of this would have astounded and appalled the Founding Fathers, who after all, created America – as they declared loud and clear in the Constitution – "for ourselves and our posterity."

    •• "and fuck the indians".

    Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 09:01am

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 10:41am

52. Posted by Happy at 07/16/2009 @ 6:32pm |

    "Oh, there will be market-based restrictions on snowball's income."

    Uh huh...look at me, holding my breath...4th month of video game sales declines, but I'm still writing invoices and cashing checks.

    "I've still got one Chinese software stock...they are growing rapidly and includes gaming software in their businesses. Give them at most, another few years, before American game programmers will have their own Hopey and Changey! Their own market for gamers is huge!"

    And would there have been a market for games in China, but for the success of StarCraft in S. Korea and World of Warcraft in China? I think not.

    Here's the closest thing China has yet come up with to displace my `income'...

    http://english.people.com.cn/200512/08/ eng20051208_226552.html

    You really think that communists can CREATE entertainment that makes people line up around the block in the middle of the night to get people like me to sign their products?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTfmT23Jt7I

    Can I interest you in leasing a slightly-used bridge?

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 10:41am

53. Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 09:29am

    Okay, so your plan is to cut THIRTY PERCENT (30%) over three years....from Social Security and Medicare.

    And you think anybody who doesn't run on that brilliant plan is a "dem lite"?!??!?

    Posted by Mask at 07/17/2009 @ 10:50am

54. Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 09:01am

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/17/2009 @ 10:41am

    These are excerpts from an article writtn by Pat Buchanna....and the numbers are true..

    Frosty, you are one of thosew who is carried by the rest of your fellow citizens, so I expect you with your one line clown comments to be....irrellevant to discussions reagrding policies and who pays for them or how...you are one of those who take out much more than you put in...and are part of the problem in the long run.

    plain and simple...you are a cost.....and as an able bodied male today of youth and vigor, and therefore, there is no excuse for you to make $15,000 a year....and you should be...besides ashamed of your self as a bad example for your family(not mentioning preparing for their future, or do you expect others to do that?)

    ...cut off from all govt subsides and services...and be given an actual bill for what you use...you might be driven to get in the game and pay "your fair share"...

    Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 10:51am

55. These are excerpts from an article writtn by Pat Buchanna....and the numbers are true. Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 10:51am |

    Too bad the language used to disingenuously establish the context for those numbers is not.

    Obama's budget as 28% of GDP, vs Dubya's 20.1%, vs Clinton's 18.3%...

    If the Chinese 'are not fools', why are they pushing for renewables harder than we are?

    The top tax rate is not "the income tax rate", Pat.

    The top 1% pay ~20% tax rate, and only on the income they get which other's don't, of which there is plenty...enough to cause them to pay 40% of collected taxes; forgive me for not weeping for the likes of Dick Fuld Jr.

    Consumption taxes are not equally applied across society...quit smoking, drinking, and driving SUVs; talk about a sense of 'entitlement'.

    The blaming illegals for doing work we won't routine is a tired, failed gambit; your Chipotle lunch is a fine example. Are you willing to pay 5x as much for your burrito in exchange for sending them packing?

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 12:08pm

56. "What is needed is not new legislation. What is needed is a political revolution. That is not in store." Posted by goedel at 07/16/2009 @ 3:17pm

    Agreed

    The sad thing to me is that 52.9% of Americans may be under the impression that we just had one.

    Posted by thefullaunty at 07/17/2009 @ 12:15pm

57. Posted by thefullaunty at 07/17/2009 @ 12:15pm

    Yes, but if you go around carrying pictures of Chairman Mao (or Glenn Beck)....

    You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow!

    Posted by Mask at 07/17/2009 @ 12:48pm

58. American taxpayers are NOT buying Obamanation and the Demoncrats "Pigs in a Poke" style of politics!

    House Democrats and the Obama administration have been selling the idea of taxing the rich to pay for healthcare.

    Cato Institute Senior Fellow Dr. Daniel J. Mitchell doesn't buy it, saying it will be the middle class who will take the "collateral damage" and will end up paying for healthcare and all of President Barack Obama's new spending.

    In an interview with Moneynews.com's Dan Mangru, Mitchell said that there aren't enough rich people in America to finance big government and that small business owners will bear the brunt of Obama's new tax hikes.

    Mitchell states that taxing the rich will "hurt our economy and make America less competitive."

    He goes on to state that taxing the rich is code for going after investors and entrepreneurs, which will make America less productive and shift jobs to China and India.

    Mitchell said that if Obama wants to expand government control over every sector of our economy, including bailouts and creating government run healthcare, "he has to tax the middle class to make government bigger."

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/17/2009 @ 1:37pm

59. Yes, but if you go around carrying pictures of Chairman Mao (or Glenn Beck)....

    You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow!

    Posted by Mask at 07/17/2009 @ 12:48pm

    That's pretty good Mask or shall I call you John Lennon II?

    Here's a little something to ponder. I've included a portion of the article below. The article appears at CNNMoney.com and here's the link. http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/17/news/economy/economic_recovery.cnnw/

    "Summers also warned that "for quite some time, the United States will be living with the consequences of an over leveraged economy."

    The "common desire of households, businesses, and financial institutions to reduce their borrowing and improve their balance sheets will act as a drag on spending and growth," he said.

    "While painful, these adjustments are essential to laying a sound foundation for future growth."

    Summers made his remarks during an appearance at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a non-partisan think tank focused on global economic policy."

    What comes to mind reading this is that if they could or can forecast how the economy will be doing in 2010, then how in the hell did they miss the near collapse of the market in 2007 or in early 2008?

    Since Mr Summers was addressing a think tank for global economic policy, you have to wonder if per chance this whole economic downturn wasn't designed ahead of time with malice and forethought.

    Kind of amazing that the saved banks are now profiting handsomely and we're supposed to be happy to continue pinching pennies while they get rich off our dime. This is complete horsesh*t folks.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 07/17/2009 @ 1:44pm

60. Posted by BigPasture at 07/17/2009 @ 1:37pm |

    So one Senior Fellow at the Cato (damn you OJ!) does an interview at moneynews.com and you extrapolate that to "American taxpayers"?!?

    Your contention is that the 1%, who make 12% of the income, and pay an oft-quoted 40% of all income taxes in the US (or a 20% rate, for those actually counting), aren't sufficient to pay for healthcare?

    The Cato folks need smarter economists.

    Your laughable claim that investors will move whatever chunk of the US economy isn't already being made in China overseas is also amusing.

    I'm sure the small biz owners that are currently struggling to compete with MSFT and INTC to provide parity with respect to healthcare plans (as a self-employed contractor, I'm tempted to join the borg, believe me) are quaking in their boots at the relief offered by a public option.

    Take your ignorant fear-mongering back to big-fast-stupid-wasteful-monopoly-money-machine.com where it belongs.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 2:22pm

61. 1.So let's hear em all? Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/16/2009 @ 9:28pm

    1.Remove health insurance from the employer/employee relationship.

    2.Work with Insurers to offer 3 tiers of coverage.

    a. Full coverage as is typical of most coverages today, whether an HMO or PPO or both options.

    b. Catastrophic coverage which is already offered at much lower prices than full coverage.

    c.guaranteed Catastrophic coverage that covers even those not insurable currently. The costs to be partially shared by insurers and the policy owners of types a & b.

    3.Tort reform. I listened to some doctors yesterday sharing how their malpractice insurance costs are $200k a year and more. The average cost for a malpractice policy for a Doctor in the US is more than the average pay that a French doctor receives.

    4.Rationing of health care. This fixation by Americans to have every latest technology to extend their lives comes at a price. How many Americans received Kidney dialysis 20 years ago? Today, Dialysis centers are a thriving business and in states like California, even illegal aliens get free use of this treatment.

    As a note on this; health insurance deals are out there. I don't sell health insurance because I really don't care for the product or the marketing of it. But I just had a life insurance client age 47 tell me he just got a good plan here in California with a $2500 annual deductible for $125 a month.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 2:42pm

62. antisocialist wrote: "The average cost for a malpractice policy for a Doctor in the US is more than the average pay that a French doctor receives."

    are you saying it's more profitable to be a doctor in France? If so, then we should adopt their system. If not, then you moot your own "point"

    by the way---too funny that you won't sell health insurance but you will sell life insurance, which is really a misnomer, it's death insurance. (and, by means of your religion, you sell "death insurance" by being a pastor too).

    Forget health--it's all about death!

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/17/2009 @ 3:17pm

63. antisocialist wrote: "The average cost for a malpractice policy for a Doctor in the US is more than the average pay that a French doctor receives."

    are you saying it's more profitable to be a doctor in France? If so, then we should adopt their system. If not, then you moot your own "point"

    by the way---too funny that you won't sell health insurance but you will sell life insurance, which is really a misnomer, it's death insurance. (and, by means of your religion, you sell "death insurance" by being a pastor too).

    Forget health--it's all about death!

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/17/2009 @ 3:17pm

    No, I'm not saying it's more profitable in France. Point of fact is that the socialized medicine system there limits the pay that doctors receive just as they will attempt to do to doctors and nurses here.

    If you ever had the opportunity to deliver a check to a grieving spouse who is trying to figure out how to still raise their children, you would never make such a crass and inane statement like you did.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 3:29pm

64. Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 08:58am

    You didn't answer my question Jom. You went on a rant about your problems with Obama. I asked what the conservative solution to HEALTHCARE is.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 4:56pm

65. .Tort reform. I listened to some doctors yesterday sharing how their malpractice insurance costs are $200k a year and more. The average cost for a malpractice policy for a Doctor in the US is more than the average pay that a French doctor receives.

    Liv,

    You bring up tort reform and the cost of malpractice insurance. Ever thought that maybe the insurance industry is raking doctors over the coals on malpractice insurance? How many claims are made for malpractice that are successful versus doctors paying for malpractice insurance? I'll bet you the numbers are stacked heavily on the latter. In short, a lot of money is being made by the insurance industry on malpractice. The first place to cut costs there is the insurance industry itself (big surprise there).

    Instead of limiting malpractice suits, laws should be clear defining what actual malpractice is. Sure there are frivolous lawsuits out there, but then again, there are lawsuits where the doctor should lose his/her license. Medicine is a high risk, high pay field for the professionals working in it (not the insurance folks, the real medical people) . If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen and pick a different profession. I worked around a hospital as a biomedical electronics technician and decided then and there the medical industry wasn't for me....it wasn't the gore but the smells of surgery I didn't like. So, I picked engineering instead.

    Doctors pick their field and I haven't noticed too many poor doctors running around. They deserve the pay they get and should use their clout to hammer the insurance industry, not their patients. Most patients have no intention of suing. Perhaps a federal malpractice insurance set up would be better than privatized malpractice insurance.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:01pm

66. But I just had a life insurance client age 47 tell me he just got a good plan here in California with a $2500 annual deductible for $125 a month. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 2:42pm |

    They'd best read the fine print and make sure that actual Medical coverage is being provided, and not just Hospital care coverage, as is the case with many of the unhealth-insurance policies en vogue these days.

    Perhaps your doctor friends are paying so much for malpractice insurance because they've made several claims against same?

    Unfortunately, tort reform, when tried in several states, had little to no effect on the cost of premiums.

    Perhaps insurance companies are just that greedy (i.e. if their investment portfolio tanks, they pick YOUR pocket)?

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:04pm

67. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 2:42pm

    All good suggestions. Here is why it won't work. Because you are going to massively cut into the profits of insurance companies. They will not lower their prices if they don't have to. Otherwise they would have had to by now in order to compete. Malpractice insurance is a huge problem and is a result of a litigious society who sues McDonalds because you spilled their hot coffee in your own lap. But most of this requires the government forcing insurers to change their practices, because if you ask nicely they still won't do it because right now they are making money and they aren't going to give up making money.

    That's why the model of businesses works. Buissnesses don't work hard to satisfy their customers, they work hard to make money. Satisfaction of customers is seen as a way to do that not as a requirement. If they offer a product that that people won't say no to then they don't care about customer satisfaction.

    Let's take Microsoft as an example. Microsoft has no REAL competition in the OS arena. So when they release colossal failure like Vista, it's not really a big deal. So they shirk it off and HOPEFULLY they release a better product next time but who knows. It's what happens when companies don't actually have to compete.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:06pm

68. But I just had a life insurance client age 47 tell me he just got a good plan here in California with a $2500 annual deductible for $125 a month. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 2:42pm |

    If someone is actually offering lower prices it says to me that the price is more elastic than other companies are letting on. Which falls into my argument that these companies have no one to actually compete with.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:07pm

69. All good suggestions. Here is why it won't work. Because you are going to massively cut into the profits of insurance companies. They will not lower their prices if they don't have to. Otherwise they would have had to by now in order to compete. Malpractice insurance is a huge problem and is a result of a litigious society who sues McDonalds because you spilled their hot coffee in your own lap. But most of this requires the government forcing insurers to change their practices, because if you ask nicely they still won't do it because right now they are making money and they aren't going to give up making money.

    That's why the model of businesses works. Buissnesses don't work hard to satisfy their customers, they work hard to make money. Satisfaction of customers is seen as a way to do that not as a requirement. If they offer a product that that people won't say no to then they don't care about customer satisfaction.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:06pm

    Catastrophic coverage has been around for some years now, but unfortunately most people don't take advantage of it. That goes back to my contention that Americans have become lazy and simply want to be able to run to a doctor every time they get the sniffles or a sore throat. It is also one reason why most people didn't need health insurance as my own example I've shared before when I was raising my kids. We paid cash and never went unless it was a real emergency.

    I don't know where you get your understanding of business and customer satisfaction. That runs contrary to my nearly 50 years of work. I would posit that your argument applies to govt workers. My wife works for the County of Orange and she says that most of the people wouldn't last a month in the private sector.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 5:28pm

70. But I just had a life insurance client age 47 tell me he just got a good plan here in California with a $2500 annual deductible for $125 a month. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 2:42pm |

    If someone is actually offering lower prices it says to me that the price is more elastic than other companies are letting on. Which falls into my argument that these companies have no one to actually compete with.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:07pm

    What your post shows is your lack of knowledge about what determines price. In healthcare and especially in the insurance field, it is conditioned in great part from your expenses of which claims costs are the driving factor. That is why the company rate and also COBRA costs can be significantly different between 2 employers. If the claims history is reasonable, the costs go down and thus also the rates.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 5:39pm

71. What your post shows is your lack of knowledge about what determines price. In healthcare and especially in the insurance field, it is conditioned in great part from your expenses of which claims costs are the driving factor. That is why the company rate and also COBRA costs can be significantly different between 2 employers. If the claims history is reasonable, the costs go down and thus also the rates.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 5:39p

    It's not a lack of knowledge of what drives price. If your assertion is correct then the majority of peoples prices would be low. The problem is no one's prices are low even if you never claim anything. I have a friend who can't afford any healthcare plan even though she has had a clean bill of health her entire life.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:49pm

72. I don't know where you get your understanding of business and customer satisfaction. That runs contrary to my nearly 50 years of work. I would posit that your argument applies to govt workers. My wife works for the County of Orange and she says that most of the people wouldn't last a month in the private sector.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 5:28pm

    My argument applies to any industry in which there is no competition. Call the help desk at Microsoft and you will find out.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:50pm

73. . But I just had a life insurance client age 47 tell me he just got a good plan here in California with a $2500 annual deductible for $125 a month.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 2:42pm

    Such a deal! That means the poor sap has to pay $4000 out of pocket a year before he gets any benefits. What a crock. And then on top of that he will have to pay a 20% copay on services and on top of that maybe $10 to $50 for prescriptions. And god forbid if he really gets sick.

    I know I pay $4800 a year in premiums and have a $1500 dollar deductible. And I pay another $1200 a year for prescriptions. That is $7500 dollars a year even before I get the pleasure of paying my 20% co-pay. And United Healthcare doesn't pay anything or very little for some services. So I get stuck paying 80% and they pay 20%.

    I currently have 3 lawsuits pending for unpaid medical bills.

    This is immoral and a complete rip-off.

    I shouldn't be paying anything for healthcare. I'm paying 25% of my net annual income for fucking healthcare. And that is just for me. What if I had a wife and 2 kids on my policy? I would be paying 60% or more of my annual net income for fuckin healthcare. I know guys at work with families that pay $400 a week for healthcare. And they only take home $600 a week. That leaves $200 a week for a family of 4. Disgusting.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 5:54pm

74. We live in one messed up shithole of a country.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 5:57pm

75. It's not a lack of knowledge of what drives price. If your assertion is correct then the majority of peoples prices would be low. The problem is no one's prices are low even if you never claim anything. I have a friend who can't afford any healthcare plan even though she has had a clean bill of health her entire life.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 5:49pm

    I don't believe that you have all the facts about your friend. even though I don't sell it, I can get her low quotes to pursue.

    Even at my age, I could get Kaiser HMO with a $25 deductible for under $400 a month.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:10pm

76. Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 5:54pm

    Look we understand that as a Commie, you hate the market system.

    Just in case you attempt to deny you said you're a commie

    <I'm a commie, but not a Democrat. But I still thought that was a very good post you made there..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/06/2009 @ 09:38am>

    http://tinyurl.com/oyt2kz

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:14pm

77. Even at my age, I could get Kaiser HMO with a $25 deductible for under $400 a month.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:10pm |

    Bullshit.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 6:20pm

78. Just in case you attempt to deny you said you're a commie Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:14pm

    Actually I'm a socialist. But you can call me commie if you want.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 6:24pm

79. At least I'm not a liar. ;)

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 6:26pm

80. I don't believe that you have all the facts about your friend. even though I don't sell it, I can get her low quotes to pursue.

    Even at my age, I could get Kaiser HMO with a $25 deductible for under $400 a month.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:10pm

    The average person doesn't have $400 a month to spend on healthcare. I don't even have 400$ a month to spend on healthcare and I make twice as much as she does.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 6:30pm

81. The average person doesn't have $400 a month to spend on healthcare. I don't even have 400$ a month to spend on healthcare and I make twice as much as she does.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 6:30pm

    Life is about choices. Do you think healthcare should be free? If so, then you think that doctors and nurses should be slaves?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:35pm

82. Then why are you defending her when you have no better idea of her meaning?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:00pm

    WHat!? Are you kidding me? DO you know what slavery is!? Doctors and nurses would still be paid. They would still have the ability to quit. This post is as ridiculous as Lacewells.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 6:43pm

83. Life is about choices. Do you think healthcare should be free? If so, then you think that doctors and nurses should be slaves?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:35pm

    Asking for a universal healthcare solution has nothing do with the cost to doctors or slavery. This is absolutely ridiculous anti.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 6:44pm

84. Life is about choices. Do you think healthcare should be free? If so, then you think that doctors and nurses should be slaves?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:35pm

    And life is about choices. BUT I and her represent more than 60% of this nation when it comes to income. Which means more than 60% of this nation can't afford healthcare.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 6:45pm

85. * Deductible 40/3000 NM DED The Deductible 40/3000 NM plan has a $3,000 deductible and low monthly premium. $40 copay for preventive care and office visits, and $10/$35 copay for generic/brand prescriptions (all not subject to the deductible). No maternity coverage. $318.

    http://tinyurl.com/ng7os7

    This same plan for a 35 yr old female

    Deductible 40/3000 NM DED The Deductible 40/3000 NM plan has a $3,000 deductible and low monthly premium. $40 copay for preventive care and office visits, and $10/$35 copay for generic/brand prescriptions (all not subject to the deductible). No maternity coverage. $144.00

    Now compare the coverages on these 3 plans with little out of pocket for office visits.

    http://tinyurl.com/lexfmy

    Affordable healthcare is out there for anyone who really is serious about it.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:47pm

86. Life is about choices. Do you think healthcare should be free? Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:35pm

    FREE? Oh, you mean like in 35 other countries?

    Affordable healthcare is out there for anyone who really is serious about it.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:47pm

    Don't go out on a limb there Anti. Anyone really serious about it? Naw, no one is really serious about their health, are they? You have got to be kidding. Sad thing is, your not.

    I rarely have the opportunity to actually see a sociopath in action.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:06pm

87. Affordable healthcare is out there for anyone who really is serious about it.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:47pm

    Yeah, I'm sure most of the nation isn't serious about it. And all those people going bankrupt because they get sick even though they have healthcare weren't serious about it. I hate to tarnish your perfect view of the world but its not how it works. To the typical viewer it is obvious that healthcare is broken.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:11pm

88. Have you even bothered to watch Sicko Anti? Please tell me if you did. And what you thought about it. I'm always interested in the inner workings of a diseased brain.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:12pm

89. Affordable healthcare is out there for anyone who really is serious about it.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:47pm

    You seem to believe the world works in perfect balance and it would if humans were robots but we are not. That is why capitalist societies are regulated because if you let people do whatever they want greed would take over an there wouldn't be fair competition. This is what has happened with healthcare. They have realized they don't need to compete because they are in a market for a neccesary service. Which means they no longer compete with each other.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:15pm

90. "I shouldn't be paying anything for healthcare. I'm paying 25% of my net annual income for fucking healthcare. And that is just for me. " Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 5:54pm

    So, who SHOULD pay for your healthcare? Nothing is free.

    Posted by twillie at 07/17/2009 @ 7:21pm

91. Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:06pm

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:12pm

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:11pm

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:15pm

    You and Chaozen challenged my assertion on affordable healthcare and then when I provided proof, you both launched instead into attacks on my viewpoint rather than the facts.

    And as usual, chaozen who seems to lack the character for civil debate among adults, prefers to be the usual immature jerk.

    Did I or did I not provide evidence that affordable healthcar is available?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 7:23pm

92. They have realized they don't need to compete because they are in a market for a neccesary service. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:15pm

    You struck gold when you said "necessary service". That is why healthcare should be part of the commons. Like the Fire Department, Police, Roads, Libraries, Schools, Public Lands like parks and national forrest areas, National Defense and the like.

    Healthcare like these other services that are essential parts of what we hold in common and are not only necessary but vital to any civilized society. How would you like to have a for profit fire department? If you were not a member in good standing and had missed your last payment, they would just let your house burn down. That is just one example of the commons. For services that are essential.

    Healthcare is essential. And should be part of what we all hold in common.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:34pm

93. So, who SHOULD pay for your healthcare? Nothing is free.

    Posted by twillie at 07/17/2009 @ 7:21pm

    We should all pay for healthcare. Just like we do for the fire department, the police department, national defense and a host of other essential services in a civilized society. I can talk till im blue in the face but you pugs will never get it, will you?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:38pm

94. ANTISOCIALIST,

    Have you ever seen the movie Sicko? Simple question. And if so, what did you think about it?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:40pm

95. Walter Cronkite died. RIP Walt.

    Jeeze. I grew up watching him. Always made me feel good to hear his reassuring voice.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:43pm

96. Even at my age, I could get Kaiser HMO with a $25 deductible for under $400 a month. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 6:10pm |

    Bullshit. Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 6:20pm |

    At 32, with no medical problems whatsoever (literally one round of antibiotics and a 40 count bottle of Vicodin when I busted my collar-bone in a motorcycle accident), Kaiser cost me $160/mo when I started as an independent contractor 5 years ago.

    Today that same Copay/50 coverage is $242/mo (I just did a quote at kp.org).

    I ran the quote for someone 62 with a deductible 50/500 NM plan...

    Try $1091/mo, Anti (note: not less than $400) and probably even higher than that once you check the "have had cardiac event" checkbox.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:46pm

97. ANTISOCIALIST,

    Have you ever seen the movie Sicko? Simple question. And if so, what did you think about it?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:40pm

    It was so lacking in facts that it is appropriately titled sicko after it's twisted originator, Michael Moore.

    Here Moore is debunked by John Stossel

    http://tinyurl.com/l9bkmm

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x6yHrRq774

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 7:49pm

98. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 7:49pm

    You are hopeless. As a sometimes bad buddhist (trying to improve) I usually try and have patience with people. But try as I might, sometimes I just have to throw up my hands and mutter. Some people just can't be reached.

    Michael Moore cannot be debunked. The truth is very difficult to debunk even for the experts. And you and all the tinyurl's you bandy about ad nauesum are no proof of anything. I know from experience the healthcare systems of other countries. And have been around the world.

    Maybe you should try and sell your snake oil to those who never left the farm.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 8:07pm

99. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 7:49pm

    And you still have not answered my question. Have you watched Sicko? Or did you just read or watch some ignorant assholes debunking?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 8:12pm

100. Try $1091/mo, Anti (note: not less than $400) and probably even higher than that once you check the "have had cardiac event" checkbox.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:46pm

     Thanks for doing the legwork on that snowball. I was going to get a quote myself. But I took the shortcut of just calling Bullshit. If you call bullshit when Larry posts something you will be right about 99% of the time.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 8:15pm

101. "We should all pay for healthcare. Just like we do for the fire department, the police department, national defense and a host of other essential services in a civilized society. I can talk till im blue in the face but you pugs will never get it, will you?" Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 7:38pm

     Us "pugs", huh? I guess i misunderstood your statement, " I shouldn't be paying anything for healthcare". My bad. So why are you complaining about paying for your healthcare?

     Posted by twillie at 07/17/2009 @ 8:20pm

102. You and Chaozen challenged my assertion on affordable healthcare and then when I provided proof, you both launched instead into attacks on my viewpoint rather than the facts.

     And as usual, chaozen who seems to lack the character for civil debate among adults, prefers to be the usual immature jerk.

     Did I or did I not provide evidence that affordable healthcar is available?

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 7:23pm

     I would answer but neither of those links is leading to anything. Which means Ican't read the fine print. A plan can look affordable but not be. ARM's looked affordable to a lot of people but when the shit hit the fan it wasn't anymore. Which is the problem with a lot of healthcare. You get a cheap plan thinking it's going to protect you against everything and then when something happens it doesn't protect and leaves you just as poor as if you didn't have healthcare. Which is the problem. If you want decent coverage you have to pay an arm and a leg to get it.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 8:39pm

103. "How would you like to have a for profit fire department?"

     These actually exist. During the wildfires in LA private insurance companies dispatched their paid for fire fighters and the fire fighters said that while they were protecting one house they were watching the house next door burn down.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 8:41pm

104. So why are you complaining about paying for your healthcare?

     Posted by twillie at 07/17/2009 @ 8:20pm

     Sorry,I guess you must be mentally challenged. When we all pay for healthcare that is not for profit in a single payer system the cost is greatly reduced because the entire country is paying like one big group in the form of taxes. That is how we pay for services in the commons at the local, state and national level.

     Do you send a check every month to the fire dept or the police dept or the defense dept? Do you have co-payments and deductibles for these services? Do you get convoluted billings that are impossible to understand? Do you have to fill out endless forms before you receive service? No. Thats because these things are part of the commons and they cost much less because everyone pays in. And there are no forms to fill out and no bills to pay.

     I feel silly even having to explain this. It's a no brainer.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 8:45pm

105. Try $1091/mo, Anti (note: not less than $400) and probably even higher than that once you check the "have had cardiac event" checkbox.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 7:46pm

     Thanks for doing the legwork on that snowball. I was going to get a quote myself. But I took the shortcut of just calling Bullshit. If you call bullshit when Larry posts something you will be right about 99% of the time.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 8:15pm

     You're both wrong and just relying upon misinformation. I posted the actual rate.

     And the heart attack is not on my medical records since I didn't go to the hospital. I had a doctor friend verify it by EKG a few weeks later.

     I'm beginning to think that neither one of you has a clue about this subject. In Chaozen's case, he made some bad choices in his healthcare planning.

     And deductibles don't have to impact you. You can either set up a tax deductible HSA or purchase a supplemental plan (I used to sell them for Aflac) that covers your deductible.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:08pm

106. Do you send a check every month to the fire dept or the police dept or the defense dept? Do you have co-payments and deductibles for these services? Do you get convoluted billings that are impossible to understand? Do you have to fill out endless forms before you receive service? No. Thats because these things are part of the commons and they cost much less because everyone pays in. And there are no forms to fill out and no bills to pay.

     I feel silly even having to explain this. It's a no brainer.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 8:45pm

     Not true; in CA if the fire dept comes to your home your are billed for it.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:10pm

107. You're both wrong and just relying upon misinformation. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:08pm

     And this statement coming from a purveyor of misinformation. Translation of your above statement.

     "You're both right and relying upon real information". LOL.

     What a maroon!

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 9:17pm

108. "You're both right and relying upon real information". LOL.

     What a maroon!

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 9:17pm

     Serious question. Do you even have a high school diploma?

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:39pm

109. "You're both wrong and just relying upon misinformation. I posted the actual rate. "

     I think he got that quote from the Kaiser site.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 9:50pm

110. So I don't know if it's misinformation.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 9:50pm

111. So I don't know if it's misinformation.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 9:50pm

     Did you read Snowballs post? She went to Kaiser's site and got the real rate.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 10:12pm

112. Serious question. Do you even have a high school diploma?

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:39pm

     Nice try Anti. If you really want to know my I.Q is 145. I completed high school and have a diploma. I also completed college and have a degree in industrial engineering.

     Anything else you want to know?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 10:16pm

113. Not true; in CA if the fire dept comes to your home your are billed for it.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009

     Why don't the homeowners policy underwriter receive the bill? It's only fair, They are the ones at financial risk. Does the insurer cover this bill?

     Posted by koroviev at 07/17/2009 @ 10:32pm

114. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:39pm

     Another serious question. Have you watched Sicko? I have asked you for a straight answer a number of times. But you either dance around the question or try and change the subject. Which leads me to believe you have not even watched the documentary.

     If you lie I will know. And if you have seen it I would very much like to hear your observations. But you have not even seen the film. Have you? I have a gut feeling that you have not.

     But you don't want to admit that, do you? Because then all your criticism of Michael Moore and your whole bullshit ball of wax would just crumble like a house of cards. Which is the sort of house you live in eh?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 10:35pm

115. Not true; in CA if the fire dept comes to your home your are billed for it.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:10pm

     Bullshit. Do you just make this stuff up as you go? The only charges would be for medical services or in some cases false alarms. Basic fire protection entails no cost to the homeowner. And you would not be billed for medical services if we had single payer healthcare.

     Does the shit actually run out of your ears and bubble up from your shoes?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 10:55pm

116. Why don't the homeowners policy underwriter receive the bill? It's only fair, They are the ones at financial risk. Does the insurer cover this bill?

     Posted by koroviev at 07/17/2009 @ 10:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     Basic fire protection entails no cost to the homeowner.Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 10:55pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     I can't believe this keeps coming up!

     Basic Homeowners and Farmowners policies to some extent provide coverage $500.00 to $1,000.oo for Fire Dept. Service charges in almost every state that I know of. At times in the past the charges continually grow greater and in some states than the policies allow for and the resident is "billed" for the additional charge NOT covered by insurance. It is that simple. Read your policy if you don't know what your state allows!

     If you want to compare coverage to actual charges call your city hall to find out just what the F.D. will charge you for a call!

     Posted by BigPasture at 07/17/2009 @ 11:06pm

117. Posted by antisocialist at 07/17/2009 @ 9:08pm |

     "You're both wrong and just relying upon misinformation. I posted the actual rate."

     I plugged the age 62 into the Kaiser quote link YOU tinyurl'd into your previous post; you're full of it.

     "And the heart attack is not on my medical records since I didn't go to the hospital. I had a doctor friend verify it by EKG a few weeks later."

     So you'd lie about not having one; I'd expect nothing less of you, but G-d might feel differently...with those commandments and all.

     "I'm beginning to think that neither one of you has a clue about this subject."

     I'm beginning to think you're a pathological liar who can't admit it when the jig is up.

     "And deductibles don't have to impact you."

     As long as you never actually require medical care, it won't.

     "You can either set up a tax deductible HSA or purchase a supplemental plan (I used to sell them for Aflac) that covers your deductible."

     An HSA doesn't make the money appear in your account, it just makes it pre-tax, and a supplemental plan isn't free.

     One correction for Chaos: I'm a boy.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 11:08pm

118. google fire department service charges and you will find the "Rough Notes" version in plain language enough for non-insurance people!

     Posted by BigPasture at 07/17/2009 @ 11:10pm

119. One correction for Chaos: I'm a boy.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 11:08pm

     Sorry snowball, I was guessing. 50/50 chance and as usual I got the other 50. I apologize for any gender reference. Geez now im red all over.

     Oh well..

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 11:26pm

120. Posted by BigPasture at 07/17/2009 @ 11:10pm

     There are service charges for certain fire department services. Like a vehicle on fire, or negligence, or a meth lab exploding. But basic fire protection is provided at no cost. Service charges only come into play when there are extenuating circumstances. And even then the fees rarely exceed $400 bucks. And in most of those instances the fees are covered by insurance. Either homeowners or vehicle insurance. Which just about everyone is required to have on their mortgage or vehicle.

     But in all cases the fire department will respond to any fire without checking out wheather you paid forward. Try and get medical services in the same circumstances.

     Unless you go to the emergency room for critical care which costs everyone a fortune. And does nothing concerning preventative care and general health.

     When you call the police or go to the library do they ask you to to swipe your debit card before they will assist you?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 11:44pm

121. Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 11:26pm |

     No worries; it affects the actuarial outcomes though.

     Thankfully, I got to keep my beloved Kaiser via my wife's employer when we wed. I've been with them either through my parents, my corporate employers, or on my own dime, since the 80s.

     We just had a baby boy on the 1st after 25 hours of painless pitocin induction, 4 hours of pushing, and then a C-section.

     He was 8lbs 9oz, 21" and OP (upside down) so it wasn't too surprising that a vaginal delivery was not in the stars for the tiny wife-type person.

     It turns out that he was the 1 in 4000 babies that has a stroke near or during delivery which we noticed as a slight tremble in one hand the day after he was born.

     Kaiser treated it aggressively while we all stayed in the hospital and/or Intensive Care Nursery for a week, ran EEGs to determine if it was seizure activity, ran all manner of tests to eliminate bacterial and viral infection as a cause, got an MRI to diagnose what had happened, and then left for home after a positive neurological consult with an oral anti-convulsant scrip in hand.

     My out of pocket costs for all of it (hospital admit fees, tests, radiology, drug copays, etc) were less than it cost me to park our hybrid in SF for the duration.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/18/2009 @ 12:03am

122. google fire department service charges and you will find the "Rough Notes" version in plain language enough for non-insurance people!

     Posted by BigPasture at 07/17/2009 @ 11:10pm |

     Yeah that was for people who live outside a fire protection district. I read the whole article. That is for rural fire protection which entails the use of a volunteer fire department. A volunteer fire department operates on a tight budget. I know as I was a volunteer fireman for quite a few years.

     They are mostly supported by fund raising and landowner subscriptions. But since they operate on a shoestring budget, many rural volunteer fire depts will bill a service charge for over budget costs related to a fire. This is to be expected. And in most cases it is covered by homeowners insurance. And even if they are not. The fees are nominal and usually don't cover expenses.

     Rural firefighters donate their time for the sake of the community. Their is no profit motive. Imagine if there was. Imagine a for profit fire department. Did you pay through the nose for fire protection this month? If not your house will burn to the ground.

     Now take that scenario and apply it to healthcare. Do you yet see?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/18/2009 @ 12:18am

123. Posted by YourJomamma at 07/17/2009 @ 10:51am

     moo!

     Posted by frosty zoom at 07/18/2009 @ 12:48am

124. moo!

     Posted by frosty zoom at 07/18/2009 @ 12:48am

     No mooing! Makes me want some yogurt.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/18/2009 @ 01:35am

125. I got some of that Activa stuff. Has a bunch of bacteria in it. Makes ya poop good.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/18/2009 @ 01:39am

126. were less than it cost me to park our hybrid in SF for the duration.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/18/2009 @ 12:03am

     Wow, a health insurance story with a happy ending. Don't hear too many of those nowadays. You must have had good maternity coverage. But it shouldn't have cost you anything. If you lived in France for instance you could have taken a year of parental leave which can be renewed up to three times. And through the APE program you would receive a monthly check.

     With me in the last few years I have broken my left wrist (ice fall) which resulted in 12 weeks off work. Collected unemployment because I was released to work but my employer would not let me come back until I was 100%. So now the state is trying to get back 12 weeks of unemployment from me about $4200. Even though they approved my claim initially.

     Then I had carpal tunnel surgery as a result of driving and shifting a truck 6 days a week. Then I had a motorcycle accident which put me out of work for awhile. So I have been awash in medical bills. And am being sued right and left for the bills.

     Not a happy ending for me.

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/18/2009 @ 10:31am

127. Posted by chaoszen at 07/18/2009 @ 10:31am |

     It always costs something...whether it's taxes ala France, or my wife's employer contrib, or my premiums when I had an individual policy (but never received any care).

     And there are trade-offs too...like being treated by several different doctors and tens of different nurses due to the HMO method, and waiting over the 4th of July weekend to get an MRI done, but I'm okay with that since almost every one of them was well-qualified to administer care and I didn't have to run all over town to get the labs and radiological work done.

     I'm sorry to hear about your troubles; that is the suck.

     My dad got stiffed when the company he was working for started to go "tango uniform" and cancelled the employee's health insurance...without telling them.

     He had just been admitted to the hospital for severe GI pain which turned out to be diverticulitis and ended up holding the bag/bills for his multi-thousand dollar overnight stay.

     For me, the simple truth is that medical insurance should be a shared, socialized risk since you don't know when you're going to slip'n'fall and we all might need X-rays, MRIs, and pain meds at some point.

     It's all well and good to pretend that this can be addressed by for-profit care, but the inflexible demand for the product in the extreme case makes markets a poor solution indeed.

     The status quo is untenable, the people know it (well 3/4 of them anyway), and something has to give.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/18/2009 @ 11:11am

128. Here are some Senators and blue dog(dems) who are on the wrong side of Health Care reform. Give them a call and demand,

     "MEDICARE/SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH CARE FOR ALL NOW!"

     (blue dogs) Ross D-AR, Boucher D-VA, Kind D-WI, Pomeroy D-ND, Tanner D-TN Polis (CO), Titus (NV) and Altmire (PA)

     These are the problem Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee: John Barrow (GA-12), Bruce Braley (IA-01), Bart Gordon (TN-04), Baron Hill (IN-09), Jay Inslee (WA-01), Jim Matheson (UT-02), Charlie Melancon LA-03, Zack Space (OH-18) and Bart Stupak (MI-01).

     Joe Lieberman I-CT, Chuck Grassley R-IA, Lindsey Graham R-SC, Susan Collins R-ME, Olympia Snowe R-ME, David Vitter R-LA, Saxby Chambliss R-GA, Tom Coburn R-OK, Jon Kyl R-AZ, John Thune R-SD, Richard Lugar R-IN, Jim DeMint R-SC Jeff Sessions R-AL, Richard Shelby R-AL, Mel Martinez R-FL, John McCain R-AZ, Mitch McConnell R-KY, Jim Inhofe R-OK, Lamar Alexander R-TN, Dick Burr R-NC, John Cornyn R-TX

     Mark Pryor D-AR, Thomas Carper D-DE, Mary Landrieu D-LA, Max Baucus D-MT, Kent Conrad D-ND, Ben Nelson D-NE, Maria Cantwell D-WA, Kay Hagan D-NC, Blanche Lincoln D-AR, Ron Wyden D-OR, Evan Bayh D-IN, Diane Feinstein D-CA, Arlen Specter D-PA

     Here are the toll-free numbers for the Capitol Hill Switchboard: (House and Senate) 1-800-828-0498 1-866-338-1015 1-866-220-0044.

     Also give the President a call or write an e-mail:

     White House Comments Line:

     1-202-456-1111 M-F 9:00-5:00 est. (NOT A TOLL-FREE #)

     President Obama's e-mail: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

     Nothing rattles the Congress and White House more than informed CITIZEN/VOTERS ringing the phones off the hook for real health care reform. Call the House, Senate and the White House and demand, "MEDICARE/SINGLE-PAYER TYPE HEALTH CARE FO

     Posted by judybrowni at 07/18/2009 @ 1:43pm

129. Nice try Anti. If you really want to know my I.Q is 145. I completed high school and have a diploma. I also completed college and have a degree in industrial engineering.

     Anything else you want to know?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 10:16pm

     You should consider a lawsuit against the school for incompetence.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 4:13pm

130. Posted by snowball777 at 07/17/2009 @ 11:08pm

     I don't know what you are using, but it's not Kaiser. Here is the quote. I redid it today. And BTW, I'm 60 not 62.

     there is no option over $516 a month. And the quote is the same for age 62.

     http://tinyurl.com/ng7os7

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 4:24pm

131. Another serious question. Have you watched Sicko? I have asked you for a straight answer a number of times. But you either dance around the question or try and change the subject. Which leads me to believe you have not even watched the documentary.

     If you lie I will know. And if you have seen it I would very much like to hear your observations. But you have not even seen the film. Have you? I have a gut feeling that you have not.

     But you don't want to admit that, do you? Because then all your criticism of Michael Moore and your whole bullshit ball of wax would just crumble like a house of cards. Which is the sort of house you live in eh?

     Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 10:35pm

     I only needed to watch clips of it. Why would I watch all of anything Michael Moore does? He is pathological liar who has never done anything honest in his life.

     there are countless sources who have proven what a lying film Sicko is. I can't imagine anyone who wishes to be informed wasting their time on Sicko or anything else that Moore does.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 4:28pm

132. I think single payer is a mistake. I think that the best system would allow most people to keep the coverage they have, if they like it, and provide a medicare type system for those who can't afford insurance.

     We should actually get away from the idea of blanket health "insurance". Insurance is a system of pooled risk. In its simplest form, 100 car owners or home owners contribute to a kitty, that will cover the one unfortunate individual who totals his car, or whose house burns to the ground.

     If we want to apply it to health coverage, let's separate out coverage for cancer, catastrophic and chronic disease, and cover that with insurance. the routine doctor visits can be covered out-of-pocket.

     Any "free" program, as favored by chaoszen, will be overused, guaranteed. Feel a cold coming on? Take the morning off, go to the doctor. It's free, why not? Sprained an ankle? Go to the orthopod, it's free.

     "I feel silly even having to explain this. It's a no brainer." Posted by chaoszen at 07/17/2009 @ 8:45pm

     If you feel silly having to explain your thoughts, then write more clearly. It's a no-brainer.

     Posted by twillie at 07/18/2009 @ 4:29pm

133. Posted by judybrowni at 07/18/2009 @ 1:43pm

     thx for the info. We'll do our best to neutralize the leftist calls with our own.

     We must stop this attempt for totalitarian govt control of the lives of Americans.

     Liberty and freedom will stand or fall based on whether we successfully oppose the lefts attempt to destroy our nation with these marxist controls over peoples lives and income.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 4:38pm

134. The glorious Cuban healthcare that Michael Moore did not want Americans to see.

     http://tinyurl.com/mmqhx2

     Cubans expose the truth about Cuban Healthcare

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV4LeXc3yTE

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 4:59pm

135. I don't know what you are using, but it's not Kaiser. Here is the quote. I redid it today. And BTW, I'm 60 not 62. there is no option over $516 a month. And the quote is the same for age 62. http://tinyurl.com/ng7os7 Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 4:24pm |

     Yeah, it was kp.org, but I entered quote info for NorCal, not SoCal, and had increased your age (what can I say; libertarians skew the crotchet-o-meter outside spec).

     Mea culpa, Pastor.

     Unfortunately, your link is "Unable to process at this time. Please call Kaiser Permanente at..."

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/18/2009 @ 5:41pm

136. Unfortunately, your link is "Unable to process at this time. Please call Kaiser Permanente at..."

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/18/2009 @ 5:41pm

     I used kaiserpermanente.org

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 5:50pm

137. $516 a month.

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 4:24pm

     holy fuck!

     that's $6192 a year.

     that's crazy.

     god bless tommy douglas.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 07/18/2009 @ 11:31pm

138. Posted by antisocialist at 07/18/2009 @ 5:50pm |

     If you type www.kp.org into your browser, you will find yourself at www.kaiserpermanente.org through the magic of domain name aliasing...they are one and the same.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/19/2009 @ 10:35am

139. If our current group of legislators come up empty again with regards to health care reform it will be a shame. While I'm not happy with the Obama plan, we can sure use some basic reform. Government does not have to run the entire health care industry as some republicans and blue-dog democrats fear. And democrats in general should not be looking for big government to cure the nation's collective ills.

     Perhaps both sides can put politics aside for once and actually do some good for the people, all the people. They can start with making it a lot harder for individuals to be denied specific health care because of so called 'prior condition'. If someone is sick, they're sick, period. It's very hard to proove that a present condition is not the result of former illness, especially in advancing age.

     Also, legisislation should be created and passed into law to remove the threat of any 'citizen' having to be destroyed by catastrophic illness. There should be across the board coverage to protect against this situation.

     Finally, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security should be strengthened before any new programs are created.

     Posted by gunslinger1 at 07/19/2009 @ 12:32pm

140. "Conservatives are bought and paid for by the healthcare industry": Really? I guess they sent my check to the wrong address...or maybe it's just late. I'll go check my mailbox again.

     Medicare for all? Lets see, seniors on Medicare tend to buy supplimental private insurance to cover what Medicare doesn't. One of the stipulations in the dems plan is to make private insurance illegal. It is this type of Stalinist addiction that turns the stomach of most Americans - government control over the people. One thing for damn sure, the government is not looking out for what is best for the people when they push garbage like cap-n-tax plus complete government control of medical care. We believe in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness - the truly great thing about our country.

     One more thing, are the elite vermin in DC going to have the same plan as us peasants or are they going to keep their gold-plated "special" plan for the "special" people?

     Posted by pyeatte at 07/19/2009 @ 1:25pm

141. Posted by pyeatte at 07/19/2009 @ 1:25pm |

     I'm sure the 50% of bankruptcies caused by medical bills, so you can keep your 'Life' and 'Liberty', put a big dent in the 'Pursuit of Happiness'.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/19/2009 @ 1:33pm

142. Posted by snowball777 at 07/19/2009 @ 1:33pm: I did not say we didn't need medical reform - we certainly do, but the reform need not put us under government control. There are other ways, such as allowing people to buy catastrophic insurance at a relatively low cost with high deductibles. Pay for the small stuff yourself at a price the doctor sets. That would stop the bankruptcies. Allow small companies to group together to get deals like the big companies can get. Allow us to get insurance from other states other than only the state you live in. The government could supply a safety net for people who have no money. You just don't have to Force all the people to do it your way. It's called freedom - something that seems to be alien to many.

     Posted by pyeatte at 07/19/2009 @ 4:52pm

143. Posted by pyeatte at 07/19/2009 @ 4:52pm |

     A few questions:

     What is covered by 'catastrophic' insurance? What is not?

     Can they still exclude everyone that isn't a fat cost-center?

     Doesn't bypassing interstate commerce law make a complicated morass only more so?

     What freedoms are you being denied under the proposed plan from the Dems besides behaving like Anti and foregoing all medical care (until you don't)?

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/19/2009 @ 6:35pm

144. "What is covered by 'catastrophic' insurance? What is not?"

     Cancer, chronic debilitating disease like diabetes or AIDs, severe trauma. Not covered: sprained ankle, colds, broken rib, gastroenteritis.

     Don't understand "fat cost-center".

     Congress has great power to regulate, or not regulate, interstate commerce.

     Posted by twillie at 07/19/2009 @ 7:22pm

145. Posted by snowball777 at 07/19/2009 @ 6:35pm: Catastrophic are those things that traditionally bankrupt us. You should pay for the small stuff yourself. There is no real reason to prevent you from buying insurance from a different state other than politics and that dirty word - control. What also bothers me is the arrogance of politicians in Washington, who have and will keep, gold plated medical coverage but want to dictate to the rest of us what we must tolerate. It is also disgusting that politicians seem to be representing their party instead of the people they are suppose to represent - the people who sent them to Washington in the first place.

     Posted by pyeatte at 07/19/2009 @ 8:09pm

146. Don't understand "fat cost-center". Posted by twillie at 07/19/2009 @ 7:22pm |

     Shorthand for people without pre-existing conditions who will pay premiums into their investment coffers and not make expensive claims; the bread ' n ' butter of current private health insurance companies.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/19/2009 @ 10:52pm

147. Posted by pyeatte at 07/19/2009 @ 8:09pm |

     How about an unscheduled C-section (my wife just had one on the 1st)...covered or no?

     I certainly couldn't have known it would be necessary beforehand, denied it of her after 29 hours of labor, or afford to pay for it out of pocket (surgery is expensive, period).

     How exactly would a 'public OPTION' deprive me of my current Kaiser coverage?

     Agreed on the disgust with our 'representative' democratic republic, but we'll need real campaign reform and a 5-alarm fire on K-street before that starts to change.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/19/2009 @ 10:58pm

148. I went to Anti-War protests before Iraq. Iraq still happened. I know the symbolic stuff is what the left tends to lean on but you need to get some better tactics. Petitions and protests don't accomplish much of anything. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 05:29am | ignore this person | warn this person

     I disagree. I too went to anti war marches, against Vietnam and the Iraq war. what a protest march accomplishes is that it changes the debate. after half a million folks like you and I march down the streets of OUR capitol they can no longer say that EVERYONE approved.

     if marches don't accomplish anything, why is the anti war left "blamed" for losing the Vietnam war?

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/20/2009 @ 07:17am

149. Insurance is a system of pooled risk

     single payer includes everyone, and for that reason it is the most efficient.

     single payer doesn't work? how many countries use this approach? works for them

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/20/2009 @ 07:22am

150. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/17/2009 @ 05:29am |

     CCC, if you don't think the fact that half a million people got ignored had an effect on the last election, you're not paying close enough attention.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/20/2009 @ 07:17am |

     And there are actions beyond 'petitions and protests' that also make a difference like the longshoremen's local out here in SF who shut down the ports for a day to make their point about Iraq.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/20/2009 @ 08:50am

151. right you are Snow,

     in my case the most effective protest against the Vietnam war, was to avoid the draft.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/20/2009 @ 08:56am

152. For about a hundred years, America has been a nation of accumulating medical controls. Each new regulation was passed with the same justification made for the previous one: This measure will sufficiently correct the failings of the free market and thus save the free-market system. And the result? Today's "crisis in health care" -- as the welfare statists themselves call this iatrogenic disease. The more band-aids are applied, the more wounds appear! And with nothing but band-aids in their bags, these "liberals" (often the same aging advocates of past regulation) can now prescribe only covering the patient head to toe -- i.e., the final move to the outright socialization of all medicine. What this says about the microcosm of medicine is obvious; what it means for our mixed economy is ominous.

     From <a href="http://abcdunlimited.com/ideas/liberalism.html">LIBERALISM: HISTORY AND FUTURE</a>

     Posted by BarryLoberfeld at 07/20/2009 @ 10:37am

153. Posted by snowball777 at 07/18/2009 @ 12:03am | ignore this person | warn this person

     my most sincere and heartfelt congratulations on the baby boy, who will continue to make you both very happy. (at least until he comes home at four in the morning sans a call)

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/20/2009 @ 10:44am

154. right you are Snow,

     in my case the most effective protest against the Vietnam war, was to avoid the draft.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/20/2009 @ 08:56am

     Coward

     Posted by antisocialist at 07/20/2009 @ 11:05am

155. antisocialist-Bush,Cheney and others that you claim to admire,also, did all they could to avoid the war,but you got upset when I referred to them as cowards.The people that you admire supported a war,but refused to fight in it which makes them the cowards and not those who were against the war.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/20/2009 @ 11:13am

156. antisocialist (label slinger): You've forgotten that McNamara, the Defense Chief during Vietnam, called the entire debacle "a mistake" 25 years later. I happened to perceive that correctly and have the same assessment while it was happening, as did emile duBois, before being drafted and therefore took the responsibility to avoid it. Now I grant you, logically, I may have been a 'coward' in addition to that rationale. But whether I was or not is unconnected to what I have just stated. You can sling your demagogic labels at anyone you want but they'll only stick to the ones with litttle or none critical thinking skills, which probably defined most of those who volunteered or allowed themselves to be drafted into a meaningless hell. Glad you survived.

     Posted by jazznation at 07/21/2009 @ 04:02am

157. my most sincere and heartfelt congratulations on the baby boy, who will continue to make you both very happy. (at least until he comes home at four in the morning sans a call) Posted by emile duBois at 07/20/2009 @ 10:44am |

     Thanks, JR. He is indeed a joy to behold...and to simply hold, for that matter.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/21/2009 @ 05:46am

158. Posted by snowball777 at 07/21/2009 @ 05:46am | ignore this person | warn this person

     brings tears to my eyes.

     my filius is about to turn 19, and I still feel the same.

     take plenty of pictures, to help you remember.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/21/2009 @ 09:13am