The Beat

Hope for Health Reform? Push Single-Payer Now

posted by John Nichols on 07/27/2009 @ 11:00am

It is unsettling to listen as President Obama and House Speaker Pelosi talk up a health-care reform "plan" that has yet to take shape in any realistic form.

The vagueness on the part of the president and the speaker is, of course, intentional.

Obama and Pelosi are still pushing the notion that they can get some version of their public-private stew cooked up before the year is done -- although not, according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, before the president and the Congress take the extended summer vacations that will kill whatever sense of official urgency might have existed.

Reid has taken some hits for suggesting that it would be a good idea to try and get health-care reform right, rather than just rush through a plan that fails to cover all Americans or control costs.

But that requires details. And neither Obama nor Pelosi is dealing in details right now because that's where the devil resides.

Here is the truth they tend to avoid mentioning: A robust public plan, with the quality and flexibility that is required to make it appealing to all Americans, would wipe out its insurance-industry competitors in short order. Why would anyone opt for more of the profiteering, restrictions and actual denials of needed treatment -- especially for people with pre-existing conditions -- that the insurance industry uses to make money rather than provide Americans with the medical care they require? And why would any employer choose to subsidize the stock value of health-care conglomerates when it is possible to opt for the better care and controlled costs of a public plan?

Unfortunately, the creation of a robust public plan, one that can compete on the basis of quality and affordability, will require a significant federal expenditure in the form of start-up money as well as regulatory protection for the program. That's where the devil comes in.

The powerful insurance and private health-care lobbies, which fear honest competition as the vampire does the stake, are going to do everything in their power to accomplish three things:

1. Scare Americans with hypocritical talk about the hefty price-tag for getting a robust public plan off the ground.

2. Undermine the structural supports for a public plan so that it cannot compete -- effectively turning it into a sub-standard "alternative" that will appeal only to those who have no other options.

3. Fiddle with the overall "reform" so that most of the taxpayer money that is expended streams into the accounts of private firms.

In the state of confusion created the industry's lobbying and advertising campaigns, chances are that the scaremongers and the profiteers will come out ahead.

They usually do.

And their task is being made easier by in-the-pocket "Democrats" like Montana Senator Max Baucus, the Senate Finance Committee chair who is collecting huge contributions from hospitals, insurers and medical interest groups in return for doing their dirty work. If it was just Baucus, that would be a problem.

But it's not just Baucus. The monied Montanan has all too many Democratic allies -- especially among the Democratic Leadership Council-allied "New Democrats." The "New Dems" are far greedier and more troubling players than the small cadre of southern and rural Blue Dog Democrats. Of particular concern is the determination of so many of the "New Dems" to follow Baucus' lead and grab up what Jerry Flanagan, a health-care analyst with the group Consumer Watchdog describes as the "huge down payment" of campaign contributions from corporations by that want any health care "reform" warped to favor their interests.

The corporate special interests and their willing accomplices within the ranks of the Democratic party are capitalizing on the confusion about the scope and character of proposed reforms. In so doing, they are creating a circumstance where the push for real reform can and will be thwarted unless there is a major pushback from real reformers.

That pushback can and should take the form of a renewed effort to promote the right repair: a single-payer program.

There has already been some progress in this regard. The recent 25-19 vote by the House Committee on Education and Labor for an amendment allowing states to create single-payer health care systems if they so choose was an example of this.

A bigger test could come this week, as the House Energy and Commerce Committee considers Congressman Anthony Weiner's proposal to replace the convoluted public-private scheme that is outlined in the Obama/House leadership bill with the easily-understood and efficient single-payer plan contained in HR 676 that has been endorsed by 86 members of Congress.

Were the committee to endorse the Weiner amendment, single-payer would be on the table -- as it should be.

Even if the committee fails to do the right thing, a strong vote for single-payer would send an essential signal about the need for a robust public option.

The stalwart single-payer backers at Progressive Democrats for America are organizing on behalf of the Weiner amendment, urging targeted calls to members of the committee.

The website www.democrats.com is maintaining a whip count, which includes phone numbers of members who are being targeted. Heading the list of those expected to cast "yes" votes for single-payer is Congresswomen Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisconsin, and Jan Schakowsky, D-Illinois, who has long been in the forefront of the real reformers in the House.

Baldwin and Schakowsky are staying steady.

And rightly so.

This is not the time to waver is our commitment to real reform.

Indeed, it is the time to press those who know the right reform to stop wavering.

Physicians for a National Health Care Plan has launched a smart -- and necessary -- new campaign to get President Obama to abandon experiments that are likely to fail in favor of the reform he supported before he became president: a single-payer plan.

"Like most of our colleagues and the majority of the general public, we believe that single-payer reform is the standard against which other health reforms should be measured. Sound single-payer proposals have been introduced in both the House of Representatives (H.R. 676, The U.S National Health Care Act) and the Senate (S. 703, The American Health Security Act of 2009)," the physicians write. "Single payer reform, as embodied in these bills, would eliminate the bewildering patchwork of private insurance plans with their exorbitant overhead and profits, as well as the costly paperwork burdens they impose on providers. These savings on bureaucracy - nearly $400 billion annually – are sufficient to cover all of the uninsured and to provide first dollar coverage for all Americans. No other approach can provide comparable coverage at a cost our nation can afford."

That's the proper prescription. Obama and Pelosi should listen to the doctors and follow it. But that will only happen if those who favor real reform seize on this uncertain but not unforgiving moment to make the case for single-payer.

Comments (202)

  1. The insurance industry has put the Blue dogs in their pockets and are so far they succeeded in scare mongering Americans of "the socialist takeover".

    According to a study conducted by the California Nurses Association, if we eliminate the insurance companies from the equation there will be enough to cover every body. In addition, millions of jobs can be created in the healthcare industry as coverage expands to everybody.

    Posted by nursevic at 07/26/2009 @ 7:14pm

  2. Very persuasive piece. My ol' bias is THE MEDIA isn't making any serious noise on single payer. MSM/Lockheed is as silent as FOX on the merits of the power and majesty of this most patriotic, transformative idea.

    Are we really down to Physicians for a National Health Care Plan and Progressive Democrats for America and other feeble organizations like this -- sad! While there is TN there's no TN television channel. TNN - sounds good.

    More importantly, a progressive powerhouse channel is needed to go as negative, as loud and long as Limbaugh -- on Limbaugh and their selling of our democracy.

    Posted by winyahn at 07/26/2009 @ 8:10pm

  3. NICHOLS: "...- especially for people with pre-existing conditions -- that the insurance industrial uses to make money rather than provide Americans with the medical care they require?"

    If an insurance company denies coverage for someone with a chronic problem, say Evil Kneivel from habitual motorcycle injuries, how does such company "make money" off such unwanted customers?

    Refusing to serve certain customers, outside of race/gender/nat'l origin, is the right of any business.

    Ever notice posted notices on restaurant doors saying no this or no that? Bars refusing to serve obviously intoxicated or just obnoxious patrons?

    Would The Nation hire a journalist that has repeatedly been fingered for plagerism, fabricated stories, or multiple padding of expense accounts?

    While we do sympathize with folks with chronic medical problems, esp. not of their choosing due to lifestyles, why can't Libs understand the rights of businesses?

    I know why! So few of you have ever run any businesses that you are just flat-out anti-business....and this, is the main reason your Party/ideology just don't work in this day and age of global consciousness to the need to compete.

    Just like high-risk drivers end up in state-sponsored insurance schemes, so too, should folks with problematic existing conditions.....of course, this means public subsidy of some level for those not responsible for their conditions.

    Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 8:11pm

  4. NICHOLS: "The powerful insurance and private health-care lobbies, which fear honest competition...."

    "honest competition"? Laughable!

    How well have the `stockholders' of Gubber entities held the Gubber executives responsible so far on any number of Fed `businesses'?

    Sure, there are elections for some 550 Fed high-rollers who tap `corp. funds' to bankroll their own propaganda for reelection...but does anyone think they compete "honestly" against you or I running?

    Stockholders of private companies get wiped out all the time but can just walk away.....can the `stockholders' of the Feds walk away without giving up citizenship for themselves and their kids?

    Stockholders of private companies can mount true democracy by waging proxy fights,....

    You get my drift, Mr. Nichols?

    Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 8:23pm

  5. If an insurance company denies coverage for someone with a chronic problem, say Evil Kneivel from habitual motorcycle injuries, how does such company "make money" off such unwanted customers? Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 8:11pm

    Yep. That's the point.

    Nearly everyone agrees that there are certain societal needs that should not be predicated on the ability to " 'make money' off of such unwanted customers."

    Military, police departments and fire departments are among those providers of services which we agree that society requires, but which should not be controlled by the profit motive.

    Posted by Radscal at 07/26/2009 @ 9:02pm

  6. John, Thank you for writing a nice piece on the crooks who are trying to steal health care reform. The people that have commented about being business owners and seemingly being smarter than we as a group can continue to think that. Way to be a members of the "me" club that is standing to my right. I am glad you side with Max, 95% of his political contributions come from outside of Montana so i guess it's obvious that his constituents are people that want the best Senator money can buy. His pal Kent Conrad said today that they needed Republican votes. I think it is time for these "leading" Senators to get their staffs to start writing real legislation for real Americans. The health care reform packages that are being bandied about are starting to smell like a trash barrel next to a city park pavillion. What is worse is the clowns of the Republican party talking about getting more competition in the insurance business to solve the rising cost of health care. What is the competition? Is it topping United Health's $759 million quarterly profit? Sadly the administration seems to be having the same problem as the Blue Dogs, asking the health care giants for help in fixing the mess that they created. Someone give me an update on Harry Reid's whereabouts, the rumor is that he is a tour guide on Lake Havasu and that is why he has been so silent. Progressives stay on the task at hand.

    Posted by whatizz at 07/26/2009 @ 9:42pm

  7. "A robust public plan, with the quality and flexibility that is required to make it appealing to all Americans."

    Well, isn't that the goal? Of course, but the vast majority of the American people rightly do not believe it can be pulled off especially given the details that have been revealed to date. Telling the people you cannot do this or that, or must do this or that under penalty of law is not a good start and is doomed to fail to gain public support. This process must be done gradually, trying this or that, throwing away what doesn't work and keeping what does.

    The Clinton plan failed to pass because the liberals insisted on having everything at once and in the end, got nothing. The Obama plan is following in the same footsteps and will meet the same fate.

    America saw how well the stimulus plan worked creating jobs and see the same people doing the health plan and say: "You must be kidding, forget this".

    Posted by pyeatte at 07/26/2009 @ 10:09pm

  8. Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 8:23pm...

    --Stockholders of private companies can mount true democracy by waging proxy fights,....

    You get my drift, Mr. Nichols?--

    Every now and then... a post will happen here in blogland that captures the true spirit of the issue at hand that it stops you right in mid sentence...

    This, Happy... is one of those moments. Thanks.

    You have helped us make this issue sparklingly clear and obvious... for those of us that thought that there might be some 'hidden justice' behind the health care system we have now.

    As we enter this debate about cost effective health care... it is good to know who the players are that hold the real 'bottom line' issues close to their chests...

    And now we know. Investors control the debate because money speaks louder that words... and health care is but a 'widget' to be bought and sold on the open market like gadgets and goods... snake oils and soda pop... let the buyer beware and it's every man for himself...

    So... investment capitol decides who lives and who dies... who gets heath care at all... and who is deemed too risky to even treat... not doctors, or nurses, or a patient's physiological status and resilience..

    And the competitive nature of the world markets that we have to compete in in the future... isn't really a concern, because the shock to a business model that has taken root in a place where illness means big profits... and prolonged illness generates prolonged profits...

    ...might cause 'unpleasant feelings' in the investors that make money off the top of every transaction that occurs in our 'private' health care 'industry'?

    What's next... pay toilets in restaurants and shopping malls?;^)

    Oh... that's right, I forgot... that's been tried, but public outrage was rather severe...

    Posted by ttr at 07/26/2009 @ 10:34pm

  9. A new Rasmussen Reports poll shows that President Barack Obama's rating in Rasmussen's Presidential Approval Index has hit negative double digits for the first time.

    The survey found that 29 percent of voters strongly approve of Obama's job performance, while 40 percent strongly disapprove.

    Rasmussen calculates its Presidential Approval Index by subtracting the "strongly disapprove" figure from the "strongly approve" figure. As a result, Obama's overall score is a minus-11. That's the first time his rating has reached negative double digits.

    Other results of the poll:

    49 percent somewhat approve of Obama's performance.

    50 percent disapprove of Obama's performance.

    76 percent see Obama as liberal.

    48 percent see Obama as very liberal.

    54 percent primarily blame former President George W. Bush for America's economic woes.

    25 percent say the U.S. economy has been aided by the economic stimulus package.

    53 percent oppose the Democratic healthcare reform package.

    37 percent say deficit reduction should be Obama's top priority.

    20 percent say healthcare should be Obama's top priority.

    The poll is based on answers from 1,500 likely voters. It has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.

    I'd say all you 29%ers have a real problem along with the 20%ers that think national healthcare is important!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/26/2009 @ 10:46pm

  10. Posted by ttr at 07/26/2009 @ 10:34pm: "but public outrage was rather severe..."

    Isn't that the whole point? Ultimately, the public must approve in order for something to endure.

    Posted by pyeatte at 07/26/2009 @ 10:49pm

  11. As the effects of the economic collapse began pouring down Main Street, the government last year was left holding a record $2.1 billion in write-offs of small business loans it had guaranteed. Officials expect the number of defaults to rise as the nation continues to climb out of the recession.

    Records obtained under the federal Freedom of Information Act show the public is paying to offset bank losses on small business loans across the country, from a convenience store in the tiny Canadian border town of Houlton, Maine, to a graphic arts design company on the island of Hawaii, more than 5,000 miles away.

    It's a sign that even as record profits re-emerge on Wall Street, thanks to massive government loans and guarantees for banks deemed too big to fail, the pain on Main Street is as profound as it's been in half a century. The companies that were not too big to fail are failing.

    And the good news for small business owners whose loans are charged off is they get to pay the IRS for this INCOME item even as they fail and lay off their employees!

    Yep the Obamnation that makes desolation and the Demoncrats are doing a "bang up job" fiddling with socialist healthcare while the employers of 50% of our labor force are devastated!!!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/26/2009 @ 11:02pm

  12. Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 8:23pm...

    --Stockholders of private companies can mount true democracy by waging proxy fights,....

    You get my drift, Mr. Nichols?--

    Every now and then... a post will happen here in blogland that captures the true spirit of the issue at hand that it stops you right in mid sentence...

    This, Happy... is one of those moments. Thanks.

    Posted by ttr at 07/26/2009 @ 10:34pm

    You're welcome....in so far as staying within the context of my comment of 8:23 pm.

    The rest of your MASKian BS, is just a long anti-capitalist rant....let's call it Capitalist Profiling....be careful, you may get arrested by some big, stock-owning cop who teaches Stock Investing 101 to first-year cops looking over investiment options under their big, fat Gubber plans.

    Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 11:20pm

  13. Sure, pyaette... if the markets were consistent... and our world was a static level playing field where people could count on stable careers and consistent employment...

    But in today's world... with the constantly changing business atmosphere that most of us have to live in... employment based health care is something of an anachronism. Not only does it weigh down the businesses that could preform better, change approaches faster, and hire more quickly... it can resist those who could seek better and more timely employment advantages from seeking advancement or relocation by tethering them to a health care plan that they have paid into and need.

    Its pretty obvious now that our economy is changing very rapidly... and it only makes sense to fascilitate our twenty first century foothold in the global economic sphere by streamlining our national priorities along cost competitive lines.

    American values are tried and true... consistent and persistent... but America's place in the global economy is rapidly changing. We, as a Nation, need to take this much more seriously.persistent... but America's place in the global economy is rapidly changing. We, as a Nation, need to take this much more seriously.

    Posted by ttr at 07/26/2009 @ 11:35pm

  14. "A business can refuse service to anyone ..." is a sign on the local steakhouse door, not a health care policy for a nation of 300000000 human beings. Its shocking even to a most jaded generation, the utter cymici and plutocratic greed that has defined American health care.

    Posted by syfriendly at 07/26/2009 @ 11:41pm

  15. Safety nets are for sissies. Medicare, the VA, Victim Services, Child Protective Services, Geriatric Abuse Hotline = nothing but socialism.

    Posted by winyahn at 07/26/2009 @ 11:55pm

  16. by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 11:20pm...

    ;^)...

    Anti capitalist rant? Not even. I'm all for Capitalism... and cops too, for that matter... ;^)

    ...but the reign of investors and stock protfolios is only as strong as the underlying 'industry' that supports them... as is the integrity of the US economy itself. It is arguable that health care itself is dependent upon a thriving marketplace... and at 17% of the current economy... it is not sustainable as an industry in a country with a steadily shrinking industrial capacity.

    Does health care qualify as an industry? Should it? These are questions that we must ask ourselves...

    Posted by ttr at 07/27/2009 @ 12:18am

  17. Refusing to serve certain customers, outside of race/gender/nat'l origin, is the right of any business. ....who else but Happy!

    Life and death are not subject to market forces. Health care essentially should be a non-for-profit service with moderate payments. It is a shame the Reps like you can support that assertion. And then when they are told they are the Party of the selfish and rich Epulon that the Gospels tells us about, they negate it.

    Not everything is business and making money. There is also compassion and care. At the end everybody pays taxes as his/her contribution to common good and welfare. Is for example the police service more essential to society than health care?

    You Reps will sell even your souls to defend what is not defensible, businesses that only draw people into misery.

    Posted by Frank42 at 07/27/2009 @ 02:01am

  18. Posted by BigPasture at 07/26/2009 @ 10:46pm

    RIO, don't you ever get a LITTLE worried that the only polling you can cite is Rasmussen....and that he gives you exactly what you want when those other polls don't?

    Maybe a bit suspicious???

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 06:24am

  19. BBTW, I predict two disappointed groups-

    Mr Nichols and Hard Left...it won't be single-payer.

    Right....there WILL be a bill and since ANYTHING will fit your definition, it WILL be "a socialist Government takeover of our health care, doomed to destroy it"...even if it's a slightly upgraded version of COBRA.

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 06:26am

  20. Posted by ttr at 07/26/2009 @ 10:34pm |

    Very nice.

    I'd point out the further irony that a big chunk of the capital that they `wield' in the market consists of private investment money that comes from YOUR PREMIUMS.

    As if the American public wasn't already aware that we're being screwed and paying for the privilege by the current state of healthcare.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/27/2009 @ 07:01am

  21. Mr Nichols and Hard Left...it won't be single-payer. Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 06:26am |

    C'mon, Mask...just this once, allow yourself to dream (the impossible) dream...imagine Max Baucus and the Blue Dogs clocking one last fix of lobbyist dough with faces straighter than Gus of the Norse from the World Series of Poker...slipping in the 'SINGLE-PAYER PAYLOAD' amendment, late in the session, right as everyone is heading home for break.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTiyLuZOs1A

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

  22. If a single-payer `plan' or `exchange' outsourced the `paperwork' and `digital records' management to (private) government contractors, based on Fed standards for the records and forms, wouldn't the insurance industry also reward themselves (handsomely, but not too), insure competition (for a piece of that good gubmint cheese), etc?

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/27/2009 @ 07:25am

  23. The Health Industrial Complex: write your own no-bid contract today.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/27/2009 @ 07:25am

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

    Not gonna happen. If it was, it would have been smooth sailing from the get-go...as our right-wing friends note, they've got the votes to just ignore the Republicans.

    Plus, we've got John Nichols' track record...LOL

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 08:14am

  25. Military, police departments and fire departments are among those providers of services which we agree that society requires, but which should not be controlled by the profit motive.

    Posted by Radscal at 07/26/2009 @ 9:02pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    did this dude really say the military is not driven by a profit motive? hahahaahaha!

    and the police? --- yeah, that's the ticket!

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 09:55am

  26. "Its pretty obvious now that our economy is changing very rapidly... and it only makes sense to fascilitate our twenty first century foothold in the global economic sphere by streamlining our national priorities along cost competitive lines."

    did someone just say a whole lotta nothin'?

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 09:59am

  27. the privblic plan!

    c'mon unemployed people and get those lobbying dollars flowing.

    lazy, irresponsible commies.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 10:15am

  28. "Why would anyone opt for more of the profiteering, restrictions and actual denials of needed treatment?"

    THE MARKET MUST BE FREEEEEEEEEEE!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 10:18am

  29. In his foaming-at-the-mouth stemwinder against greedy boogey men Nichols forgot to mention Haliburten and "the JOOS"

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:18am

  30. Simple fact: single payer is not within the realm of possibility this term.

    You can have your irrelevant theoretical discussions about how many angels dancing on the head of a pin would vote for single payer, but you are still not getting single payer this term.

    You can have your irrelevant theoretical discussions about whether capitalists' missing souls are replaced by pig excrement or dog excrement, but you are still not getting single payer this term.

    You can have your irrelevent theoretical discussions about whether republicans are more stupid or more greedy, but you are still not getting single payer this term.

    Or you can all get together for a good ole' fashioned circle jerk and actually accomplish something.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:24am

  31. Wow... Mask has popped in to lay down the law by nay saying his cryptic 'how its gonna be' on us...

    You've got quite a 'track record' yerself ol' boy...;^)

    We might have to prove you wrong on this one... if only because you are so darn smug about your prediction that big money will win out... again...

    Its all about the money, Mask... or so you say... and you never cease from your incessant reminders that this is 'the way things are'.

    Money's great... but Democracy is much greater...

    Posted by ttr at 07/27/2009 @ 10:26am

  32. Single-payer could happen if Obama launched an unrelenting whistle-stop effort like HST's in 1948 to connect the populist majority who support it with a single-payer plan he attached himself to. Not likely but we have to have hope.

    Posted by buss119 at 07/27/2009 @ 10:28am

  33. "...chances are that the scaremongers and the profiteers will come out ahead.

    They usually do."

    YOU HATE AMERICA, NICHOLS.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 10:30am

  34. by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 09:59am ...

    Yeah... that would be you...;^)

    Look again at the world you thought you understood... much has changed, and more is on the way.

    Posted by ttr at 07/27/2009 @ 10:32am

  35. if only because you are so darn smug about your prediction that big money will win out... again...

    •• goldman sachs

    reminders that this is 'the way things are'.

    •• goldman sacks

    Money's great... but Democracy is much greater...

    •• goldman socks.

    Posted by ttr at 07/27/2009 @ 10:26am

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 10:33am

  36. In his foaming-at-the-mouth stemwinder against greedy boogey men Nichols forgot to mention Haliburten and "the JOOS"

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:18am

    uh, oh, mr. nichols.

    you've upset the actuary.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 10:35am

  37. What's next... pay toilets in restaurants and shopping malls?;^)

    Oh... that's right, I forgot... that's been tried, but public outrage was rather severe...

    Posted by ttr at 07/26/2009 @ 10:34pm

    people understand toilets.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 10:38am

  38. John, you really need to get real about this kind of plan. It has certain characteristics, which are: 1. High Costs-You cannot pretend that there will not be high costs simply because gov is paying for it. You libs seem to think gov is some sort of giant credit card where the 30th of the month never comes.

    2.Incompetency-Regardless of where their hearts are, doctors, outside of a few expeceptional men and women, will not perform as well if not forced to compete in system that demands perfection in exchange for reward. The current reimbursment is a classic example of this.

    Shortages- If people bear no responsibility for the cost of their trips to the Dr, the natural tendency to go there for almost anything will crowd medical facilities and create shortages.

    Now, I'll be the first to agree that today's system is about as screwed up asa it could be, but its not cause of privatization-Health Care has been slowly drifting towards socialism since the advent of Carefirst in the '80's. In the interest of doing SOMETHING even if its wrong, I'm ready to try Obama's plan, (even the unconstitutional part involving forced contributions). On the theory that we've created such a mess for ourselves that there is no escape to a future real solution without a little serious pain first.

    So at least call it what it is John. Socialist medicine is fucked up and it always will be, though compared to today's mess, it may be our best option for now.

    Posted by william.harry13 at 07/27/2009 @ 10:44am

  39. Another thing you could do, that would actually be productive is to stop shouting slogans and understand the problem.

    For instance, the majority of Americans feel they are entitled to the best care no matter the price. That's a problem that requires a change in attitude.

    The problem isn't this naive slogan about greedy insurance companies. Insurance companies provide a service. They pool similar risks, which allows people (who can affort to) to manage the risk of economic insecurity due to morbidity.

    Grocery stores provide a service. They sell food, yet you don't fault them for not eliminating poverty. Home builders and appartment complexes provide a service. They sell shelter, you you don't fault them for not eliminating poverty.

    What is it about an intangible service (risk management) that causes you to become unhinged and see nefarious conspiracies lurking behind every corner?

    America's insurance companies do a good job of delivering a needed service to approximately 90% of the Americans who "can afford" the service.

    The problem isn't the insurance companies: the problem is Americans' lack of willingness to pay for the healthcare of the poor. Insurance companies didn't create poverty. And they don't exist to creaty your utopia of egalitarinaism.

    Many of you have latched onto single payer as the be-all end-all cure for unequal distribution of healthcare. Single payer would elinimate private insurance, so, logically, insurance companies must be evil and the root of the problem. That's quite a leap.

    The reason you aren't getting single payer isn't because of insurance companies; it's because the majority of Americans are unwilling to sacrifice their care for the "greater good". The problem is attitudes, not "greedy" insurers.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:47am

  40. The recent 25-19 vote by the House Committee on Education and Labor for an amendment allowing states to create single-payer health care systems if they so choose was an example of this.

    States already have the power to do this. No amendment was necessary because of the Tenth Amendment:

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Consituion, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserve to the States respectively, or to the people.

    The idea that states were prohibited from doing this is rediculous. No state has done it because no state could afford it or wanted it.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:54am

  41. Posted by ttr at 07/27/2009 @ 10:26am

    ttr, like I said on Mr Nichols' interminable impeachment posts...

    Prove me wrong...I'll enjoy it.

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 10:59am

  42. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:54am

    And it wouldn't have ANYTHING to do with the fact that such plans would inevitably bang up against Medicare and Medicaid....and thus involve the Fed and negate the 10th Amendment?

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 11:01am

  43. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:54am

    And it wouldn't have ANYTHING to do with the fact that such plans would inevitably bang up against Medicare and Medicaid....and thus involve the Fed and negate the 10th Amendment?

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 11:01am

    Nonsense. Why don't you explain to us how Medicare and Medicaid (which are themselves outside of Congressional authority) trump the rights of states under the 10th amendment to do anything that they choose as long as they don't violate the Constitution or try and usurp the powers enumerated to the Fed.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 11:07am

  44. Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 11:07am

    Not about "Constitutional rights", Larry.

    Talking about bureaucracy and duplication of services and various red tape crap like that.

    You DO admit some of that might be involved, don't you???

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 11:13am

  45. There is nothing that says you have to sign up for Medicare or Medicaid. A state could make it a crime to sign up of the beneifts and citizens would just be on their own outside the state's boarders.

    Actually, ERISA could be a problem, but I fail to see how this amendment authorizing states to do what they already have the power to do will impact Medicare, Medicaid, or ERISA.

    This vote is nothing but empty symbolism to placate uneducated supporters.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 11:17am

  46. FRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEE

    MMMMMMMAAAAAAAARRRRRRKETTTTTTSSSSS!

    Five Firms Hold 80% of Derivatives Risk, Fitch Report Finds

    The companies also recorded a total notional amount of derivative positions of more than $296 trillion.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 11:22am

  47. Not about "Constitutional rights", Larry.

    Talking about bureaucracy and duplication of services and various red tape crap like that.

    You DO admit some of that might be involved, don't you???

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 11:13am

    so what? It is none of the business of the govt.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 11:23am

  48. The companies also recorded a total notional amount of derivative positions of more than $296 trillion.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 11:22am

    That's very misleading. The investment banks function much like brokers. They find a party that loses money if the stock market goes up and matches them with a party that loses if the market goes down.

    They could have $1 trillion long and $1 trillion short and no matter which way the market moves they neither gain nor lose money. They just pocket a fee for matching up the counter parties.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 11:26am

  49. FRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEE

    MMMMMMMAAAAAAAARRRRRRKETTTTTTSSSSS!

    Oil: the Market is the Manipulation

    Posted by Gail the Actuary on July 26, 2009 - 9:14am

    Topic: Economics/Finance

    Tags: brent, chris cook, international petroleum exchange, nymex, oil market, oil prices [list all tags]

    This is a guest post by Chris Cook. Chris is Former Director of the International Petroleum Exchange, and is now a Strategic Market Consultant and commentator.

    Clearly manipulation has been going on in the global market in oil – there's nothing new about that – it's what intermediaries who transact for profit do and have always done. Indeed, some market wags say that trading could be defined as "acceptable market manipulation". But until the last few years what consenting adults were doing among themselves in the oil market didn't really affect the man in the street.

    But things have changed. We have now reached the culmination of a process of financialisation of the oil market to a degree where the market has become entirely sociopathic. It now operates to the detriment of consumers and producers alike and for the benefit of the intermediaries who control the market.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 11:28am

  50. FZ,

    Being a red-blooded American, you can imagine my solution to market manipulation is a good old-fashioned ass kickin'

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 11:53am

  51. even the insurance industry?

    hmmmmmm, DARIN?

    •• Ingenix, a unit of UnitedHealthcare, has settled a fraud case filed last year by New York attorney general Andrew Cuomo that has repercussions across the medical industry and should ripple across technology as well.

    Cuomo had charged Ingenix with posting phony rates in its database, so that a $100 office visit might be reimbursed as a $72 visit, leaving the patient with a bill for the remainder.

    The case started in 2006 when Columbia lecturer Mary Jerome complained she was left with tens of thousands of dollars in bills for ovarian cancer treatment, despite having full insurance.

    Under the settlement, estimated at $50 million, UnitedHealth will create a new database on out-of-network rates, which Cuomo wants based in New York. Ingenix is based in Minnesota.

    UPDATE: Add another $450 million to AMA doctors, and $20 million from Aetna to fund a non-profit alternative to Ingenix.

    Investors are shrugging off the news. UnitedHealth is currently trading very near the level it was at when the case was first filed, despite the Wall Street crash which came in the interim.

    Critics will say that, since UnitedHealth may have made more than $50 million from the fraud it is getting off lightly.

    BUT CUOMO ALSO PROMISED TO GO AFTER EVERY INSURER USING INGENIX, and the result could decimate the unit. This just as it was trying to launch a consulting arm trading on its good name. At minimum it may have to be spun-out. ••

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 12:06pm

  52. plus, darin, you are a corn-blooded american.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 12:12pm

  53. Tell Democrats Not To Let Blue Dogs Kill Health Reform! Please CALL Speaker Pelosi, Hoyer, Clyburn, and the White House with these talking points below! Remember, first thank them for supporting the House Tri-Committee health care plan, and then tell them why they can't go on vacation before dealing with health care reform:

    "I'm calling to thank [Name of Member] for supporting the House health care plan, and for supporting the public option and the national insurance exchange. I don't want Congress to go on vacation before they deal with the passage of health care reform! As an American who's faced denials of claims and has been facing higher insurance premiums, the public option and the national insurance exchange is NECESSARY to hold down the costs of private insurance and give us the kind of care we need. Please DO NOT delay the passage of health care reform in the House. We need you guys to stay in and work for us. Also, I've been hearing that the Blue Dog Democrats want to cut back subsidies for my family, that they want a fake state-based co-op plan, and have a trigger on the national insurance exchange by having it as state-based insurance exchanges at first. What they want is unacceptable for me and my family. Don't give into their demands. I'm an American who needs the choice of the national insurance exchange and the public option."

    CALL Speaker Nancy Pelosi at (202) 225-4965 or local office at (415) 556-4862 if you can't get through.

    CALL House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer at (202) 225-3130

    CALL House Majority Whip James Clyburn at (202) 226-3210

    More on who else to call, and what you can do to save healthcare: http://tinyurl.com/mdobxv

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 12:23pm

  54. Tell (MORE) Democrats Not To Let Blue Dogs Kill Health Reform!

    Please CALL these THREE chairmen in the House of Representatives, with your concerns about the Blue Dog Democrats trying to block health care reform and ask them NOT to listen to the Blue Dogs or give into their demandsl?

    Ways and Means Committee Chair Charlie Rangel (202) 225-3625)

    Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Henry Waxman (202) 225-2927)

    Education and Labor Committee Chair George Miller (202) 225-3725)

    Also, don't forget to call the co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and ask them to take a strong stand against the Blue Dogs' actions by asking the House leadership not to give into their demands to weaken the health care reform bill, and especially the Medicare-like public option in the bill.

    CALL Rep. Raul Grijalva, co-chair of the CPC, at 202-225-2435

    CALL Rep. Lynn Woolsey, co-chair of the CPC, at 202-225-5161

    And don't forget to CRACK THE WHIP on the rest of the Congressional Progressive Caucus so they stand as a strong voting bloc in opposition to the Blue Dog Democrats!

    We'll also need the Tri-Caucus members to hold firm against the Blue Dogs' demands to weaken health care reform for their constituents back home, so please call the leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, and the Congressional Asian Pacific AmericanCaucus! We need you guys to ask if the caucus will accept the Blue Dogs' demands, and ask them to fight back against the Blue Dogs.

    CALL Chairwoman Nydia Velasquez, Congressional Hispanic Caucus at (202) 225-2361

    CALL Chairwoman Barbara Lee, Congressional Black Caucus at 202-226-9776

    CALL Chairman Mike Honda, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus at (202) 225-2631

    http://tinyurl.com/

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 12:26pm

  55. CALL the White House with the talking points and tell them that the Blue Dog Democrats must UPHOLD the majority view of Americans who need a strong, robust Medicare-like public option, and not to give into their demands to weaken the public option in health care reform!

    CALL The White House at 202-456-1111 and E-MAIL THEM with the talking points above, and ask for Congress to stay and work on health care reform instead of going off on vacation!

    Also, if you can't afford direct calls--try this toll-free phone number at 1.800.828.0498. to call the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate!

    And if Congress goes home for vacation? You know what? We'll be right there in their faces, at rallies, OFA gatherings, HCAN events, and Moveon.org events. I want you to stop worrying, and start fighting at home if this happens. Step away from the computer, find a health care event near you, sign up, and start making these Members of Congress regret they ever went on vacation without passing health care reform.

    ALSO:this Facebook application called FriendRoots, allows you to choose campaigns to contact your friends in key congressional districts and urge them to call and e-mail their Representative or Senator in support of the House Tri-Committee bill.

    http://tinyurl.com/lms4j7

    So, if you're on Facebook, contact your friends that live in these lawmakers' districts, and tell them that you need their help.

    http://tinyurl.com/mdobxv

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 12:36pm

  56. House Progressives Take Hard Line on Public Option

    The Congressional Progressive Caucus, in response to pressure from the Blue Dogs to water down healthcare reform, are fighting back. On Friday afternoon, eight members of the caucus wrote to Speaker Pelosi on behalf of the entire CPC, to draw a line on any efforts to further weaken the public option.

    ...That's 82 votes for the kind of healthcare reform that is worth doing. More than 50 of them are on the record with caucus leadership as refusing to vote for any legislation that does not have a robust public option. Hopefully some of that spirit will inject their counterparts on the Senate side.

    http://tinyurl.com/nx474v

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 12:41pm

  57. Is there anyone here who still has doubts that judybrowni is a paid hack for the DNC?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 12:44pm

  58. Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 11:23am

    Larry, I'm talking Darin's point...not your philosophy. And the point remains, that single-payer systems set up by the state would obviously over-lap the Federal systems and thus clear guidance would have to be set up by Congress.

    As a militarist and Presidential authoritarian, you'd agree with that basic point on National Guard units, right? If a State Governor wants to do something with the NG that might interfere with a regular US Army protocol, procedure, or assets....it would require Congressional delineation of "who gets to do what", right?

    Or do State Govs control over the NG supercede Federal military domestic operations?

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 12:48pm

  59. The $2.1 Million Reason Evan Bayh Does Not Support A Public Option

    "Why is the senate even debating including the incredibly popular idea of a public option? Your answer is right here:

    Bayh contends the $2.1 million that his wife, Susan, earned from public health-care companies from 2006 to 2008 represents no conflict of interest...Susan Bayh, who was a midlevel lawyer for the politically active Eli Lilly and Co. while her husband was governor of Indiana, did not serve on the board of a single public health-care company until it was clear her husband was about to ascend to the U.S. Senate. Only one month before Evan Bayh was elected to the Senate in a landslide vote, his wife was appointed to serve on the board of what would become the nation's largest health insurance company -- and arguably the company with the most at stake in the health-care reform debate."

    http://tinyurl.com/mwynh6

    Stand up to Eva Bayh, and the health insurance lobbyists: Who to call for healthcare now!:

    http://tinyurl.com/mdobxv

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 12:49pm

  60. Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 12:44pm

    Larry, anybody who provides ANY information you don't like suddenly becomes a "paid operative of DNC"....including me!

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 12:56pm

  61. Naw, ANTI-S, JUDYBROWNI IS JUST passionate about her convictions. She reminds me of my long lost liberal cousin Nancy Dwayne from Piscataway, NJ

    Posted by william.harry13 at 07/27/2009 @ 1:03pm

  62. plus, darin, you are a corn-blooded american.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2009 @ 12:12pm

    Never waste a good pun. :-)

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 1:05pm

  63. Larry, anybody who provides ANY information you don't like suddenly becomes a "paid operative of DNC"....including me!

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 12:56pm

    I don't think I've said you are a paid operative, and I don't think you are.

    But Ms Judy has been primarily a poster of DNC talking points and only showed up when this issue got more attention. And I note that she really only posts her "updates" on this subject with lots of references to how to contact the White House or Democratic reps.

    As much as you target people, I can't imagine you haven't had the same conclusion

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 1:24pm

  64. Truth: I am a liberal, and originally from New Jersey! (But farther west in the state than Piscataway.)

    Howlingly funny lie: I'm a paid DNC "operative" -- I've repeatedly begged the crazy wingnuts to supply me with the url where one could sign up to be paid to comment for progressive causes, but since it doesn't exist in the real world, they've been silent on that talking point.

    If only that job did exist for progressives...but perhaps the nutballs are projecting, perhaps THEY are paid RNC (or John Birch Society) operatives.

    It's the only explanation that makes sense...

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 2:01pm

  65. Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 1:24pm

    So if we get RNC talking points from HAPP or sjcher or Maasch, does that mean they're a paid operative of the GOP?

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 2:03pm

  66. Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 2:01pm

    BTW, judy, in fairness....if we want to read an article, we'll go to the website.

    We're more interested in what YOU think, with the cited material as back-up if you need.

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 2:05pm

  67. saw two amusing political cartoons in my local paper yesterday. the first makes fun of the progressives' hysteria with the uninsured.

    it shows a lineup of six different type of uninsured people under the headline "The 47 Million* Uninsured"

    1-man in suit sipping coffee: "I can afford it. But I don't want it." 18 million

    2-man in superman costume: "I'm 18-25 years old, and I'm indestructible." 8.4 million

    3-mexican man: "I'm an illegal, and I'm not here." 12.6 million

    4-woman in business suit: "I'm in between jobs and only temporarily uninsured." 9.4 million

    5-kid: "I'm covered but my parents haven't signed me up yet." 8 million

    6-slacker looking guy: "I'm eligible for government health programs but I haven't signed up." 3.5 million

    *adds up to more becaus some categories overlap.

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 2:07pm

  68. ...the second cartoon makes fun of the conservatives' hysteria about socialism.

    it shows a family packed up in a car. the radio is on and it says "Public option health care? That smacks of socialism!*"

    *As they listen to talk radio on gov't regulated airwaves...

    in a vehicle from a gov't bailed-out company...

    driving on a gov't built interstate highway...

    this publicly educated family...

    is sipping water from a municipal system...

    on its way to a vacation in a national park.

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 2:10pm

  69. CALL CONGRESS: TAKE THE PLEDGE FOR THE PUBLIC OPTION

    Progressive members of Congress need to draw a line in the sand and demand a public health insurance option -- something 76% of Americans want.

    We need you to call progressive members of Congress and ask that they Take the Pledge to vote against any health care bill that doesn't have a public plan which is:

    Available nationwide, on day one, and accountable to Congress and the voters

    You can find their phone numbers below:

    http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/publicoption

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 2:10pm

  70. end the most INEFFICIENT, EXPENSIVE system in the world and adopt a version of the paradigm that STATISTICALLY speaking...

    is more efficient and less expensive - single payer or something similar.

    the PARASITES WASTE MONEY, PROVIDE SUBSTANDARD SERVICES IN RETURN.

    who knows what will come out of this, but i fear a bastardized mess that combines the worst of both worlds...

    Posted by dexter666 at 07/27/2009 @ 2:12pm

  71. As much as Lady Luck smiled on Candidate Obama in '08, she sure has given President Obama the cold sholder in '09.

    Really, the only thing you can do to fix a recession is to wait for the economy to fix itself. If you are politically astute you will make a big show of giving your friends a big pile of other people's money and call it "stimulus" and hope that the gift coincides with the recession's end. His timing here was terrible, but it wasn't good either.

    His nomination of Judge Sotomayer went fairly smoothly. She met only token resistance as Republicans effectively rolled over and played dead. But in the last month nothing has gone right.

    The flair-up in Honduras certainly hasn't helped his image as a supporter of Democracy or as a supporter of America's most loyal ally in Central America. The Supreme Court voted 15-0 that Zelaya violated the article of the Constitution that says if a President seeks to extend his term he will be immediately dismissed and stripped of his duties. President Obama threw his support behind Zelaya, who now has less than 30% support in Honduras. This could still be a strategically smart move in-so-far- as President Obama effectively threw his Support behind Chavez, but the move didn't help in the US.

    Of his two signature legislative issues, Cap & Trade will be an even tougher sell in the Aug following a July that set 3000 record low temperatures across the US and Health care is losing support one people realize that the campaign promise of more of everything for less money won't pan out.

    And in the Gates' affair, President Obama threw caution to the wind and threw his support behind his friend who, it turns out, was racially profiling the cop he accused of racial profiling.

    Not a good month.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 2:19pm

  72. hey judybrowni---the same couple dozen people post here regularly (I have no idea how many people bother to read anonymous comments below blogs if they're not signed up/don't comment--but I think it's safe to say not many).

    In other words--you are wasting your time with the repetitive 'urge your congressman to vote this way' campaign. 'Infinite Jest' comes to mind as an apt description of your efforts here.

    Allow me to make a suggestion: insetad of your upteenth copy-and-paste job that pretty much everyone just skims over or has already started to just skip over; start to put things in your own words in somewhat brief posts and get a dialgoue going. Even then, in all likelihood, you're still just pissing against the wind, but your manner and style now is definitely just pissing against the wind.

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 2:19pm

  73. also, judybrowni, i'm not saying you are being paid by a liberal corporation/association--but it's not unfair of the anonymous commenters on here, most of whom have been blog commenters for many years, to suspect someone of being a paid operative when that person shows up here after not being part of this anonymous community as long as they have, and when that person:

    1. posts almost exclusively about one topic

    2. the posts are almost exclusively copy-and-paste jobs

    3. the posts are urging people to take action to effect political representatives.

    Allow me to clue you in to something: the regulars here post b/c of the following reasons (some may overlap):

    First and Foremost--they're bored.

    2. they like to be right, and engage in "gotcha" moments with the same people about a variety of topics ; over and over and over again. the flip side of this is virtually no commenters are coming here to have their minds changed; their minds are already firmly made up

    3. they're addicted to the internet; especially the anonymity of the internet.

    4

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 2:37pm

  74. Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 2:37pm

    Interesting post.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/27/2009 @ 2:40pm

  75. One aspect of blogging has always been the aggregating of information.

    Sometimes I'm moved to write opinion, at others, happy to pass on information from sources that seems somehow appropriate.

    And then, of course, action items (I've been thanked for passing those on.)

    I come from a journalistic tradition, but I tired long ago of the "he said," "she said" format -- there's also been discussion of whether that "even-handedness" has perverted journalism, giving equal weight to the insincere, the lie, the fringe, the crazy.

    I was surprised to find so much wingnutty batshit crazy in the comments of the Nation, and without factual information the balance here could seem to tilt to the wackadoo.

    Plus: some wingnut comments are too insane to discuss rationally -- paranoid delusions are difficult to break through.

    I also know that a thread with many misspelled, grammatically erratic, and mean-spirited delusions comments drives away those who'd rather deal in complete thoughts, artfully written and rationally expressed.

    So I have set myself the task, to which I will take whenever I like, to bring some light and air to the topics on which I've become informed.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 2:41pm

  76. "Of his two signature legislative issues, Cap & Trade will be an even tougher sell in the Aug following a July that set 3000 record low temperatures across the US and Health care is losing support one people realize that the campaign promise of more of everything for less money won't pan out."

    in june 2009, the global ocean surface tempeture was the highest ever recorded, and the government, under pressure from climate scientists, released never-before-seen photos of the artic and antarctic ice shelves (which bush kept secret) i beg of you to look at them.

    second, on the issue of healthcare, darin. if it is your goal (and it's obvious that this is the GOP's goal) to defend the insurance companies over the interests of americans, then please, go right ahead. you are the perfect encapsulation of everything that is wrong with the healthcare "debate" in that you fail to grasp the implications of attempting to defeat proposals which would actually HELP people, rather than bury them in medical bills, swallow them with fear and anxiety, etc. it's disgusting, and our warped understanding of healthcare in this country makes us the laughing stock of the globe. i know many canadians and europeans, and all of them think that we are out of our fucking minds with regards to our treatment of sick people.

    obama's plan is so excruciatingly tepid, that it is extremely unlikely we will see anything resembling a "government takeover of healthcare" in this country. anyone who thinks that obama's proposal is "radical" or "socialistic" has no idea what she's talking about. he's basically going to throw billions of dollars into a disfunctional system. single payer NOW.

    Posted by darladoon at 07/27/2009 @ 2:41pm

  77. there was no 4 (at least none i came up with; i'm sure a 4-through-much higher than 4 reason could be listed).

    and not to pile on, well, yes, to pile on--saying "where is this job online?" is not concrete evidence that you're not what you're denying you're not. are all jobs in the world listed online? no. one of my least favorite words--networking--is how most people get jobs. maybe you know someone or know someone who knows someone.

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 2:41pm

  78. "Plus: some wingnut comments are too insane to discuss rationally -- paranoid delusions are difficult to break through."

    your behavior on this board doesn't back up this accusation. it seems the majority of the time you're posting something in your own words (which is a tiny minority of your overall posting) you're engaging what you call "wing-nuts"

    and there more necessary and ultimately telling question is: do you really think you're "making a difference"?

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 2:48pm

  79. Single Payer, although providing the greatest savings on Healthcare and relieving an enormous stress on present employers and would be entrepreneurs of small businesses. Not to mention the relief of the entire population (excluding the obscenely rich, the the "insurance and pharma" crowd and the paid off Politicians).

    Single Payer could save possibly a Trillion Dollars over a few years. But it will never happen. The fix is in.

    The only thing that will change this is a massive protest nationwide. And the people just don't know how to do that. They sit in front of their electronic gadgets like lemmings and do nothing.

    Disgusting country we live in.

    I wish I could move out of here. But how in the hell does one do that?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/27/2009 @ 2:55pm

  80. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 2:19pm

    Dow going up and he gained the Senate by 60 votes and his nominee for USSC is picking up REPUBLICAN support despite being a "racist".

    Not that bad, Darin.

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 3:05pm

  81. I used to just by a ticket, pack a backpack and go. Passport was easy. Now it's very difficult to even get a passport, let alone passing the litmus test of "Homeland Security", and if you happen to be on the "No Fly List". You are fucked.

    The system is being refined so that we cannot even leave this crap country. A a mass Exodus of refugees would reduce the tax base.

    I suppose the best thing to do is go to Florida and try and get to Cuba. Like a reverse boat people thing. Once in Cuba, a person might be able to travel on..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/27/2009 @ 3:07pm

  82. I wish I could move out of here. But how in the hell does one do that?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/27/2009 @ 2:55pm

    and if you happen to be on the "No Fly List". You are fucked.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/27/2009 @ 3:07pm

    You could always ask Frosty if he'll let you crash on his couch.

    And the no fly list is no biggee. They just have to speak to you at the counter and then they have to use the wand on you even if you don't set off the metal detector. No more than a 5 minute nuisance.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:21pm

  83. Blue Dogs aren't making sense:

    "Right now the fate of health care reform seems to rest in the hands of relatively conservative Democrats -- mainly members of the Blue Dog Coalition, created in 1995. And you might be tempted to say that President Obama needs to give those Democrats what they want.

    But he can't -- because the Blue Dogs aren't making sense.

    Well, they talk a lot about fiscal responsibility, which basically boils down to worrying about the cost of those subsidies. And it's tempting to stop right there, and cry foul. After all, where were those concerns about fiscal responsibility back in 2001, when most conservative Democrats voted enthusiastically for that year's big Bush tax cut -- a tax cut that added $1.35 trillion to the deficit?

    But it's actually much worse than that -- because even as they complain about the plan's cost, the Blue Dogs are making demands that would greatly increase that cost.

    http://tinyurl.com/lcc62g

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 3:24pm

  84. Dow going up and he gained the Senate by 60 votes and his nominee for USSC is picking up REPUBLICAN support despite being a "racist".

    Not that bad, Darin.

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 3:05pm

    I mentioned these (even if I accidentally typed "was terrible" when I meant "wasn't terrible".)

    Dow 9000 is an indication of expected economic growth, but it will take a long time to shake out the excess unemployment, so even though only 8% of the stimulus has been spent, the recession is over but unemployment lingers and Binden conceded that they didn't know what they were doing/underestimated. So President Obama won't benefit from a perception that he "rescued" the economy.

    And I addressed Judge Sotomayer with the "token opposition" reference. She didn't cost him any political capital, but she didn't really pay any dividends either.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:28pm

  85. Hey Mask, did you see the latest on Drudge?

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99MUM7O0& show_article=1

    Police: Woman accused of killing newborn ate brain

    SAN ANTONIO (AP) - A woman charged with murdering her 3 1/2-week-old son used a knife and two swords to dismember the child and ate parts of his body, INCLUDING HIS BRAIN (emphasis added), before stabbing herself in the torso and slicing her own throat, police said Monday.

    ...

    San Antonio Police Chief William McManus said the early Sunday morning attack occurred a week after the child's father moved out.

    ***********

    Obviously this is all Democrats' fault. If they and their anti-family welfare policies weren't always trying to convince America that fathers are irrelevant none of this would have happend.

    ;-) (<-- this is the little smiley face emoticon that you asked me in include that indicates that I'm only joking.)

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:41pm

  86. "the recession is over but unemployment lingers and Binden conceded that they didn't know what they were doing/underestimated. So President Obama won't benefit from a perception that he "rescued" the economy. "----Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:28pm

    "recession is over"....but in 16 months, it won't benefit Obama in the 2010 midterms, and in 2 years, 16 months, he won't benefit from it for his re-election.

    Gotta pretty high bar there, Darin, don't you????

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:41pm

    Good....hard to tell most of the time. BTW, given Matt Drudge has NO children....is he the MOST selfish a person can be???

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 3:48pm

  87. BREAKING: House Dems To Hold Five Hour, Closed Door Health Care Meeting

    "Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, explained in a statement: "This in-depth look at the bill is another step in our efforts to keep our members informed and educated on this important topic. Democrats in the House have already held 10 Caucus meetings on health care, 79 hearings on health care reform, 550 town hall events in their districts about health care, and three House Committees have heard 45 hours of debate and amendments on our health care reform legislation. The American people have been waiting 75 years for us to get this done."

    http://tinyurl.com/l393je

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 3:51pm

  88. Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 3:48pm

    I don't think you get this jovial give-n-take thing. You were supposed to reply that the child's mother was obviously a Republican because she stopped caring about the child's welfare as soon as he was born.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:51pm

  89. What's the emoticon for a rimshot?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:54pm

  90. Military, police departments and fire departments are among those providers of services which we agree that society requires, but which should not be controlled by the profit motive. Posted by Radscal at 07/26/2009 @ 9:02pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    did this dude really say the military is not driven by a profit motive? hahahaahaha! and the police? --- yeah, that's the ticket! Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 09:55am

    This dude said "SHOULD NOT be controlled by the profit motive.

    Coming from Chicago, I've been pulled over by the cops many times for for DWW (driving with wallet).

    Seriously, a sad reality of U.S. history is that both the military and police have been used to build the profits of the already-wealthy. Not the way I think it SHOULD BE, but certainly the way it often has been.

    Posted by Radscal at 07/27/2009 @ 4:12pm

  91. The rest of your MASKian BS, is just a long anti-capitalist rant....let's call it Capitalist Profiling....be careful, you may get arrested by some big, stock-owning cop who teaches Stock Investing 101 to first-year cops looking over investiment options under their big, fat Gubber plans.

    Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 11:20pm

    ?????????????????????????????????????????

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/27/2009 @ 4:35pm

  92. BTW, given Matt Drudge has NO children....is he the MOST selfish a person can be???

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 3:48pm

    I really touched a nerve here, didn't I?

    Anyway, I've always assumed Drudge's lack of children was related to reports that he is gay.

    Getting back to the other point, there is a difference between correlations and rules.

    I don't remember the exact quote I made, (I'm sure you have it) but what I was trying to communicate was the speculation that selflessness would be positively correlated with the number of children you have because each additional child require parents to make additional material sacrifices. (Unlike the olden days when children were economically net providers as free labor on the farm.)

    This was in reference to articles saying Republicans have more children on average, so you claimed I said Republicans love their children more than Democrats. You put 2 and 2 together and got the square-root of negative one. (Yes, that's an irrational number.)

    Nonetheless, a correlation is not a rule. Correlations identify a patter in millions of data point: they do not preclude exceptions.

    There is a correlation between intelligence and income (not wealth, though). However, the man with the highest IQ in the US is no where near the richest man in the US. In fact, despite having an IQ of around 195, his lack of personal skills precluded him from even graduating from college. He is an outlier.

    In my opinion, the most selfish person in the US is the Octomom. She put the health and wellbeing of her 14 chidren behind her selfish desire for celebrity status. She is an outlier.

    These exceptions do not prove the correlation doesn't exist, only that the correlation is less than 1.0 in magnitude.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 4:38pm

  93. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 10:47am |

    "Grocery stores provide a service. They sell food, yet you don't fault them for not eliminating poverty."

    If grocery stores ran like insurance companies, they'd have a cover charge to go into the store, you could only buy food once you've proven that you're hungry, and they could randomly remove products from the shelves as you browse.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/27/2009 @ 5:27pm

  94. "If grocery stores ran like insurance companies, they'd have a cover charge to go into the store, you could only buy food once you've proven that you're hungry, and they could randomly remove products from the shelves as you browse."

    I like it, not bad!

    But...let's put some (ne, let's put most) of the blame on the consumer (who has free will to purchase what he wants): if people eliminated saturated fat, processed sugars, and refined foods (in other words, much of what is sold in foods and proven to be detrimental to health) from their diets this country would not have the enormous (pun intended) health issues (heart disease, many types of cancer, etc) that it suffers from.

    But maybe the conspiracy runs deep! The health insurance companies must pay the grocery stores to stock unhealthy yet delicious food that will guarantee people get sick!

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 5:51pm

  95. and the dentists must be in on it too! are you an anti-dentite?!

    but seriously, oral hygeine and health (one must brush and floss much more often if one eats bad foods) are bid indicators of overall health. if someone lets his teeth rot his gums are next; and most likely if he doesn't care about the part of his body that he needs to eat then he probably doesn't care much mabout the rest of the stuff going on in his abdomen.

    ...which is really the point. personal responsibility. many people dont' really care what they put in their bodies...it's like the deficit...a future you will pay the consequences, not the you you see when you look in the mirror.

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 5:57pm

  96. Refusing to serve certain customers, outside of race/gender/nat'l origin, is the right of any business.

    Posted by Happy at 07/26/2009 @ 8:11pm

    And that, in a nutshell, is why medicine should be practiced by doctors and not insurance companies. Medicine is not a business, and should never have become one. Doctors should be paid, of course, but they run up bills so that their own paychecks go up. Damn, wish I could do that at my job!

    I am not a "customer" of the health industry. I don't "consume" health care. Health care is not something I can go to a supermarket, or a local WalMart, and buy it off the shelf. It requires highly trained specialists and should not be treated as if cancer somehow equates to a new hi-def television. Or whether brain tumors are equivalent to a new house. The republicans and anyone who sides with them on this issue have absolutely no compassion for their fellow citizens. You care more about the concept of the free market than people dying because they aren't "covered." For a group of people who claim not to believe in evolution, you are certainly all believers in survival of the fittest, as long as the rules benefit you. It is yet another in the long line of logical and philosophical loopholes ya'll have to jump through to even attempt to be internally consistent with your stated ideology.

    Sad, really.

    Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 07/27/2009 @ 6:16pm

  97. And the no fly list is no biggee. They just have to speak to you at the counter and then they have to use the wand on you even if you don't set off the metal detector. No more than a 5 minute nuisance.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/27/2009 @ 3:21pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Unless you look...um...is it Arabic this week? Or "Middle Eastern?" Or perhaps it's just the men with names like Mohammed or Abdul.

    5 minute nuisance my ass. Tell that to the Senators and Congress people who made it on that list.

    There are approximately 7 Billion people on our planet today. Radical terrorists number a few thousand. You do the math.

    Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 07/27/2009 @ 6:38pm

  98. Hi! Yep, 96 posts and this is all still nothing but a government power grab.

    And Stephen Carver1, you are wrong to cite opposition as lacking compassion for their fellow citizens. In my opinion the opposition has compassion. They know that this power grab will lead to a diminished health care system, rationing and ultimately a lack of liberty and access to health care for all of us.

    Like most liberals I come across, you appear to associate the forced redistribution of resources as "compassion". Your generosity with other people's wealth isn't really compassion.

    I will never truly understand the left's faith in politicians, centralized government and its expansion, when our nation was founded on a clear limitation of government. By the way, if anyone ever accuses you of hating America? That's why.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 07/27/2009 @ 6:45pm

  99. "They know that this power grab will lead to a diminished health care system, rationing and ultimately a lack of liberty and access to health care for all of us"

    only a conservative could argue that universal healthcare will LIMIT americans' access to healthcare.

    wow.

    Posted by darladoon at 07/27/2009 @ 6:58pm

  100. universal health care will lead to rationing?

    frei, you do realize that we already have rationing.

    or, are you too blinded by your own stupidity?

    Posted by darladoon at 07/27/2009 @ 7:20pm

  101. Posted by freiheit1 at 07/27/2009 @ 6:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Frei, I think there is an easy answer to that one! Leftist, regressives, liberal, or whatever they wish to label themselves politically or socialogically bear a marked resemblance to the hebrew naiton of the old testament.

    10So Samuel spoke all the words of the LORD to the people who had asked of him a king. 11He said, "This will be the procedure of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and place them for himself in his chariots and among his horsemen and they will run before his chariots.

    12"He will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and of fifties, and some to do his plowing and to reap his harvest and to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.

    13"He will also take your daughters for perfumers and cooks and bakers.

    14"He will take the best of your fields and your vineyards and your olive groves and give them to his servants.

    15"He will take a tenth of your seed and of your vineyards and give to his officers and to his servants.

    16"He will also take your male servants and your female servants and your best young men and your donkeys and use them for his work.

    17"He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his servants.

    18"Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day."

    19Nevertheless, the people refused to listen to the voice of Samuel, and they said, "No, but there shall be a king over us,

    20that we also may be like all the nations, that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles."

    Such Ignorance is an arrogant human trait difficult to eradicate!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/27/2009 @ 8:10pm

  102. Posted by antisocialist at 07/27/2009 @ 12:44pm

    Larry, anybody who provides ANY information you don't like suddenly becomes a "paid operative of DNC"....including me!

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 12:56pm

    And Michael Steele!

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/27/2009 @ 8:36pm

  103. "If grocery stores ran like insurance companies, they'd have a cover charge to go into the store, you could only buy food once you've proven that you're hungry, and they could randomly remove products from the shelves as you browse."

    I have to disagree:

    If grocery stores were run like health insurance companies, you'd have to pay a premium every month (which would up yearly, on an arbitrary basis, but certainly if you'd gotten older) on the possibility that you might need to shop in that store at some point.

    In addition, there would be a cover charge each time you entered the store, you could only buy food once you'd proved you hadn't ever eaten that particular food before, and they could randomly remove products from your cart, after you'd paid for them.

    And, you might receive additional bills for that food weeks or months later.

    No matter if you''d paid your premiums and were willing to pay the admission charge to the store, and whatever bills the grocery store cared to present, the grocery store could still bar you from buying food, if they felt you were too hungry for their taste, and effectively blackball you from all other stores.

    Of course, it's not an exact anaology: we must eat three times a day, but we're also all human with human bodies that break down and require repair multiple times in our lives.

    The argument that healthcare requires a profit-making insurance company between you and your doctor falls apart, even in the recent past. Before Nixon sold us out to the HMO, Blue Cross and Blue Shield were non-profits, premiums were affordable, families rarely went bankrupt from healthcare.

    Just ask my Dad, who raised us on non-profit Blue Cross.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/27/2009 @ 9:15pm

  104. Mr. Nichols: Thank you for this terrific article. I have been pleading with all my progressive contacts (even to you recently) to push for Universal single payer health care now that there is time to do so. According to the public response to many articles in the N.Y.Times and elsewhere, people are fed up with the confusing health care dance that is going on now in Washington. If only President Obama had the courage of his convictions, he would fight for such complete coverage for the public by listening to the people instead of all his political colleagues, democrat and republican. By the way I live in Canada I am a(U.S.Citizen) and happy to be eligible for its medical coverage. The Canadian woman now appearing in ads complaing how she was forced to have surgery in the U.S. for a brain tumor since she couldn't get care in Canada is a total fabrication. She had a benigh cyst on her pituitary gland which was not life threatening and was scheduled for a specialist appointment in a few months. She lives in a town near me and has infuriated Canadians. I am forwarding your article to my progressive connections.

    Thank you.

    Posted by pvolkov at 07/27/2009 @ 10:07pm

  105. people act like health care being expensive is merely a tool of the rich insurance companies.

    i was born in 1979. my mother and father had a house built in 1980, their first. it was a modest size house, a 3-bedroom cape on approx. 1 acre of land. the house cost about $30,000. they paid off their mortgage in less than 10 years.

    if i wanted to buy that house today, even in a down market, it would cost rougly 10 times as much as they paid only 30 years ago.

    was health insurance really 10 times cheaper 30 years ago?

    all things have increased in price a ridiculous amount in my lifetime (only 30 years).

    inflation my friends. we don't sell anything to the world anymore. the dollar, truly, ain't what it used to be.

    even if we got universal health care starting tomorrow, taxes would have to go up to pay for it (or we could just increase the deficit more adn make the next generation look at today's inflation rate with envy).

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/27/2009 @ 10:25pm

  106. Maybe a bit suspicious???

    Posted by Mask at 07/27/2009 @ 06:24am | ignore this person | warn this person

    mAsKeD fool, a new Zogby Interactive survey finds a majority of Americans are evenly split on the basic structure of proposed reform.

    Respondents were presented with two statements describing different universal healthcare plans and asked whether they agree or disagree with each:

    Universal Plan A - "Do you agree or disagree with a universal healthcare plan that would require everyone in the U.S. to have health insurance with federal help for those who cannot pay the premiums?"

    Universal Plan B - "Do you agree or disagree with a universal healthcare plan where the government would provide health insurance for everyone in the U.S. under a single-payer plan, similar to everyone having Medicare?"

    A plurality of respondents (49 percent) agreed with Plan A, which most closely resembles the current reform proposals, while 48 percent disagreed. Plan B received slightly less support with only 44 percent agreeing to a potential "Medicare for all" system. The partisan split between Republicans and Democrats is significant and currently a majority of political independents disagree with both proposed reforms.

    The survey also included questions about the upcoming challenges facing the Baby Boomer generation as they entire retirement. Less than half of all respondents (42 percent) believe that Social Security will be available for them, while 50 percent believe Medicare will be available. The survey shows far fewer believe that either program will be available for their children. This Zogby Interactive survey of 4,811 adults nationwide was conducted July 15-20, 2009 and carries a margin of error of +/- 1.4 percentage points.

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/27/2009 @ 10:40pm

  107. Now for JudyBrowniemakers totally biased leftist polls never cited as they reveal nothing but biased Demoncrat manipulated figures! (more to masked fools taste)

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/27/2009 @ 10:42pm

  108. only a conservative could argue that universal healthcare will LIMIT americans' access to healthcare. wow. Posted by darladoon at 07/27/2009 @ 6:58pm

    Only a liberal would argue that the government can take over healthcare, cover all the currently uninsured, provide unlimited care for all, and save money over what we pay now.

    Posted by twillie at 07/27/2009 @ 11:25pm

  109. As the convoluted Congressional proposals have become clerer, they have run into great trouble. What is so amazing is the extent to which that change parallels the recent rise in the stock mrket, which is the collective decisions of millions of Americans and others putting their money where their mouths are.

    I wish I had more money with which to take advantage of this wisdom

    Along with this came an explosion of MANY THOUSANDS of postings and responses on the web about health care. The extreme rise in personal, uncoordinated interest is huge, and commendable.

    John D. Froelich

    Posted by balataf at 07/27/2009 @ 11:38pm

  110. If English is your first language, Big Pastor, your local grammar and high school should be sued.

    The purpose of language is to convey information and meaning, but I'm unable to decipher the above run-on sentence. (Here's some basic structure: a sentence is a complete thought, and punctuation helps organize those thoughts.)

    I realize you're trying to say something negative about the national range of polls I've posted (from legitimate sources, not Fox news propaganda fountain.) You've thrown in some slurs and name-calling, but come off sounding more like those poor mad creatures who wander the streets of our major cities muttering to themselves.

    In other words, your postings really aren't helping your side. (So I encourage you to post on, Big Pasture of cow patties!)

    As to the Zogby "interactive" poll: Zogby is one of the less reliable pollsters for a variety of reasons (a big "for instance" in Zogby history, they predicted a Kerry win in 2004.)

    "Interactive" polls also are considered unreliable -- rather than the large random sample that offers the best option for reflecting actual percentages, in interactives those polled are self-selected, which tends to skew the results.

    Zogby is infamous for it's highly unreliable interactive polls.

    Small wonder the Zogby poll is off under 20-30 points for those favorable to goverment-sponsored health care, and nearly the same amount for those who don't favor it, from a range of more reliably-structured polls, from more reliable polling agencies.

    In the majority of polls recently, government supported health care is favored by about 70% of the American people (ranging from 60% to 76%, if memory serves) -- skewed polls don't change reality, but simply give false hope to the deluded.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:16am

  111. As for the cost of health insurance simply having simply increased with inflation and cost of living -- that would be a big NO.

    I'll try to find the source, but I've seen figures that compared the actual cost of health insurance and health care in the United States adjusted for inflation and cost of living, and in the 1950s -'70s (before "managed care") the cost back then was near 1/10 of what we're paying now.

    I've checked this out with my father, who raised a family of three kids on non-profit Blue Cross/Blue Shield, and he agrees.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:24am

  112. Even recent health costs have outstripped inflation:

    "Facts on the Cost of Health Insurance and Health Care

    In 2008, total national health expenditures were expected to rise 6.9 percent -- two times the rate of inflation.1 Total spending was $2.4 TRILLION in 2007, or $7900 per person1. Total health care spending represented 17 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

    U.S. health care spending is expected to increase at similar levels for the next decade reaching $4.3 TRILLION in 2017, or 20 percent of GDP.1

    In 2008, employer health insurance premiums increased by 5.0 percent – two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,700. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,700."

    http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:27am

  113. Even recent health costs have outstripped inflation:

    "Facts on the Cost of Health Insurance and Health Care

    In 2008, total national health expenditures were expected to rise 6.9 percent -- two times the rate of inflation.1 Total spending was $2.4 TRILLION in 2007, or $7900 per person1. Total health care spending represented 17 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

    U.S. health care spending is expected to increase at similar levels for the next decade reaching $4.3 TRILLION in 2017, or 20 percent of GDP.1

    In 2008, employer health insurance premiums increased by 5.0 percent – two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,700. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,700."

    http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:35am

  114. Only a liberal would argue that the government can take over healthcare, cover all the currently uninsured, provide unlimited care for all, and save money over what we pay now.

    Posted by twillie at 07/27/2009 @ 11:25pm

    Maybe you could ask all the "Liberals" as well as the "Conservatives" in the 35 other industrial nations that currently have "government" healthcare. And then ask yourself why none of them has a for profit system like ours. And why they are mostly happy with government handling their healthcare needs.

    A recent poll in Canada that was taken because of the spate of "Canadian Health Care Bashers" here recently.

    Canadians were asked if they were happy with the current system. 65% said Yes.

    When asked if they would rather change to an American style system. 82% said No.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 02:16am

  115. Currently the US spends twice as much on healthcare as any other Industrialized Nation and we die younger.

    We also rank 29th globally in infant mortality. We ranked 12th in 1960.

    We are currently tied in infant mortality with Poland and Slovakia...

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 02:29am

  116. All of this is the result of a for profit vampiric corporate healthcare system that feeds off of the misery and misfortune of others.

    We desperately need to drive a stake through the heart of this morbid system.

    Where is Van Helsing when you need him?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 02:37am

  117. I would not want the government making my Bluejeans, my TV, my Computer or my iPod. These are things best left to healthy competitive capitalism.

    But when it comes to the Roads, The Police and Fire Department, Defense and other parts of the Commons that are essential, I think government is uniquely qualified. And healthcare is an essential part of the commons.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 02:47am

  118. But alas.. Without comprehensive campaign finance reform the voice of the people will not be heard by politicians whose ears are stuffed with cash money bribes.

    The big corporate interests and their self interested greedy lobbyist zombies that inhabit Washington will silence the needs of the people.

    Unless we get their attention. The people outnumber these freaks. But the people are sheeple and all is lost. We let the few lead the many down the road to destruction. And the people follow them bleating, BAAA,BAAAA,BAAAAA !

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 04:13am

  119. The healthcare vamps are currently feeding the greed of Washington politicians $1.3 million dollars a day to combat reform... Greasing the palms of those like Max Baucus and others to support the status quo.

    This Montana Senator is a traitor, not only to the people, but to the very foundations of Democracy. And Harry Reid, who should be run out of town on a rail, enabled him.

    Why do we have these bastards in office?

    And why do we tolerate them? These are evil greedy assholes, who work for the Totalitarian Corporate Democracy we currently have.

    What are YOU doing to protect our freedoms?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 04:40am

  120. I'm done ranting..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 04:41am

  121. Maybe not quite done..

    This August Vacation that is flaunted by the likes of Harry Reid to just slow down and get a well thought out "Good Bill" is just a tactic to remove the urgency of healthcare reform and Kill The Bill.

    The House already has a Bill that is almost out of committee. But bills don't die in the House. They die in the Senate.

    This is the conspiracy to Kill the Public Option. It will result in a few changes that are not healthcare reform.

    Why has not Obama come out swinging on this? He has the power to keep the Senate in session until a bill is produced. He could tell them that they will not go in recess until they do their job and get a Bill ready for reconcilliation.

    I have said before that I suspect that even Obama does not want real healthcare reform, and that this is just an excuse to give him cover.

    Look what happened to Card Check. It was quietly dropped by the Senate. And not a word from Obama.

    We are suckers if we don't see this..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 05:02am

  122. I realize you're trying to say something negative about the national range of polls I've posted (from legitimate sources,

    In the majority of polls recently, government supported health care is favored by about 70% of the American people (ranging from 60% to 76%, if memory serves) -- skewed polls don't change reality, but simply give false hope to the deluded.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:16am | ignore this person | warn this person

    =========

    There goes our Demoncrat Party "hired gun" again quoting "unnameable" biased leftist polls as predicted! She never heard of Gallop, Rasmussen, Zogby, etc. the large accredited national polls!

    Pathalogical liars are always soooooo...very very prolific with their perfidy!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 06:19am

  123. You apparently missed this one judybrowniemaker! (or did the Demoncrat Party hired help recieve notice to ignore it?)

    A new Rasmussen Reports poll shows that President Barack Obama's rating in Rasmussen's Presidential Approval Index has hit negative double digits for the first time.

    The survey found that 29 percent of voters strongly approve of Obama's job performance, while 40 percent strongly disapprove.

    Rasmussen calculates its Presidential Approval Index by subtracting the "strongly disapprove" figure from the "strongly approve" figure. As a result, Obama's overall score is a minus-11. That's the first time his rating has reached negative double digits.

    Other results of the poll:

    49 percent somewhat approve of Obama's performance.

    50 percent disapprove of Obama's performance.

    76 percent see Obama as liberal.

    48 percent see Obama as very liberal.

    54 percent primarily blame former President George W. Bush for America's economic woes.

    25 percent say the U.S. economy has been aided by the economic stimulus package.

    53 percent oppose the Democratic healthcare reform package.

    37 percent say deficit reduction should be Obama's top priority.

    20 percent say healthcare should be Obama's top priority.

    The poll is based on answers from 1,500 likely voters. It has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.

    I'd say all you 29%ers have a real problem along with the 20%ers that think national healthcare is important!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 06:40am

  124. Pathalogical liars are always soooooo...very very prolific with their perfidy!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 06:19am

    Look in the mirror for a pathological liar. See the face? It is you!

    A recent USA Today/Gallup Poll of 3,026 Adults. July 2009, Says.

    "By 56%-33%, those surveyed endorse the idea of enacting major health care changes this year. Just one in four say it's not important to them."

    The people speak. But the Spin Doctors just Spin.

    Americans want healthcare reform. And that is surprising in a way since most Americans are as ignorant as pig piss.

    Even considering the lack of education that is rampant in this third world country due to a right wing war on education.

    If the people who were polled had a decent public education, the results would probably be even more dramatic.

    Give it up "Big Pasture", there are some of us out here who are self educated and intelligent enough to inform the less fortunate.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 06:48am

  125. If grocery stores ran like insurance companies, they'd have a cover charge to go into the store, you could only buy food once you've proven that you're hungry, and they could randomly remove products from the shelves as you browse.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/27/2009 @ 5:27pm

    Think about that. You'd pay a Monthly Premium and you could take whatever you "felt" you needed.

    I might have ceral this week so I'll take 8 gallons of milk, and 8 dozen eggs just in case, oh, and 8 packages of eggo waffles, with 8 bottles of syrup, and 8 loves of bread for toast, and 8 packages of doughnuts, and I like fruit for breakfast, and sometimes I like yogurt, and I can't decide between sausage and bacon, so I'll take 8 packages of each, Oh, amost forgot, I eat oatmeal three or four times a year, so I'll take 8 packages of oatmeal, ...

    Now, what about lunch?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 06:55am

  126. By 56%-33%, those surveyed endorse the idea of enacting major health care changes this year.Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 06:48am | ignore this person | warn this person

    So just how many want a socialized national healthcare program run by the people who brought us the U.S. post office and digital T.V.??? Who does not favor major healthcare changes like NOT paying for uninsured illegal aliens utilizing our emergency rooms for primary care quadrupoling the cost to health plan payers?

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 07:00am

  127. Posted by freiheit1 at 07/27/2009 @ 6:45pm |

    "...you are wrong to cite opposition as lacking compassion for their fellow citizens."

    They don't have it, but stop pointing that out.

    "In my opinion the opposition has compassion."

    In the opinion of the sick, they don't.

    "They know that this power grab will lead to a diminished health care system, rationing and ultimately a lack of liberty and access to health care for all of us."

    Because Jimminy DeMent and Dr. Coburn (I play one on TV) said so? Sorry, bowing to fear-mongers won't do. You're gonna have to get one hell of a lot more scary before you top the status quo's ugly.

    "Like most liberals I come across, you appear to associate the forced redistribution of resources as "compassion". Your generosity with other people's wealth isn't really compassion."

    Ayn Rand told me so...and I don't wanna clean my room.

    Like most cons I come across, you appear to associate the externalities of market systems as "someone else's" problem. Your lack of willingness to address the messes caused by your solutions isn't really all that efficient.

    "I will never truly understand the left's faith in politicians, centralized government and its expansion,"

    I will never understand the right's adherence to their allegiance with private capital serving public needs, but there you have it.

    "when our nation was founded on a clear limitation of government."

    Maybe before we gave corporations the rights that are enjoyed by citizens in the 19th century?

    "By the way, if anyone ever accuses you of hating America? That's why."

    We've never really worried as to the motives of you lunatics, especially when you're bandying about such vile accusations, but thanks.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/28/2009 @ 07:03am

  128. Happy who is paying you to say those things here? Maybe someday you will have some responsibility, something to care about. I feel sorry for you.

    Posted by Milhaus at 07/28/2009 @ 07:09am

  129. Because Jimminy DeMent and Dr. Coburn (I play one on TV) said so?

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/28/2009 @ 07:03am | ignore this person | warn this person

    Why is it leftist like to LIE so much? Yours about Tom Coburn stinks to high heaven like a dead skunk in the middle of the road!

    Senator Tom Coburn pursued a medical degree and graduated from the University of Oklahoma Medical School in 1983. He then opened a medical practice in Muskogee, Oklahoma, and served as a deacon in a Southern Baptist Church. Coburn is one of only two licensed doctors currently serving in the US Senate. During his career in obstetrics, he has treated over 15,000 patients and delivered 4,000 babies and was subject to one malpractice lawsuit.[

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 07:12am

  130. But when it comes to the Roads, The Police and Fire Department, Defense and other parts of the Commons that are essential, I think government is uniquely qualified. And healthcare is an essential part of the commons.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 02:47am

    "The Commons" refer to natural resources that exist independent of humanity that are necessarily shared by all.

    All people depend on things like air and water so it is against public policy to pollute them. Any particular tree does not necesarily become part of "the commons" but we require millions of acres of forest to produce oxygen so government manages national forests. People also depend on the oceans for food and other things so we prevent polluting them.

    Governments establish and enforce conventions for air traffic and radio waves so as to make their use more efficient. If there were no conventions about air traffic pattern or frequencies there would be greater conflict between individuals trying to use these parts of "the commons".

    Things like roads and schools and airports are not part of "the commons". These are infrustructure investments that are government financed and are publicly owned. They are shared resources, but that doesn't mean they are part of "the commons".

    Police and Fire fighters are not part of "the commons". These are people; people who have vested in them special authority to serve the public interest. These people sell their labor to municipal governments. The government does not own a right to their labor.

    Doctors also sell their labor to individuals who need health care. No person owns a right to a doctor's labor. Health care is most certainly not part of "the commons".

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 07:26am

  131. House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty issued a report this week that concluded that a Washington takeover of health care would harm both states and working families.

    The report entitled "Capital Malpractice: How a Washington Takeover of Health Care Will Hurt States" found that it was imperative that any plan successfully deal with the problem of rising costs.

    "Health care needs vary from individual to individual, and from state to state," noted the report authors. "Health care reform should increase flexibility for states to develop solutions that fit their needs.

    "A Washington takeover of health care will achieve neither objective. To the contrary, it will harm states and working families by increasing health care costs and empowering federal bureaucrats to make important decisions that should be left to doctors and patients," the report authors concluded in an overview.

    The final verdict: The 1,017-page Washington takeover of health care proposed by the Democrats would take power away from states, increase state costs by expanding Medicaid, and add a $1.6 trillion burden on the American middle class over the next 10 years.

    The plan, in the estimation of the study authors, would force states to comply with complex new federal regulations, stymie them from developing health care programs that best fit the requirements of their residents, and leave governors and state lawmakers with huge unfunded federal mandates.

    In another highlight, the report authors concluded that the bill would cost the nation 5.5 million jobs over 10 years as a result of the tax on employers who don't provide health insurance.

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 07:35am

  132. The authors single out the proposed Medicaid expansion as an "unfunded mandate," noting that even in its present form, the program is accounting for 20 percent to 25 percent of state budgets.

    The 19-page report concluded that the federal government should not be forcing health care on the American people but rather be looking to states "like Minnesota, which have pioneered market-based health care reforms.

    "Alternative health care reform plans such as the plan developed by the House GOP Health Care Solutions Group, which reflect the experiences and input of reform-minded governors and state legislators, offer better solutions and the potential framework for true health care reform legislation that will help all Americans."

    The states-right theme of the report echoes the sentiments of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who went on the record recently threatening that if the Democrats pushed through a government takeover of health care, he would use the 10th Amendment to impede its implementation in Texas.

    Some features of the plan proposed by the House GOP Health Care Solutions Group:

    Brings greater fairness to the tax code by extending tax savings to those who currently do not have employer-provided insurance but purchase health insurance on their own. This provision would provide an "above-the-line" deduction that is equal to the cost of an individual's or family's insurance premiums.

    Provides immediate substantial financial assistance, through new refundable and advanceable tax credits, to low- and modest-income Americans.

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 07:35am

  133. Recognizes that one of the largest obstacles for many small businesses when it comes to retaining current employees or creating new jobs is the cost of health insurance. The plan allows states, small businesses, associations, and other organizations to band together and offer health insurance at lower costs just like corporations and unions do.

    Implements comprehensive medical liability reform that will reduce costly, unnecessary defensive medicine practiced by doctors trying to protect themselves from overzealous trial lawyers.

    Provides Medicare and Medicaid with additional authority and resources to stop waste, fraud, and abuse that costs taxpayers billions of dollars every year.

    Creates incentives to save now for future and long-term health care needs by improving health savings accounts and flexible spending arrangements as well as creating new tax benefits to offset the cost of long-term care premiums.

    Gives financial help to caregivers who provide in-home care for loved ones.

    "Our nation's health care system should be market-driven, patient-centered, and quality-focused," Governor Pawlenty said in a press release. "In Minnesota, we have implemented nation-leading reforms that have begun to rein in the growing costs of health care. The Congressional Democrats' flawed attempt at health care reform won't solve the health care cost crisis facing our nation and, as this report shows, would actually add to the financial burden of states and families. I encourage Congress to abandon this legislation and instead evaluate what states have done to improve health care quality and make health care more accessible and affordable."

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 07:36am

  134. No wonder the Obamanation that makes desolation and the Demoncrats don't want anyone to read their socialist health rationing, abortion supporting, and euthanasia for seniors enabling bill! Conyers, Reid, Pelosi, and Kennedy think the American taxpayer is to dumb to read and understand any of its provisions! But, what else can we expect from liberal elitist shills except racism, arrogance, elitism, and entrench marxist leanings?

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 07:42am

  135. So just how many want a socialized national healthcare program run by the people who brought us the U.S. post office and digital T.V.???Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 07:00am

    The people who brought us the US post office? I work for the Post Office. Try sending a letter with delivery in 1-3 days for $0.44 cents with UPS or Fed-Ex. Try sending an overnight package, Express Mail starting at $13.05 with $100 Insurance included, with UPS or Fed-Ex. Or a flat rate box with 70lbs weight limit starting at $4.95.

    I work with unionized people who are dedicated to providing excellent service. And if they work their jobs their entire lives until retirement, still have something to retire on.

    You are a disgrace. Just as we glamorize our soldiers who sacrifice their lives for the Imperialist Totalitarian Corporation. The Postal Service is a Domestic Program that actually does some good.

    I put my life on the line 363 days a year to ensure that you get your mail. I drive through shit (especially in winter) that would rival the risk that any soldier takes.

    And you deign to disrespect this? I do this job for you, and others like you and you crap on me?

    What do you do for America?

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 07:57am

  136. Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 07:57am | ignore this person | warn this person

    Name the American business still doing business that loses $3,000,000,000. a YEAR for decades that is NOT fully funded by American taxpayers and I will make my apology in full!?

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 08:03am

  137. I would not want the government making my Bluejeans, my TV, my Computer or my iPod. These are things best left to healthy competitive capitalism.

    But when it comes to the Roads, The Police and Fire Department, Defense and other parts of the Commons that are essential, I think government is uniquely qualified. And healthcare is an essential part of the commons.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 02:47am

    So healthcare is definitely NOT an essential part of the commons. So what is it about healthcare that that makes it unsuitable for free market delivery?

    Is it because it is essential? No, food, clothing and shelter are essential and left to free markets. (Food, clothing, and shelter are all primary needs and all are left to the free market. Healthcare, transportation, and education are all secondary needs necessary for life in an industrialized economy. Education is mostly public with a substantial amount of private for post-secondary. Transportation is mostly private with a substantial public transit system employed in most major cities.)

    What is it about healthcare that makes it more like eductation than transportation?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 08:03am

  138. "The Commons" refer to natural resources that exist independent of humanity that are necessarily shared by all.Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 07:26am

    Thanks for your ignorant and stupid definition of the "Commons". It proves that you are willingly ignorant. Which makes you much worse than the simply "Ignorant".

    The commons are simply all the things that we commonly support as essential aspects of a civilized society. Public Parks, Public Roads, Public Education, Public Police and Fire protection, Public Libraries and Defense.

    These are things that we all hold in common, through the payment of taxes, and are all "Socialized". It is the things that we all benefit from and contribute to.

    If you can't see Healthcare as belonging to a common. Then you are a idiot.

    The overall health of this country is of Paramount Importance, and as such should be an integral part of the Commons.

    It is not and should not be in the arena of profit. When you place such an important common like healthcare, into the dog eat dog area of unrestrained and unregulated Capital gain it will bankrupt the country.

    We see that now and we must correct it.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 08:22am

  139. Name the American business still doing business that loses $3,000,000,000. a YEAR for decades that is NOT fully funded by American taxpayers and I will make my apology in full!?

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 08:03am

    The postal system did not lose $2.8 Billion in 2008. It was underfunded by $2.8 Billion due to unforseen profiteering by big oil and a reduction of Mail volume by 9.5 Billion pieces.

    The postal system had a total of $75 billion in revenues and expenses totaled $77.8 Billion. So there was a shortfall of $2.8 Billion.

    UPS and Fed-Ex along with other players also have had revenue loss. Yellow and Roadway freight were so strapped that they merged. Unheard of till now. Many truckers lost their jobs or were placed on the extra board.

    It is not just the USPS that is suffering the policies of the Repug policies of the last 30 years.

    Everyone is hurting.

    The USPS is revenue neutral and can't make a profit. It is a public service. And when the economy goes to hell, everyone suffers both public and private. Don't criticise what you know nothing about.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 08:49am

  140. RIO/Big Posture...

    so what IS the "conservative health care plan" that "a majority of Americans" are demanding?

    Posted by Mask at 07/28/2009 @ 09:00am

  141. Try actually reading what was posted mask instead of asking dumb questions.

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 09:04am

  142. UPS, the world's largest shipping carrier, today said it swung to a hefty loss in the fourth quarter due to a $6.1 billion payment to shift 45,000 of its employees from one pension plan to another, the Associated Press reported.

    The company said it lost $2.58 billion, or $2.46 a share, compared to a profit of $1.13 billion, or $1.04 a share, for the same period a year earlier. It also said it expects financial headwinds to hamper its results in the first quarter of 2008.

    "We anticipate the first quarter will be the most difficult of the year due to lower profitability from an early Easter and additional interest expense not yet offset by labor contract benefits," Chief Financial Officer Kurt Kuehn said in a statement.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 09:54am

  143. Hey Big Rio! quit harrassing Mask for made up stuff and respond to an actual post with facts!

    Are you such a brainwashed lackey slug for the right wing that you cannot present any argument...

    I thought so. Another PUG.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 09:58am

  144. It's spelled "pathological", Big Pasture, and the liar is you.

    As you're well aware, in the thread for a previous healthcare story, I cited SIX polls with that 2/3 divide of those in favor of government-sponsored healthcare -- to the two troll polls dug out of the ass of Fox and other right-wing propanda machines, which couldn't even bring themselves to go lower in the lie than about a 50/50 split.

    But lie away, lies helped drive the no-nothing Republicans out of office.

    Again, you're not serving your side well with misspelled, grammatically erratic, barely coherent paranoid rants and lies. But your lies are so transparent, they serve the 2/3 of rational Americans, so please keep on lying.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 10:04am

  145. Try actually reading what was posted mask instead of asking dumb questions.

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/28/2009 @ 09:04am

    You have nothing Rio. You are the bane. You are a traitor. You make up sense. And then present it as some kind of fact.

    And then you come here and try and spread your poison.

    What a despicable lump of flesh.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 10:06am

  146. Sorry, to get personal. Rio. But reality sucks.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 10:08am

  147. "Seventy-two percent of those questioned in recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey say they favor increasing the federal government's influence over the country's health care system in an attempt to lower costs and provide health care coverage to more Americans, with 27 percent opposing such a move. Other recent polls show six in 10 think the government should provide health insurance or take responsibility for providing health care to all Americans..."

    "The poll also indicates that health care is tied as the third most important issue for President Obama and Congress to deal with over the next year. Forty-eight percent said dealing with health care was extremely important, tied with education and trailing only the economy and terrorism as the most important issues."

    http://tinyurl.com/ch5mvb

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 10:45am

  148. "In an extensive ABCNEWS/Washington Post poll, Americans by a 2-1 margin, 62-32 percent, prefer a universal health insurance program over the current employer-based system. "

    "...most Americans, or 54 percent, are now dissatisfied with the overall quality of health care in the United States..."

    "Nearly one in four Americans, 23 percent, say they or someone in their family put off medical treatment in the last year because of the cost. (Among uninsured people, this soars to 49 percent.)"

    Public Preference: Current System or Universal Coverage?

    Current system: 32% Universal coverage: 62%

    http://tinyurl.com/72wnl

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 10:52am

  149. In a July 14 Gallup Poll, 86 percent of Americans think it's "extremely important" for healthcare reform to include allowing them to get insurance regardless of employment or medical status.

    58 percent support taxing the rich to pay for healthcare.

    And we all know about the super-majority support for the public option.

    In a June Gallup poll, only 34 percent of Americans are confident in the Republicans to make the right decisions on healthcare policy. In fact, Americans are one percent less confident in Republicans than they are in the health insurance companies. That's pretty crappy.

    At 58%, Obama fares better than congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle; however, the Democratic leaders in Congress have more credibility on healthcare reform than do the Republican leaders: 42% vs. 34%.

    http://tinyurl.com/n76exj

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 10:58am

  150. Now, now, leave poor RIO/Big Posture alone...

    in his mind, he's just "months away" from Obama rounding him up for being a "God-fearing Christian and a conservative" and sending him off to a gulag, likely run by Jeremiah Wright and Noam Chomsky!

    Posted by Mask at 07/28/2009 @ 11:03am

  151. Ipsos-Public Affairs/McClatchy Poll, Jul, 2009

    52% It is necessary to create a public health insurance plan to make sure that all Americans have access to quality healthcare

    44% Access to quality healthcare for all Americans can be achieved without having to create a public health insurance plan

    Ipsos-Public Affairs/McClatchy Poll, Jul, 2009

    Allowing the government to negotiate for discounts on drugs...Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose...allowing the government to negotiate for discounts on drugs? [ Q.6B ]

    49% Strongly support

    22% Somewhat support

    9% Somewhat oppose

    16% Strongly oppose

    Rockefeller Foundation/Time Campaign for American Workers Survey, Jun, 2008

    (Some people talk about a 'social contract' meaning government and employers should provide members of American society with basic necessities such as healthcare, retirement programs, unemployment assistance, etc.) Do you think this social contract should still exist in America? [ Q.39 ]

    72% Yes

    23% No

    Kaiser/Harvard Likely Voters in Early Primary States Survey, Nov, 2007 Now thinking specifically about healthcare and the upcoming (2008) presidential (election) primaries and caucuses, which one of the following health care issues will be most important to you in deciding who to vote for?...Reducing the costs of health care and health insurance, expanding health insurance coverage for the uninsured, improving the quality of care and reducing medical errors, reducing spending on government health programs like Medicare and Medicaid [ Q.06D ]

    35% Reducing the costs of health care and health insurance

    38% Expanding health insurance coverage for the uninsured

    16% Improving the quality of care and reducing me

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 11:14am

  152. Only half of U.S. adults (49%) agree that they currently have access to all of the healthcare services they need without it costing them more than they can afford. In contrast, two thirds of Canadian adults (65%) feel this way.

    •In the United States, there is a glaring income gap when it comes to having access to affordable healthcare: Only 37% of those with a household income of less than $50,000 say they have access to and can afford all the healthcare services they need, compared with 60% of those who have a higher income level.

    •In Canada, the income gap is much narrower: 61% of those with a household income of less than $55,000 U.S. report having access to and being able to afford all the healthcare services they need vs. 70% among those who are more affluent.

    http://tinyurl.com/md8bd2

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 11:20am

  153. "There is a dangerous gap between the opinions of Republicans in Congress and Republican followers when it comes to healthcare...

    The poll asked about the government "offering everyone a government administered health insurance plan like Medicare that would compete with private health insurance plans."

    But Republicans in Congress should take note that a slim majority of the Republicans caught in this survey back the concept of a government-run health insurance option.

    And these are not just any Republicans. They are the hard-core remnant, the left-behind 24 percent in this poll that still salute the elephant flag. All those too weak and lame to stand up to the abuse of being a Republican these days have abandoned ship for the more hospitable climes of independent or Democrat identity. So when these fittest-of-the-fit diehard GOP survivors say they want the government-run option, D.C. Republican insiders should pay attention."

    http://tinyurl.com/lpnlxb

    "The national telephone survey, which was conducted from June 12 to 16, found that 72 percent of those questioned supported a government-administered insurance plan -- something like Medicare for those under 65 -- that would compete for customers with private insurers. Twenty percent said they were opposed.

    Sixty-four percent said they thought the federal government should guarantee coverage, a figure that has stayed steady all decade. Nearly 6 in 10 said they would be willing to pay higher taxes to make sure that all were insured."

    http://tinyurl.com/lmm6wj

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 11:30am

  154. THE REASONS A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WANT A PUBLIC OPTION HEALTHCARE:

    In a newly released Reader's Digest poll, two-thirds of adults 21 and older said they feel they "can't afford to get sick." Among those identified as middle class and "underinsured," one in three said that health care is "completely" or "mostly" unaffordable. About half say they've put off or refused medical treatment for a serious condition, or delayed taking or renewing prescription drugs; 46% have postponed routine annual physicals; and 27% have avoided surgery of some sort.

    In our poll, nearly a quarter of the underinsured say they currently have overdue medical bills, and close to half have used credit cards to meet their health costs. Nearly the same number have withdrawn money from their savings to settle their accounts.

    http://tinyurl.com/lf3vgf

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 11:36am

  155. Poll: Small businesses support bigger government health-care role

    "Tennessee health-care policy group plans to publicize the results today of a springtime survey that showed a majority of small businesses want a larger government role in providing health care to more Americans, but many of them also have questions about cost and quality.

    The small-business survey found that 61 percent of 245 companies that responded to a survey mailed in March said they support a stronger government role in "guaranteeing access to quality affordable health care," according to the report's authors, three Vanderbilt University researchers from the Peabody College and Lori Smith of the Tennessee Small Business Coalition."

    http://tinyurl.com/ndbqvt

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 11:43am

  156. Kaiser Health Tracking Poll -- April 2009, Kaiser Family Foundation:

    According to the latest poll, a majority of U.S. residents say that they or a member of their household has delayed or gone without health care services in the past year.

    In addition, 59% of U.S. residents believe health care reform is now more important than ever, while 37% say reform would be too costly to attempt during the current economic climate, the poll shows.

    It also finds that about two-thirds (67%) of U.S. residents "strongly" or "somewhat" favor establishing a public health insurance option "similar to Medicare," with about 80% of Democrats, 60% of independents and 49% of Republicans in favor of such a plan.

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/147455.php

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 11:50am

  157. You are a disgrace... Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 07:57am

    Then you are a (sic) idiot... Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 08:22am

    Are you such a brainwashed lackey slug ... Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 09:58am

    You have nothing Rio. You are the bane. You are a traitor... What a despicable lump of flesh... Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 10:06am

    Zen, this hyper-aggressive posture is a little tiresome.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 11:53am

  158. May 29, 2009 -- WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A national poll indicates that most Americans are receptive to having more government influence over their health care in return for lower costs and more coverage.

    Sixty-three percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Friday said they would favor an increase in the federal government's influence over their own health care plans in an attempt to lower costs and provide coverage to more Americans; 36 percent were opposed.

    The poll also suggests that slightly more than six out of 10 think the government should guarantee health care for all Americans, with 38 percent opposed.

    http://tinyurl.com/ltykka

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 11:59am

  159. Zen, what gives you the authority to take words with a common understanding in the English speaking world and replace them with definitions you make up to suit your opinions and values, then call everyone who uses the old definition stupid?

    Examples? Sure...

    *************************

    The postal system did not lose $2.8 Billion in 2008. It was underfunded by $2.8 Billion due to unforseen profiteering by big oil and a reduction of Mail volume by 9.5 Billion pieces.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 08:49am

    **************************

    So having revenues $2.8 billon lower than expenses isn't a "loss" it's an "underfunding".

    Next up, The Commons...

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 12:03pm

  160. Strong Support for Insurance Market Reform and Public Plan Option:

    "Between 68 percent and 88 percent of Americans either strongly or somewhat support health reform ideas such as national health plans, a public plan option, guaranteed issue, expansion of Medicare and Medicaid, and employer and individual mandates ...

    While half of Americans (56 percent) are extremely or very satisfied with health care quality, far fewer are satisfied with the cost of health insurance (21 percent) or with costs not covered by insurance (18 percent)

    ...dissatisfaction with the American health care system remains widespread. Fourteen percent of Americans say that there is so much wrong with our health care system that it needs to be completely overhauled (down from 24 percent in 2007 and 20 percent in 2008). One-half (51 percent) indicate the statement "there are some good things about our health care system, but major changes are needed" best represents their view. Another 29 percent feel that the health care system works pretty well, but minor changes are needed. Only a very few (4 percent) think the health care system needs no changes..."

    http://tinyurl.com/l8om3k

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:11pm

  161. My definition of "The Commons":

    "The Commons" refer to natural resources that exist independent of humanity that are necessarily shared by all.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009

    *************************

    Zen's definition of "The Commons":

    The commons are simply all the things that we commonly support as essential aspects of a civilized society.

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 08:22am

    *************************

    Wiki's definition of "The Commons"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_commons

    The commons refers to resources that are collectively owned.

    *************************

    Who's the ignorant one now?

    Furthermore, according to you, healthcare is part of the commons. So if healthcare is "resource" that is "collectively owned" that means all doctors and nurses are effectively slaves who are owned by the US government.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 12:12pm

  162. Most Americans support a public health-care plan

    "Two-thirds of Americans across every demographic and income level support the current public health care reform plan being considered by Congress, according to a poll released today* by Consumers Union, the non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports.

    The poll shows that 71 percent of Americans support or strongly support reform to ensure that everybody has access to affordable, quality healthcare, and an even larger percentage (87 percent) support providing medical coverage for all uninsured children. And affording healthcare is still a major issue with nearly two-thirds expressing major or moderate concern about the ability to afford doctor visits in the future. Sixty percent of Americans said they were concerned about the possibility of bankruptcy because of a medical concern.

    ...This new poll reinforces Americans' overall loss of confidence in the health-care system. In a poll last year, 81 percent said they are concerned about being able to afford health care in retirement, 68 percent worry about being bankrupted by medical bills following a serious illness or accident, and 65 percent fear losing their job-related health coverage. Pressured by rising costs, 35 percent of respondents say they skipped or postponed medical care ..."

    http://tinyurl.com/mwta4k

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:16pm

  163. Hey Zen what do you say about us trying to get a standard doctor and nurse uniform that has "Property of the US Government" stamped on it?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 12:17pm

  164. Poll Bankrolled By Foes Of Health Care Reform Finds Overwhelming Support For Public Plan

    "A new poll by a nonpartisan, D.C.-based research group finds truly overwhelming support for the public option. The kicker: The poll was bankrolled partly by previous opponents of health care reform, including one of the nation's best-known insurance companies.

    The poll -- which was just released by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, a D.C. policy think tank -- finds that a majority (53%) strongly back the availability of a public plan, while another 30% "somewhat" support it. That's a total of 83% in favor of a public plan -- a staggeringly large majority.

    Even more interesting, guess who paid for the poll? From the release:

    This survey was made possible with support from AARP, American Express, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, Buck Consultants, Chevron, Deere & Company, IBM, Mercer, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, Principal Financial Group, Schering-Plough Corp., Shell Oil Company, The Commonwealth Fund, and Towers Perrin.

    Not exactly a band of raging lefties. The American Association of Retired Persons and Blue Cross Blue Shield were among the opponents of HillaryCare in the 1990s."

    http://tinyurl.com/knnsgs

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:21pm

  165. Now that you have been pwned by the fat one, let me ask my question again: (Feel free to play along at home.)

    What is it about healthcare that makes it more like eductation than transportation?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 08:03am

    I have my own idea but I'd like to generate a discussion about this issue, which is at the heart of the debate.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 12:22pm

  166. Public Rejects Insurance Industry's Misleading Claims: New Poll ShowsVoters overwhelmingly support choice of private or public health insurance plan

    "Washington, DC – A new poll conducted by Lake Research Partners on behalf of Health Care for America Now (HCAN) found there is "intense and widespread voter support" for the choice of a public health insurance plan as part of comprehensive, national health care reform even when voters hear the sharpest insurance industry attacks such as a public health insurance plan would lead to lower quality health care, more expensive health care, or big government. In paired statements supporting and attacking a public health insurance plan, a majority of voters choose the statement backing a public health insurance option every time.

    For example, 62% of voters believe a public health insurance plan will spend less on profits and administration and force private insurers to compete while only 28% of voters believe the attack that a public health insurance plan would be a "big, government bureaucracy." 60% believe that if private insurers are really more efficient than government, then they won't have any trouble competing with a public health insurance plan. Only 23% believe a public health insurance plan would have an unfair advantage over private plans.

    While recent polling has shown consistent broad support for comprehensive health care reform, this poll specifically addressed whether people want a choice of a public health insurance plan. The answer is an overwhelming yes: 73% of voters want a choice of a private or public health insurance plan, including Democrats (77%), Independents (79%), and Republicans (63%). "

    http://tinyurl.com/mrpgo3

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:26pm

  167. And Judy

    100% of Americans support children getting toys on Chrismas morning, that doesn't mean they are willing to pay for it.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 12:27pm

  168. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 12:12pm

    What a fool. So you spend time seeking a definition on Wiki? And then find one that suits your addle headed purpose?

    Even the Wiki definition belies your silliness.

    com·mon (kmn) adj. com·mon·er, com·mon·est 1. a. Belonging equally to or shared equally by two or more; joint: common interests. b. Of or relating to the community as a whole; public: for the common good. See Usage Note at mutual. 2. Widespread; prevalent.

    And the Wiki definition: The commons refers to resources that are collectively owned[1]. This can include everything from land to software.

    You conveniently left out. "This can include everything from land to software".

    And as far as doctors and nurses being effectively owned as slaves. Consider this.

    I work for the Postal Service and receive a fair wage for my labor. Am I a slave? And what about the park ranger or the road worker or the police and fire personnel. Or better yet the soldier that fight your wars.

    Are they slaves aswell? They are part of the commons.

    So go ahead dickweed, call all the policeman and the fireman and the soldiers that serve you your slave.

    You are an atrocity..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 12:38pm

  169. The real supermajority:

    "•The 40 Republican senators currently in the Senate, all of whom are expected to filibuster a public option, received 44.2 million votes in their elections.

    •The 5 Democrats (Conrad, Baucus, Lincoln, Landrieu, and Nelson) who seem most likely to filibuster health care reform including a public option received 2.5 million votes in their elections.

    •The remaining 55 Senators (53 Dems plus Lieberman and Sanders), all of whom would likely vote for cloture on a reform plan including a public option, received 79.8 million votes (this includes votes cast for the Democratic predecessors in CO, NY, IL, and DE).

    To recap:

    •Votes for seats held by GOP filibuster supporters: 44.2 million •Votes for seats held by Dems who may filibuster: 2.5 million •Votes for seats held by Dems who would support cloture: 79.8 million

    ... this analysis yields a fairly salient factoid: nearly twice as many people voted for senators likely to support a cloture motion than voted for a senator who is likely to thwart health care reform with a filibuster.

    http://tinyurl.com/m84nko

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:42pm

  170. Darin, you remind me of a few kids I used to know in grade school. They would get beat up, time and again. And keep coming back for more abuse. I used to wonder where they would end up in the world.

    Now I know..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 12:44pm

  171. OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOOPERS:

    BILL MOYERS:Back then, one of their chief propagandists, William Kristol, urged his party to block any health care plan for fear Democrats would be seen as, quote "...the generous protector of middle-class interests." Now he's telling the G.O.P. to "Go for the kill...throw the kitchen sink [at it]...drive a stake through its heart... we need to start over."

    http://tinyurl.com/kwt9ay

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:46pm

  172. More Americans are afraid of their health insurance company, than of terrotists:

    "Belden Russonello & Stewart, conducted a national survey last week to gauge if Americans really are worried about health care in the future.

    •72% of adults are worried that if someone in their family becomes seriously ill their health insurance might not cover enough of their medical bills. Nearly half the country -- 47 % -- is very worried about inadequate health coverage.

    •65% worry that if they lose or change jobs they might lose their health insurance and not be able to afford new health insurance. Again, close to one out of every two Americans -- 46% -- is very worried about losing health care.

    •60% say they worry that if someone in their family becomes seriously ill their health insurance might drop their coverage. 41% worry very much.

    •56% worry that if they lose or change jobs they might not be able to get new health insurance because of a pre-existing condition. Nearly four in ten –38% -- worry about this very much.

    The June 2009 national survey by the AP/GfK reported 35% of Americans worry being victims of terrorism, (so) you can easily conclude more Americans now fear their health insurance company than they do Osama Bin Laden.

    http://tinyurl.com/lwosjp

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:54pm

  173. "The BRS poll last week also found that overall 62% of Americans favor President Obama's efforts to create comprehensive changes in the health care system. About four in ten -- 45% -- feel strongly in favor. One in three (33%) Americans opposes what the president is trying to do.

    Support for the plan reaches far beyond liberals and Democrats, as 65% of independents and 66% of political moderates favor what Obama is trying to do. A substantial 44% of each of these groups strongly supports his efforts.

    One statistic from the BRS poll provides even more evidence that anxiety about the future rather than immediate concerns is driving support for comprehensive health care reform: younger Americans more firmly embrace comprehensive reform than their elders. Over two-thirds (67%) of Americans under 45 years old support Obama's health care reform efforts, compared to 56% of those over 45. It is not just that Obama is more popular with young people. When you account for political affiliation and ideology, age is still an important consideration in support for reform."

    http://tinyurl.com/lwosjp

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 12:58pm

  174. the most feared words in the English language

    "We're the government and we're here to help"

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/28/2009 @ 1:02pm

  175. GOP Earns Worst-Ever Rating in Fox Poll

    "I'm shocked -- shocked -- that this finding doesn't make it into the Fox News write up of its own polling, but the latest survey commissioned by the conservative news outlet finds that the Republican Party is at an all-time low in terms of popularity.

    Per the poll (.pdf), the GOP's favorability rating has slid noticeably from the spring, from 41 percent in early April to just 36 percent today. At the same time, the party's unfavorable rating increased from 50 percent to 53 percent. Both of the current numbers represent new lows for the Republican Party in Fox News polling.

    At the same time, the Fox News survey finds that Americans view the Democratic Party significantly better, with 50 percent viewing it favorably and just 41 percent viewing it unfavorably. Barack Obama's favorable ratings are even better -- still close to a 2-to-1 positive-to-negative ratio -- with 62 percent viewing him favorably and 33 percent viewing him unfavorably."

    http://www.mydd.com/story/2009/7/28/73520/5260

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 1:09pm

  176. President Obama's Healthcare Town Hall, LIVE now:

    http://tinyurl.com/5nobzz

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 1:13pm

  177. judybrowni, I think you need to get a life.

    Posted by pyeatte at 07/28/2009 @ 1:17pm

  178. Ms Judy didn't bother to mention that the poll showed the Democrats with a decline in approval similar to that of the Republicans. The Republican drop was 5 points and the Democrat drop was 4 points.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/28/2009 @ 1:33pm

  179. Or maybe Ms Judy could add in the data that the Realclear politics polling ave for Obama shows his disapproval numbers have doubled from 20% to 40.7%.

    Or that his polling average is dropping daily. Down now to 54%.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/28/2009 @ 1:40pm

  180. "Ms Judy didn't bother to mention that the poll showed the Democrats with a decline in approval similar to that of the Republicans. The Republican drop was 5 points and the Democrat drop was 4 points."

    Ah, but not to worry, the point of the piece is that Fox aired that information, but neglected to note the GOP slide down to it's lowest favorable rate.

    The Republicans were at bottom to begin with, and can less afford the greasy slide down, than the Democrats.

    Fox is notorious for skewing their polls (such as in this case, refusing to report the bad news about their favorite party) but even in their own polling: "the GOP's favorability rating has slid noticeably from the spring, from 41 percent in early April to just 36 percent today. At the same time, the party's unfavorable rating increased from 50 percent to 53 percent. Both of the current numbers represent new lows for the Republican Party in Fox News polling."

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 1:43pm

  181. In previous healthcare threads, wingnuts have howled for Gallup polls, claiming that only Gallup will do, and according to today's Gallup poll:

    President Obama's Approval Rating today is 54%, disapproval 37%.

    For a real frame of reference: Bush's job approval rating before leaving office: 22%, disapproval 76%!

    (CBS)President Bush will leave office as one of the most unpopular departing presidents in history, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll showing Mr. Bush's final approval rating at 22 percent.

    Seventy-three percent say they disapprove of the way Mr. Bush has handled his job as president over the last eight years.

    Mr. Bush's final approval rating is the lowest final rating for an outgoing president since Gallup began asking about presidential approval more than 70 years ago. "

    http://tinyurl.com/8n7e6e

    Or again, let's review GOP current job disapproval rates, nearly the same as the public's approval of Obama':

    "Per the poll (.pdf), the GOP's favorability rating has slid noticeably from the spring, from 41 percent in early April to just 36 percent today. At the same time, the party's unfavorable rating increased from 50 percent to 53 percent. Both of the current numbers represent new lows for the Republican Party in Fox News polling.

    At the same time, the Fox News survey finds that Americans view the Democratic Party significantly better, with 50 percent viewing it favorably and just 41 percent viewing it unfavorably.

    Barack Obama's favorable ratings are even better -- still close to a 2-to-1 positive-to-negative ratio -- with 62 percent viewing him favorably and 33 percent viewing him unfavorably."

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 2:22pm

  182. Oops, need a nap: according to a Fox (!) poll GOP disapproval rate is ONLY 53% versus Obama's approval rate of 62%.

    I meant to write that the GOP favorability (36%) is nearly matched by Obama's unfavorables (33%).

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 2:27pm

  183. But thanks for getting me to go over to Real Clear, because their lineup of five different polls of Obama approval rates, highlights the outlier (unreliability) of Rasmussen.

    Gallup 56 36 +20

    Rasmussen Reports 49 50 -1

    FOX News 54 38 +16

    Associated Press 55 42 +13

    USA Today/Gallup 55 41 +14

    ABC News/Wash Post

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 2:34pm

  184. judybrowni--do you think you're copy-and-paste tsunami is changing any minds here?

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/28/2009 @ 2:52pm

  185. But thanks for getting me to go over to Real Clear, because their lineup of five different polls of Obama approval rates, highlights the outlier (unreliability) of Rasmussen.

    Obama Approval Disapproval Spread Gallup 56 36 +20

    Rasmussen Reports 49 50 -1

    FOX News 54 38 +16

    Associated Press 55 42 +13

    USA Today/Gallup 55 41 +14

    ABC News/Wash Post 59 37 +22

    Wow, that's some outlier, Rasmussen -- couldn't be, uh, skewed for your politics, now could it?

    Except Rasmussen polls are coincidently outliers, skewed for their politics.

    http://tinyurl.com/dhwd2n

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 2:53pm

  186. They would get beat up, time and again. And keep coming back for more abuse. I used to wonder where they would end up in the world.

    Now I know..

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 12:44pm

    Just because you state your opinion beligerently and then call someone a foul name, does not make your opinion right. This is especially true regarding "opinions" as to the definition of a term.

    Wiki said collectively owned resources that could include software. I said natural resources shared by everyone. How does "software" make you more right when you're trying to say it's defined by what people want in a civilized society?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 2:55pm

  187. I work for the Postal Service

    Posted by chaoszen at 07/28/2009 @ 12:38pm

    Thank God for the post office. Obviously the DMV can't hire every disagreeable little dick that is unemployable in the private sector.

    ;-) (<-- Ask Mask what this means.)

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/28/2009 @ 3:02pm

  188. Earlier in the thread when I wrote, as part of an opinion, that the majority of polls showed around 2/3 of the American public were in favor of a government supplied healthcare, one wing nut went even more nutso, because I supposedly hadn't backed it up with the factual polls.

    (Although, of course, I had rounded up six polls supporting that -- generally agreed upon figure -- in a previous thread in which he was also a commentor.)

    So, this time round, I found over a dozen polls backing up my facts, and waited for the first wingnut to complain about, oh, the factual backup.

    DING, DING, DING: urmygyro may be the winnah, first to complain about all those facts! (Although pyeatte earns Honorable Mention for attempting to run my life.)

    But it's interesting, urmygyro complains about the method of conveying those facts via the usual internet fashion of aggregating information on blogs.

    So he also wins points for being disingenuous.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 3:07pm

  189. there's browni the tsunami!

    supposedly not concerned at all with so called "wingnuts" but addressing them in every one of her (rare) non copy-and-paste posts

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/28/2009 @ 3:19pm

  190. "But it's interesting, urmygyro complains about the method of conveying those facts via the usual internet fashion of aggregating information on blogs."

    browni the tsunami you should simply provide links for "aggregate information" that you didn't come up with personally. express your own ideas in your own words. this is something you're too lazy to do. you think a tsunami of copy-and-paste jobs is convincing anyone of anything? seriously, do you?

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/28/2009 @ 3:22pm

  191. Except that when I do express my opinion in my own words, some other wingnut complains that I haven't provided the facts. (Or stoop even lower, to just sling slurs, and name-calling.)

    Wingnuts can't stand disagreement, so use disengenuous arguments.

    So I think I'll please myself, and post how I please.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 6:49pm

  192. Howard Dean hosting for Keith Olbermann on MSNBC in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1...

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 6:56pm

  193. You want my opinion, but I doubt you want this one:

    On one of the healthcare threads here, in response to the figure that two-thirds of Americans want government sponsored healthcare, a wingnut responded with one of those heartless, and completely fabricated non-analogies they're fed by hate-talk radio: "And 100% of children want free toys for Christmas."

    Not only cruel, but not even an half-way decent analogy -- no children will be crippled, blinded or die of untreated cancer, if they don't receive toys.

    A better analogy would be, "And 100% of health insurance CEOs want 10 million dollar bonuses."

    That's the real trade-off: actual healthcare for Americans, instead of the shell game of insurance pulled out from under them when they get seriously ill -- healthcare versus dirty, blood-drenched and obscene profits for the health insurance industry.

    In every industrialized nation of this world (and some of the developing countries) government-supported healthcare exists, sometimes side-by-side with insurance companies making a profit.

    Perhaps not obscene profit, but profit never-the-less.

    In nations with government-supported healthcare, the citizens enjoy better healthcare than ours. No one is bankrupted by medical care (62% of American bankruptcies), no one dies from lack of access to health care (versus 17,000 Americans a year.)

    My parents raised three kids with all the knocks (and pre-vaccination) diseases, broken bones, and even a congenital condition, back when Blue Cross and Blue Shield were non-profits.

    I look back on those years, compare them to the health insurance industry now, and know that my family would have been bankrupted and broken several times over in our current system.

    While wingnuts equate healthcare to toys.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 7:02pm

  194. Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 7:02pm

    Posting the same comment on two threads is sufficient to make your point.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/28/2009 @ 7:28pm

  195. Except that when I do express my opinion in my own words, some other wingnut complains that I haven't provided the facts. (Or stoop even lower, to just sling slurs, and name-calling.)

    Wingnuts can't stand disagreement, so use disengenuous arguments.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 6:49pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    you don't seem to be able to "stand disagreement" much either, so you're being equally "disingenous" (which seems to be your favorite word of the day browni tsunami)

    i'm gonna ask you again--who do you think you're convincing here? do you think your posts are convincing anyone of anything?

    the fact that you've ignored this question (on at least three different threads) tells me you realize the answer to those two questions are: "nobody" and "no"

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/28/2009 @ 8:15pm

  196. I don't care whether or not wingnuts who post here and are calcified into their no-nothing positions, have a change of heart (ha!) from what I post.

    However, as I've written before, I believe the crazy and misspelled, grammar erratic rants of birthers and truthers and bigoted wingnuts should be balanced, if possible, with the rational and factual -- so as not to drive away all the sane readers.

    So, as long as I feel like it, I'll post comments.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 9:06pm

  197. I don't care whether or not wingnuts who post here and are calcified into their no-nothing positions, have a change of heart (ha!) from what I post.

    However, as I've written before, I believe the crazy and misspelled, grammar erratic rants of birthers and truthers and bigoted wingnuts should be balanced, if possible, with the rational and factual -- so as not to drive away all the sane readers.

    So, as long as I feel like it, I'll post comments.

    Posted by judybrowni at 07/28/2009 @ 9:06pm

  198. who are you kidding? the "wingnuts" are why you post. you'd be here if your opinion was unanimously held? yeah, right.

    Posted by urmygyro at 07/28/2009 @ 10:02pm

  199. The wing nut Reich is all up in arms over health care.They don`t care if people get sick and die,they don`t think health care is a right, I think it should part of the commons.Medicare has worked for over 40 years and runs at a low overhead with minimal interference.As I see docters opt for higher paying specialty`s because of the cost of mal practice insurance and the cost of medical school.

    My questions to the Reich are, how many industrialized nations have dropped their current public plans for private insurance run for profit?Why do you cry about big gov`t now when the Shrub was listening in on our phone calls?Where were you folks when he invaded Iraq illegally under the false pretense of lies and deciet?And finally wouldn`t you rather pay for Health care with higher taxes than paying for insurance that denies preexisting conditions with high deductibles and premiums?The Reich and it`s base are very irrelavent and marginalized and love the fact that their party is playing politics with peoples lives.

    Posted by ams@50 at 07/29/2009 @ 12:04am

  200. So much talk about polls, opinions, talking-points, and myths. No talk about what is actually in the bill, HR3200, which is the POS being pushed by the "progressive" Democrats. I read it. It is a pain to read, but it can be done regardless of what John Connyers says. This is what you'll get unless the Senate stops it. Do you want what is in it?

    Posted by sntauri at 07/29/2009 @ 12:43pm

  201. Thank you Mr. Nichols.

    We currently have some great AMERICAN democratic institutions like Single Payer Retirement Program (Social Security), Single Payer Education Program (Public Schools), Single Payer Defense Program (US Military), Single Payer Law Enforcement (Police), Single Payer Literary Program (Public Libraries), Single Payer Road System (Public Streets, Highways etc.), and the list goes on and on... and they have served the AMERICAN PEOPLE very, very well for many, many years.

    My suggestion is that the Blue Dog Democrats stop running from these great AMERICAN democratic successes and vigorously oppose the cynical Anti-Social, "I got mine" Republicans.

    Posted by thanksbutnothanks at 07/29/2009 @ 7:04pm

  202. Posted by sntauri at 07/29/2009 @ 12:43pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    instead of posting this over and over again, why don't you summarize it for us? or is that beyond your powers?

    Posted by emile duBois at 07/30/2009 @ 09:17am

John Nichols John Nichols

Breaking news and analysis on political, social, economic and cultural activism that mainstream media commonly ignore.

Archives

  1. February 2010

  2. January 2010

  3. December 2009

  4. November 2009

  5. October 2009

  6. September 2009

blog roll

Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» The Beat

Facing Bipartisan Criticism, RNC's Steele Asks If Race Is Factor | "Why? Is it because Michael Steele is the chairman, or is it because a black man is chairman?” he wonders. Maybe he could compare notes with Obama.
John Nichols

» Editor's Cut

New Web Column at The Washington Post | Every Tuesday, I'll be featuring progressive thinking about politics and challenging the Right in my new web column for The Washington Post. Read my first one here.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
32 Comments

» The Notion

When Snow Melts: Vancouver’s Olympic Crackdown | Anger is growing in Vancouver in advance of the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver. Like Olympic clockwork, here comes the media crackdown.
Dave Zirin
44 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

The Mind-Boggling Stupidity of Michael Rubin | How an AEI apparatchik's love affair for Ahmed Chalabi blinds him to Chalabi's pro-Iran treachery.
Robert Dreyfuss
28 Comments

» Act Now!

Demand Question Time | Join the call for the President and Congress to implement regular Question Time sessions.
Peter Rothberg
58 Comments

» And Another Thing

How to Counterbalance Focus on the Family on Superbowl Sunday | Give to help low income girls and women.
Katha Pollitt
54 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | James O'Keefe and Alter-reviews.
Eric Alterman