An editorial that makes it clear what is at stake in the healthcare reform debate:It is not about how much money we spend it is how we spend the money.

We wasted it on tax-rebates to the clunkers on Wall Street, now we can spend it on average citizens, including those paid hooligans disrupting the debates.

I am getting so sick of the "plants" in these audiences who only serve to confuse people and not allow the congressmen to actually educate the people in the audience who are there to learn what this program is about. And then the knobs at FOX News try to make it seem like there is some grassroots movement and it's spreading like wildfire.

Rachel Maddow last night showed a picture of the supposed grassroots mob of people that converged in Dade County for the recount in the 2000 election and 10 people who were screaming and carrying on trying to disrupt the process were all affilaited with Republican senators or congressmen (former or current aides or campaign managers) most of whom, according to the report, went on to work in the Bush administration.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32292149

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32292235

Yep! & many of them are probably those megalomaniac "birthers".

Salon.com piece Obama wants to kill your grandma debunks some right-wing myths about healthcare reform.

And beware of the Canadian woman who is appearing in commercials in the U.S. saying how she was denied care by Canada's (Ontario's) healthcare system and had to spend $97,000 for treatment in the U.S. (she is suing the Ontario healthcare system because she wants them to pay). Experts say her benign tumor was not an emergency, and thus she faced a three to six month wait to see specialists. She went ahead and paid $97,000 for treatment in Arizona (the American medical clinic was happy to operate for a high priced fee) and she claims that she would have died thanks to Canada's healthcare system. She's being used as the poster child for anti-healthcare reform advocates.

Meanwhile, she's been vilified at home as a 'traitor' to Canada.

When the hell did the Democrats become so intolerant of astroturfing? George Soros, billionaire contributor to the Democratic Party and liberal political groups, funds an enormous astroturfing campaign. David Axelrod made himself a very wealthy man basically as a professional astroturfer. ACORN and Big Labor often pay people to show up at protests. It can't be proven because the IRS is too cowardly to audit Jesse Jackson despite huge red flags all over his organization, but the Rainbow Coalition pays people to participate in their protests. I guess astroturfing is awful only when Republicans do it.

Obamacare is a constantly morphing, enormously complicated, 1100+ page bill, and nobody (not even The Messiah himself in that snoozer of a press conference) can explain it. Yet the White House, the DNC, the Democrats in Congress, and all their supporters are so absolutely intolerant of anyone who speaks out against it. Funny how dissent is the noblest form of patriotism only during Republican administrations.

The truth will come out eventually. If indeed these "angry mobs" are paid plants and all this anger is pure astroturf and fabrication, the absence of any sort of genuine movement will be exposed. Even though the New York Times ran eight zillion articles every single day for months about Martha Burk and her "feminist army" protesting at Augusta National, people finally figured out there wasn't much to it, and Augusta National remains resolutely all-male. But what if all the people showing up at these town halls aren't just a bunch of unemployed community theater actors? The cratering poll numbers on Obamacare suggest they're not. What if people really are opposed to socialized medicine? Then Obama is making a huge mistake here by trying to stamp out dissent.

If Medicare is so wonderful, then why is it trillions of dollars in debt and hurtling toward certain bankruptcy? Why would we want to expand that financial disaster to the entire health care system? And why the hell is there such a rush (dare I say, artificially imposed by the White House)?? Why shouldn't we give a lot of thought and consideration to a drastic change in something that amounts to one-sixth of our GDP and on which our lives depend? Sure, the Golds come up with some very convincing arguments in their defense of Obamacare. But they can't possibly be sure of all their claims in that editorial because NOBODY understands that 1100+ page monstrousity -- not Katherine Sebelius, not Arlen Specter, not Nancy Pelosi, not even (brace yourselves) The Messiah himself.

"Hooligans disrupting the debates," "the supposed grassroots mob of people that converged in Dade County for the recount in the 2000 election," "Salon.com piece Obama wants to kill your grandma debunks some right-wing myths about healthcare reform," "She's being used as the poster child for anti-healthcare reform advocates,"

It sounds as if it is the "vast right wing conspiracy" of the Clinton years at work again!

Omigod! Opponents of the Obama Administration's health care reform program are acting as "community organizers" in coaching protesters. Why the surprise? It's called politics. Both sides do it.

Polls show that most Americans want Health Care Reform. The polls also show that they do not want to rush it.

Just as with the extended election period that lead to Barack Obama's election, the long-term nature of the healthcare issue may eventually work against the hooliganism that is being use to oppose it.

For example this little-noted exchange between a Texas democrat and his constituents in a town meeting lead to a telling moment:

Healthcare reform opponents are playing a very potent card: greed.

It worked to send dems and repubs rushing to give tax cuts to the wealthy and starve federal government to the point where it can not adequately regulate the economy or supply basic human needs to its citizens. Now they are blaming that same government for doing an inefficient job at both and not meriting that money.

sportinlife, we clearly have fundamentally different views on personal responsibility. I believe that people are responsible for providing for their own needs. A person should work to earn enough money to buy groceries, put a roof over your head, keep the electricity running, and yes, see a doctor. You, on the other hand, seem to believe that it is the responsibility of "the government" (instead of "the government" try saying "other people", because that's who pays for government) to provide basic human needs. For most Americans, it's a struggle to pay the bills. Why should money be taken out of their hard-earned paychecks to pay someone else's bills? And if you work hard enough/smart enough/long enough such that you no longer struggle, why should the fruits of your labor be taken away from you to pay someone else's bills?

Medicare is trillions of dollars in the hole and headed toward certain bankruptcy. Numbers and figures are tossed about so much that they seem to have lost their meaning. Remember that if you spent a million dollars a day, every day, since Christ was born, you still wouldn't have spent a trillion dollars. At some point, Americans will have to pay off those trillions of dollars of Medicare debt. Medicare is a MESS, but seniors love it because they get far more out of the program than they pay in, and let's face it, seniors today will probably be dead before we're hit with the crushing impact of Medicare debt.

I pay a lot for my health insurance, but I'm very happy with it. Mind you, I did go through an extended period without health insurance, which caused me a lot of worry. I even suffered a fairly severe injury during that time and was unable to see a doctor. But as much as that sucked, I never once expected anyone else to pay for my medical needs, just as I don't expect anyone to pay for my food needs, shelter needs, clothing needs, or any other needs. It's all about personal responsibility.

BoSox, I understand where you are coming from regarding personal responsibility. Couldn't agree more. Twenty years ago, that argument held a lot more weight. With blue-collar jobs being shipped overseas at break-neck speed for the past few decades, there's just not as much opportunity for folks to tend to their personal responsibilites. The means to do so just isn't there anymore, and nothing is filling the void. As you so well described, we already have Medicare and Medicade, which ARE socialized medical care. We also have social security, disability, welfare, and foodstamps, all also forms of socialism. We really do need these things, despite their "on paper" cost. Meaning, it is cheaper for us to have these programs than to not have them. It's called the price of living in a civilized society. I think it is grand that things are going well for you, and you are able to fulfill your personal responsiblities, but others are not as fortunate. The same goes with healthcare. The system is clearly broken. The insurance companies are rolling in money, which somehow, doesn't seem right. Benefits are down, premiums are sky-high, and insurance idiots are calling the shots for medical treatment. If you cannot see the error of this, check your eyesight. You may think you are an island, but you are not. No, it is not fair for money to be deducted from your paycheck to pay for others, but again, that is the price we pay for a civilized society. I do not want to see malnurished, ill children begging in the streets like a third-world country. Whatsoever you do to the least of my brother, that you do unto me. Someday, you may need help. My hand will reach out to you. I hope that offers you some assurance of your future.

If you remove the negative consequences of bad decisions, people will make a lot more bad decisions. If you remove the negative consequences of irresponsibility, people will behave a lot more irresponsibly. If people know that they are responsible for their own health care, the vast majority will behave accordingly, and a lot more people will be a lot better off. We will never have a perfect society, but without personal responsibility, we are all F*CKED.

There are a few major changes we need to make to improve the health care system, but a single-payer system like Medicare isn't the answer. Hate to sound like a broken record, but I'm left wondering why nobody has responded to my question about Medicare: Medicare is TRILLIONS (a word that seems to have lost its meaning) of dollars in the red and headed toward certain bankruptcy. I cannot think of anything more irresponsible and grotesquely selfish than dumping trillions of dollars of debt onto a future generation of Americans. Grandkids, guess what you're getting for Christmas! No Medicare for you because the system went bankrupt, but you lucky dog, each and every one of you gets saddled with a hundreds of thousands of debt because we had to take care of ourselves in the here and now. Oh, how very humanitarian of us. Why should we expand those problems to the entire health care system?

did you know that the United States of America is the most charitable nation on earth? It is empirically proven that we give more of both our money and time to charity than any other country. If someone wants to make sacrifices to help out a family member, a friend, a neighbor, a member of their church, or even a total stranger, that is a beautiful thing. The beauty of it is that we are willing to do so. But to force a person is unjust. millerbeach, you say you're all for personal responsibility, yet you advocate every single social program under that sun, basically allowing for the abdication of personal responsibility by anybody who just doesn't feel like it. I believe that such social programs do more harm than good. We can agree to disagree, and that's fine. But to force me to submit to your world view (I can't exactly withhold a percentage of my taxes because I disagree with X, Y, or Z program, can I?) is wrong.

I believe that self-interest dictates that we learn to respect the self-interest of others as well BoSoxRudy.

Why do people force their children to hold up signs with swastikas, comparing Obama, Pelosi, the Democratic Party, healthcare reform, whatever, with the Nazis? Do they really think this is a valid comparison? And if adults want to hold up such signs, fine. But leave your kids out of this, please.

So we have Sarah Palin weighing in on the issue.



http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-gener...in.Health.Care/

Yes Sarah that's right...Obama is going to put togther a panel to decide who lives and who dies. Panel members will consist of people from the Axis of Evil (Hollywood, New York and Washington DC) and will include George Clooney, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Nancy Pelosi, Harry reid, Howard Dean, David Letterman and Bill Maher. Moronic bitch!

In her rambling, unintelligible farewell speech, here's what she said to the media:



Yeah Sarah...quite makin' things up. Unless it serves your political agenda and will scare people so much they'd be willing to actually consider voting for you.

The truth of the matter is that neither Medicare nor Social Security "lose" money. The reason why they're headed for bankruptcy is that Congress uses the monies collected specifically for those programs for other things.

Medicare is the most efficient health insurance in the country. 1.5% of cost is administration vs. about a 15% average for private insurers and some even spend 30% in "administration" costs.

The real solution is to put everyone on Medicare.

It kills me all the talk about how we have the best health care system blah blah blah....we spend more money and have more uninsured than any industrialized country.

It's really too bad that the Republicans are afraid of a real debate on the issues and really just want to "win" by blocking things. Especially since most of them identify as Christians....how Christian of them to turn their back on the needy.

Agree with you Sea. Has anyone heard anything about the GOP bill? Seriously. It must be that good, if all they are doing is trashing or excuse me, just say NO to the Dems. proposal. Its THAT good I guess.....its pretty clear who most of the lobbyists are working with ( for), mainly the Republicans. Oh yes, for sure there are some Dems. Max Baucus comes to mind, but by far, there are more lobbyists hooked up with the GOP than there is for the Dems. And SP is now saying Obamas' health care plan is "evil." How original. What segment of the society does it want to kill off goodie two shoes?

Thank you, SeaCraig.

BoSox, again, you are missing the point. Part of being an American is the willingness to live in and pay for a civilized society. We are able to do that through taxation. It is a redistribution of wealth, no doubt. You could chose to go live somewhere else, on an imaginary island, where the responsibilities of anyone else will be of no concern nor cost to you. That too, is part of the wonderful aspect of being an American...you HAVE that choice. I understand your disdain for paying for someone who either cannot or will not provide for themselves. You will drive yourself to the point of madness worrying about freeloaders. You will not be able to eliminate them. They will always be there. It is a flaw in the system. If you can figure out a way to eliminate it, let me know. With that said, accept it and move on. Otherwise, bitterness will consume you.

As for the healthcare reform proposal, which, no doubt, will have flaws and freeloaders, it is something that we are in dire need of in our nation at this time. The amount of resources consumed by healthcare has exploded in the last few decades. The evidence is there. I know you do not want to pay for this. I do not want to either, but for the good of the nation, it is something that needs to be done. I am never going to use most of the interstates in this nation, but I know we need them. I will never have children to send to a public school, but I know that we need them. Again, for the betterment of a civilized society, we need health care reform in this nation now. We simply cannot wait any longer.

Oscar Wilde himself would overdose on all the irony coming from the Democrats regarding Obamacare ...
* Barack Obama proudly boasted that he was a community organizer, stating that it was one of his strongest qualifications for the Office of the Presidency. In fact, on BarackObama.com he urges citizens to flood town halls and "make certain your members of Congress know that you're counting on them to act." Oh wait, that's only if you agree with him. If you're one of those "fishy" types who disagree with him, then you're an astroturfer with swastikas (according to Nancy Pelosi) who should stay home.
* The left, particularly the far left, were stark raving hysterical over the Patriot Act for its violation of privacy and overwhelming encroachment of government. Yet Obama wants his supporters to turn in all "fishy" communication (emails, articles, blogs, MB posts, etc.) and their corresponding IP addresses to the White House (I've provided the email addy below just in case you want to snitch on me after reading this post).
* A former professor of constitutional law is suddenly all bent out of shape that citizens are exercising their rights of free speech and assembly.
* I've already covered that the Democrats, the Party of AstroTurf, who believed that dissent was the noblest form of patriotism, suddenly find astroturfing contemptible and dissent unpatriotic.
* Here at Outsports, like pretty much all gay websites, anti-Christian bigotry is not merely tolerated, it is welcomed, encouraged, and heartily applauded. Yet those who oppose Obamacare are criticized for being un-Christian. Richer yet, liberals are quoting scripture on this board <klunk!> (I just fell out of my chair).

Many arguments brought up here. Don't know if I can cover all of them, but here goes ...
to compare health care to the highway system is such a ridiculous analogy, I can't even address it. Yes, the cost of health care has skyrocketed in the past decade or so, mostly because of staggering costs of malpractice and R&D. First malpractice, which must be addressed through tort reform. Scared to death of lawsuits, doctors order innumerable tests that are most likely irrelevant to the patient's well-being but critical to covering that doctor's ass. Since insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid pay for the tests, the patient says, "SURE!" Despite this rampant unnecessary testing, malpractice insurance remains staggeringly expensive, which adds to everyone's medical expenses, directly or indirectly. Is tort reform even addressed in Obamacare?

As for the staggering cost of R&D, that is not something we should be discouraging. There has been astonishing, many would say miraculous, progress made in drugs and medical treatments in the past decade or so. And guess, what? All that R&D costs a sh*tload of money! But I'd rather have the option to pay a lot for state-of-the-art drugs/treatment because money's not much use to you when you're dead.

hockeytom, there are Republican proposals, you just don't hear about them. With the Democrats' overwhelming majority in the House, I doubt any Republican proposals have a snowball's chance of getting out of committee. Paul Ryan talks about health care and mentions his proposal in an MSNBC interview. He doesn't go into detail, but at least you can gawk at Rep. Ryan (sorry, I've got a total mancrush on the guy).

to quote Saxby Chambliss after the former VP candidate came to Georgia and absolutely electrified every auditorium and arena, "Thank God for Sarah Palin!!!" Liberals absolutely HATE her, which is of course why I love her so much. The one thing I know for sure is that she has millions of passionate, energized, and devoted followers. Thank God she stepped into this health care debate! Between Sarah Palin, the communities that are organizing in opposition, plus of course the cratering poll numbers, Obamacare's chances of passing are looking bleaker by the day.

I did a google search for "medicare bankrupt" and found a zillion articles, including an interesting one that argues that "bankruptcy" is a private-sector phenomenon that isn't really applicable to public programs. But even this author makes no mention of money being "stolen" out of the Medicare trust. If you can pass on some articles (other than leftist bloggers, please), I'd be interested in reading them. But first, just do the math. If you live into your eighties and nineties, and so many seniors do, you're going to get a lot more out of Medicare and Social Security than you ever pay in. It's just common sense that if millions of people are getting more out of a public program than they're paying in, there's going to be a BIG problem somewhere down the line.

Finally, I'd like to talk about what's at the heart of this Obamacare debate. Obamacare is a public option that will inevitably kill off private insurance options because 1) it's subsidized by the Federal Government, and 2) apparently any change made to your private insurance forces you to switch over to the public option (don't really understand that one, but who the hell honestly understands this 1100+ page monstrousity?). In other words, we're going to end up with a national health system much like Britain or Canada. Health care currently accounts for one-sixth of our GDP, which means millions of health care workers (whether doctors, nurses, or administrators) will become public sector employees, and most will likely become part of a public employee union. Oh, what a lovely coincidence - public employee union members vote overwhelming Democratic! and not just Dem, but LIBERAL Dem!!

Liberals can't get everything they want through the democratic process. For example, Cap & Trade and Obamacare are both looking mighty iffy, despite a huge Dem majority in the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. But how much better will the leftist political landscape look in ten years if one-sixth of our GDP is thrown into the public sector? That's what's really going on; that's what's really driving this mad push for "reform." But of course, self-congratulatory leftists (and there are no more self-congratulatory beings in the history of the human race than today's American liberal) will maintain that they support Obamacare because of their selfless humanitarianism <cough>. Yeah, you just keep thinkin' that.

These are just some of the things I see somewhat differently that you do BoSoxRudy:

Barack Obama proudly boasted that he was a community organizer

I don't think he organized people to do what these people are doing or in the way they are doing it.

The left, particularly the far left, were stark raving hysterical over the Patriot Act

That act legalizes government sponsored snooping, not private citizens voluntarily reporting information.

A former professor of constitutional law is suddenly all bent out of shape that citizens are exercising their rights of free speech and assembly.

The right to do such things as yell fire in a crowded room has always been limited. Hanging a representative in effigy might be comparable.

I've already covered that the Democrats, the Party of AstroTurf, who believed that dissent was the noblest form of patriotism, suddenly find astroturfing contemptible and dissent unpatriotic.

Dissent is good. Especially when you allow others to do so equally. These hooligans do not.

staggering costs of malpractice

Does this exceed the cost of tests doctors order because they profit from the tests?

staggering cost of R&D

I personally suspect that R&D would not suffer if our medical system were the same as those advanced countries that have single-payer systems. But I can only say that as someone who has worked in the trenches pharmaceutical R&D several years. I don't know for sure.

Paul Ryan

He would have more credibility if he refused all contributions from the healthcare industry and got his information from groups that did the same.

money being "stolen" out of the Medicare trust

Congress routinely uses funds that are collected for social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid for other purposes. Should the people who benefit from those programs be punished for this? Has the private sector - lead by Wall Street - shown more integrity?

Sarah Palin

How is Alaska's healthcare funded?

public option that will inevitably kill off private insurance options

It hasn't in the dreaded Canadian system

how much better will the leftist political landscape look in ten years if one-sixth of our GDP is thrown into the public sector?

I think our spending on health as percent of GDP is higher than most countries that have public-funded healthcare. So that "landscape" would probably look better.

Drowned out by these Looney Tunes wingnut protests, you may have missed this: The Democrats have spit the bit on Senate negotiation over the bill. REAL reform is effectively dead.

Matt Taibbi (who you may know from his Rolling Stone work) nails it:



http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/07/28...care-bill-dies/

BoSoxRudy, here you go:
Reforms Conservatives Can Favor

Can someone please fix the title of this thread?

sportinlife, I'm not going over everything point-by-point. As the SNL Dieter character used to say, "You have grown tiresome" (not you specifically, but "you", this whole debate). But I will say this, liberals live by an eternally shifting set of standards. When liberals do something, it's wonderful. When conservatives do something similar if not identical, it's horrible. What would have happened if George W. Bush issued a mandate that people voluntarily email the White House about all "fishy" opposition to the Iraq War? Your head would have exploded. Yet Obama does something as utterly creepy as that, and it's A-OK. But hey, like I say in my signature, if you seriously have a problem with this post, forward it to the White House.

Thanks for the link, BBC. I love some of the ideas proposed and plan to study them more when I have more time. There was a great article in the local paper about a pediatrician who just couldn't take it any more. Between the constant threat of lawsuits, crippling malpractice insurance costs, constantly getting shorted on reimbursements from insurance companies, not to mention the long hours and aggravations that come with any job, she quit. Flat out just f*cking quit, even though it had been her dream since childhood to be a pediatrician. She now works for herself doing minor cosmetic procedures (botox and stuff like that), 3.5 days/30-35 hours a week. She makes more money working a lot less and with infinitely less aggravation. Sure, she misses pediatrics and she fondly remembers so many of the kids, but enough was enough. The sad thing was that this is happening all over the country, doctors quitting their practices, mostly because of the crippling cost of malpractice insurance. NOTHING in Obama's proposed monstrousity would have addressed this problem, which is but one of myriad issues I have with Obamacare.

In the very early days of the Obama administration, after all this campaign talk of unifying and coming together, Republican leaders in Congress approached Obama with one proposal they thought was a shoo-in: a cut in capital gains taxes. After all, it's a tax cut, which Republicans love, and how very wonderful, it also happened to be one of Obama's campaign promises. Obama's response? Chuck U Farley. Yeah, thanks for that unifying moment, Mr. President. Whether or not that capital gains tax cut would have been good for the country is now moot. But the net effect is that Obama's refusal to implement what should have been an easy layup succeeded in uniting only one thing: Republicans in Congress. In the many (fingers crossed) post mortems on Obamacare, the pundits will come up with a lot of different takes on how such a popular president with huge majorities in both houses of Congress bungled the passage of a program that clearly meant so much to him. Indeed, there were so many factors in play, but I believe that early "Chuck U Farley" was the seed of Obamacare's undoing.

I'm so terrified of this government health care monstrousity that I'm holding off on celebrating for now. Hey, it ain't over 'til it's over. But yes, it seems that the death knell has rung for ObamaCare. To quote George H.W. Bush, "The people have spoken. God bless America."

There is no rest for the weary. You have no need to fear if you have faith.

As a health care quality professional, I am appalled at the deliberate politicization of this issue by the far-right racists who are now being bused to town halls - in places they don't even live, mind you - to drown out real debate on the issue of health care reform. Meanwhile, we have a "system" that is falling apart; I know because I see it from the inside.

One thing that is not being noted is that health care, while not a right (no on has the right to demand a professional provide a service), is a public good. Just like national defense, the environment and public education, the nation is far better off economically and socially if people have access to basic and high-quality health care. Not only does worker productivity improve with less illness and fewer sick days, economies also thrive when the future is considered predictible. Eliminating the potential for medical-related bankruptcy would mean individuals would have a much easier time planning for their other financial needs.

Now it is true that Medicare is an expensive program, in part because of outright fraud by too many in the health care sector (every time you see on of those scooter ads, you can be sure even more of your tax money will be wasted), but it has also dramatically improved the quality of life for those over 65 (who could not get private insurance at any price) and added to the increase in lifespan since the creation of the program. Of course, part of the reason that Medicare is so expensive is that it covers only those with significant health care needs - the disabled, the elderly and those on lifetime dialysis. Adding a lot of young healthy people to the program would likely reduce the per-person cost pretty significantly.

There is so much we need to change about our system - eliminating employer-based insurance (you shouldn't have to be employed to get coverage), transforming the delivery of health care (greater use of non-physician clinicians for preventive/primary care, getting rid of the current cottage industry of doctor's offices, improving HIT (which is abysmal and embarrassing in the 21st century), it will require the federal government to guide it - no other institution is capable.

This whole thing about healthcare is giving me a headache. The fiscal conservative in me says WAIT A MINUTE...do we have to do this NOW?!! But its either pay now or pay later thats the bottom line. I am definitely in favor of some kind of reform in which everyone can have some kind of coverage. But these town halls have gotten so ridiculous. I haven't read in detail any of the proposals so I'm not gonna sit here and act like an expert, but I loved the guy at the town hall meeting who stood up and said "Keep your government hands off my Medicare". Oh my god...sit down you f**king twat!! What an idiot! So many of these people at these mob town hall meetings don't even know of what they speak but are just repeating the right wing talking points. This crap about gov't coming to kill grandma and the Nazi signs and Obama with the Hitler moustache are really terrible. Of course after watching Nancy Pelosi's daughter's documentary this past year when she traveled across the country to Rethuglican rallies, I am not at all surprised. He's black....get the f**k over it!!!! Bill Maher had a great New Rule on his show this past week. Pretty much sums up how I feel about things.

New Rule: Just because a country elects a smart president doesn't make it a smart country

NBC showed some pictures of some guy in New Hamsphire today where President Obama is giving his town hall, and the man is clearly wearing a gun strapped to his thigh. As I understand it, its ok to have a gun and show it there. You can not conceal it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out where this could and I hope I am wrong, could be going. My fear is that somebody is going to end up getting shot at one of these town brawls.....I saw some of Arlen Specters town brawl this morning and many of those who get up to speak, seem clearly agitated, and enraged....and I fear something very bad could potentially happen at these if they are toned down somehow....

When you show up at any political event with a gun it is understandable why people who disagree with you might be intimidated.

And it is also understandable why the polls are shifting. When you scream a lie loud enough and long enough and don't allow the truth to be spoken, even sensible people may start to believe that it's safer to believe the lie.

Great comments BOSOX Rudy - you really know how to make your case!

copman, where were you and BoSoxRudy and all the other opponents of healthcare reform when George Bush was shifting the responsibility of paying for government from the wealthy to the working poor and middle class?

It was that shift that led directly to the financial meltdown in the international markets, and the questionable rescue of the TBTF organizations.

Where was the outrage then? Everyone was happy to vote for tax cuts because they would get a few crumbs while the meat went to those who didn't need it and had no idea what to do with it. Thus it accelerated the orgy of greed that Wall Street considers natural, and hell to pay for the rest of us.

Perhaps when that finally does fully descend on these "protesters", most of whom probably have health insurance and do not want to share the responsibility of insuring others, then they too will wake up and see that healthcare reform might possibly have helped avert financial disaster for the world economy.

As it is the watering down of the public option may yet make the cure worst than the ailment. Even conservatives like Lou Dobbs and "Morning Joe" are now realizing that we spend nearly twice the percentage of our GDP on healthcare as the closest country that has single-payer health insurance and that any of the current healthcare proposals will most likely pay for themselves or better. Only selfishness will bring it down.

I heard today that someone spotted a "Death to Obama" sign at one of these rallies. These wingnuts are rabidly insane. You know, my liberal friends and I hated George W. Bush with a passion but we never wished him dead. This whole situation has gotten really frightening.

Definitely frightening and the right wing is stirring the pot with flat out lies. I tell you if something happens to him as a result of some nut influenced by all of this "birther" and "death panel" and "socialist" crap...if you think race relations were bad before.....ohhhhh my gawd...it will be ugly. And if I was Michelle I would tell the Rush's and Glenn Becks of the world that there will be no corner of hell in which they can hide from me. I always worried about Obama's safety but all of the things being stirred up about his legitimacy as president and how he wants to kill grandma and people fearing he will take their guns away, etc, etc, etc...there is only so much the Secret Service can do. I don't think I'm overreactin or being paranoid either.

Liberals bashed George Bush for 8 years straight. Now they are all upset when someone bashes Obama???. If his plan is as good as he says it is, then it will pass. Nancy Pelosi needs to learn to take a little criticism herself. You can't bash one side for 8 years when they are in power & not expect them to bash back when you are in power. I guess it comes with the territory.

Uhh ok once again....I don't think some are seeing the point. There is a difference between bashing and a difference between "DEATH to Obama" or any President signs, Hitler signs, comparing Obama to Hitler as Rush Limbaugh did. George W. Bush was blasted for 8 years, but the racist undercurrent going on here is downright wrong. What I wish half of the people yelling and screaming would admit is that they don't like a black president. Stop trying to hide it behind "oh he is a socialist" or "oh he's not really a citizen of this country". No...he's too dark for some of your tastes and I wish some...I repeat some...of these people would just have the balls to say thats what REALLY irks them about Obama. The combination of the first black president, a horrible economy, and pride loving Americans who think that their black president is a foreign born muslim is pretty scary.

No one is saying that Obama is above criticism. I surely have issues with him on his lack of movement on gay issues, the bazillion dollar deficit he's created (since I am a fiscal conservative), and even I'm not sold on this healthcare thing. I don't think he's been as transparent as he promised, and thats just to name a few. I never expected I would agree with everything he did, but I knew I pretty much wouldn't agree with anything the other guy would've put forth either. Obama needs to be criticized. But there's a difference between criticism and flat out lies. All I'm saying is that its getting ugly. The Rosa Parks poster that was torn up today, the Nazi swastika that was left on the black congressman's office...I mean I think we all need to take a step back and start acting like the civilized society we always brag about being.

Thank you mdterp.....I don't remember seeing one poster of Bush in KKK garb, or dressed as a fascist (even though he acted like one). And I totally agree...."socialism" is the new code word for "people of color are taking over". Suddenly the world doesn't revolve around white people and I'm sure that's scary for lots of people.

Ugh, as I said earlier about this debate, you have grown tiresome. But when I am called out specifically as to where was I when such-and-such was going on, I feel obliged to respond. First of all, I, like so many others here, am rather ambivalent about this P&R category. Because there are so few conservatives, the category has been reduced to a liberal echo chamber. Nothing makes me more nauseous than seeing/hearing a bunch of liberals sycophantically agree with each other, smugly pat each other on the back (back-patting only occurs when the other board member speaks in lockstep agreement, mind you), and drink the Kool-Aid. Perhaps more important, it's basically a waste of time because it's not like anybody's mind or opinion is changed even an iota as the result of all the hot air around here. So where was I during this alleged massive ass-raping of the downtrodden and destitute? Nowhere near the P&R category. I stayed away from it for a looooooooooong time, not even lurking, nor even reading the thread headers.

It feels like this board is full of a bunch of Pauline Kaels, who despaired over Nixon's victory over McGovern (in an Electoral College landslide) by crying out, "I don't know ANYONE who voted for him!!" If I had a dollar for every time a leftist loon wished George W. Bush dead, called him Hitler, or more often, "worse than Hitler," I'd have enough money to pay for George Soros's astroturf campaign. Such lunacy is wrong, whether directed at a Republican or Democratic president. But there is nothing liberals do better than self-congratulations, so if you liberals want to think it's only right-wingers guilty of this, by all means, keep patting yourself on the back for your (delusional) moral superiority.

All of this "socialism is code for you-know-what" is straight out of Liberal Groupthink Headquarters. Why do I so vehemently resist government's takeover of entire sectors of our economy? Obama provided the answer himself in his town hall <cough> meeting when talking about private/public competition. UPS and FedEx are doing great against a public entity, the US Post Office. Yeah, the two private companies are operating at a profit and provide terrific service (UPS saved my ass more times than I can count at my old job). The US Post Office is running a $9 billion deficit in 2009 and a projected $9 billion deficit in 2010. Plus I think their service is inferior, just my experience. So take the disaster of the USPS, multiply it by about two hundred. That's what we'd all end up with if we went to a single-payer system because government always does things half as good at twice the cost. But no, my thoughts, arguments, and opinions are all completely invalid because according to liberals, I and all other small-government conservatives oppose Obamacare solely because of racism. It is rather odd that none of you liberals has responded to my racist argument that better affordability of health care is impossible without tort reform, which is completely ignored in the current legislation. How that's racist is utterly baffling to me, but I won't ask you liberals to explain because you haven't gotten the canned response from Groupthink Headquarters yet.

OK, let me tone down the sarcasm. We were talking about the necessary public good of Obamacare because health care for so many Americans has become unaffordable. I brought up the need for tort reform, because the staggering cost of malpractice insurance plus all the unnecessary tests, procedures, and referrals that stem from fear of a malpractice lawsuit are huge culprits in the skyrocketing cost of health care. Do any of the "I love a good debate on the issues" liberals here respond to that? No, they launch into spews about how those who disagree with Obama or don't like him are just a bunch of hate-filled racists (gotta love liberals and their nuanced thinking).

That in a nutshell is why this P&R category is such a monumental waste of time. Nobody here really wants to talk about the issues. Nobody wants a good honest debate. So I'll leave you all to your echo chamber. Oh, and please don't bother calling me out again. I am sooooooooooo done with this thread.

Its been great fun for me hearing two nations now, Canada and the U.K. lashout at the lies the GOP have been saying about their respective health care systems. Both countries are not at all amused right now...so thats two nations , I wonder if any more will step up here...

Though I do not agree with many of the proposals in the link BBC, I do think they are sensible and well-though out suggestions, many of which no doubt are currently being included in some of the current proposals being considered.

The core value for me is that healthcare service has to respond to the customers like any other market.

When providers gain a monopoly service suffers unless regulated. Health insurers have already used the necessary regulation of health services to limit who qualifies for service. When an insurer can pay a doctor to sign off on virtually anything they want an elected government can be a useful alternative view.

A simple government mandate, that providers not set pre-conditions for instance, will be useless if the "non-government health cooperatives" are not actively forced to comply. A public option is a cheaper regulator.

As for the title of the thread, I'll stand by that because some of the arguements do defy logic and are 'stupid'.

No! You misspelled A-R-G-U-M-E-N-T!!!

Sorry, it's the grammar cop in me.

I also will correct people in conversation. Makes me a big hit at dinner parties!

Fine, as a health care professional, I will respond. The IOM reported in 2004, in their seminal report To Err is Human that "at least 44,000 people, and perhaps as many as 98,000, die in hospitals each year as a result of medical errors that could have been prevented" (To Err is Human - Summary). Not much has changed in the intervening 5 years. We still have a system rife with errors that could be prevented, and not just in the inpatient setting. Malpractice lawsuits are one of the few ways consumers can take action after such mistakes.

Now, there is research that shows you can dramatically reduce malpractice lawsuits without limiting awards, and in a relatively simple manner - simply tell the truth about such mistakes. But that will take a huge cultural change within medicine.

I would also add that a lot of the excess costs in medical care - the inefficiencies that you point to, are not so much a result of defensive medicine as a problem of information technology. Because we still have a cottage industry in medical care (small group practices acting relatively independently in scattered offices) and because physicians may be the most technologically phobic individuals ever, we have a "system" that relies far too much on paper records, which are not easily transmitted. Using paper records requires a lot more manual attention to communications, which is a system rife with errors. Imagine if every ATM withdrawl you made was actually with a human teller, and that teller had to send a note to every bank for every customer they had for every withdrawl (that is, for those customers who used other banks). Would such a system even work? In fact, it didn't - before the advent of the ATM networks and the information systems behind those networks, you could only get money at your bank. Poor communication means huge amounts of care that is either missed or redundant.

The larger issue we have with medical care in this country is that health care coverage is through the insurance industry - but that makes no sense. Insurance is meant for occurances that are rare and may never happen, like a tornado in New England. Health care, on the other hand, is something we all need, and we all need at least once per year. The entire business model of health "insurance" is doomed to failure just for that reason. Just as we all need a clean environment, good education and national defense, and we all benefit as a country when those items are secured, we all need health care and the country is better off when we have access to it.

Right now, something like 70% of all bankruptcies are due to medical costs, and almost always the people going bankrupt are insured (remember, if you have a $250,000 organ transplant and have to pay 20% of the costs, that $50,000). How much better off would we be as a country if all the costs of those bankruptcies, all the defaulted debts, all the lawyer costs, all the costs of staffing the courts and using their time for these cases, was instead channelled into providing health care?

I recently heard that "malpractice" costs are only about 3% of the total spent on health care; and, that it is only a problem in one or two practice areas OB-GYN and neurology.

It kills me that conservatives, the "personal responsibility" group, wants "tort reform" to give a pass on that "personal responsibility" when it comes to business. Many injuries that happen in health care are due to much of the industry being profit-centered and the pressures to cut corners, spend less time with patients, etc.

Why is everyone in the US so scared about a single payer system. It is NOT socialized medicine. It is exactly what it sounds like.

If you have private insurance, great!!! Keep it. If you are one of the 47 million who do not have health care, or how many other 10's of millions who are underinsured, then why not a single payer system.

Under such a system. you go to the doctor, present a card, either US Healthcare or something else, as I'm sure the politicians would need to design some pretty name. Your doctor knows just how much this plan will pay, and when his receptionist swipes the card, and fills out an ONLINE treatment code form, using common billing codes, and they will know exactly how much each treatment/test will cost. She clicks send, the patient is looked after, and the doctor is paid electronically within 30 days.

Now imagine the savings in the US if every company had to go on-line, and used common codes. The savings to the system from hospitals, doctors, labs etc would be HUGE!!!!!

That's how it works here in Canada. Before ANYONE calls it socialized medicine, it's not. It is the single payer system. It's not perfect, but NO ONE, and I repeat NO ONE is ever turned down. if you don't have a family doctor, and go to a walk in clinic, or the emergency room, they will triage you, (prioritize according to how sick you are), but by law, you cannot be denied medical care. Period.

And trust me, with all of my cancer treatments, I have seen the system way too up close and personal. Never once did I have to wait more than 2 weeks to see an oncologist, and the max time between seeing him and starting treatment was about 2 weeks (I think).

My parents both had serious end of life issues, and both were treated incredibally well, and to this day I thank the hospitals for the care they got. Both had extensive hospital stays. In my mother's case, it was 4 months in a hospital, and 4 months in a hospice.

My niece, (now 23) was born 2 months premature, and spent a lot of time in the hospital as a baby.

Also, both of my sisters have had the same cancer I have, and both have been treated great.

Total cost to my family for all of this?

$97

And that's for a fibreglass cast on my arm 2 years ago, when I tripped over the dog and broke my arm.

And according to the CD Howe institute (a conservative think thank), there is less than a 5% difference in the TOTAL individual tax burden between Americans and Canadians.

And 100% of Canadians have health care. And if you are a senior in Ontario, your prescriptions are 100% covered, except for a $2 fee.

So, what's wrong with the Canadian, British, French, German, Swiss, Dutch, etc systems?

Nothing is wrong with it. Period. End of statement. It sounds good to me. What this has become here and what this is all about IMO is to do nothing else other than bring down Obama. Thats it. Pretty simple. If you don't believe me, I refer you to the good Senator a Mr. DeMint. THen there is Mr. Grassley, Mr. bipartisan himself from Iowa. What did he do you ask? Got up in front of a mic somewhere in Iowa and said the big bad government is coming to pull the plug on grandma in the hospital. The GOP does NOT want reform. What they do want, is to bring down Obama....

Thanks BigBlueCowboy. I corrected that. And you would be no less popular than my partner who would have corrected me with far less tact.

On logic however we very rarely disagree. But when we do I think he would eventually agree that am generally right.

And when I am wrong it is because I do not have my facts straight. Should you find any other "fact" I state to be incorrect I would again welcome a correction.

CPT_Doom Your post made so much sense that it surprises me that more health professionals are not speaking out on this issue.

Perhaps I am wrong but could it be that too many of them are doing well financially under the current system?

WHATEVER republicans don't want, I WANT.

TRL

I honestly don't know much about the ins and outs of different aspects of different plans, but I do know that health costs have limited my raises for a long time and I do know that when Democratic presidents have tried to deal with this, it's become more about knocking them (or their wives!) down than trying to solve a problem for the betterment of the country as a whole, and I do know that Republicans did not try to do anything when they had the presidency and control of both houses for 6 years- that pretty sums up where they are coming from- great at criticizing but severely lacking in putting forth solutions and having the guts to take the heat.

One of the saddest facts of the matter is that many responsible republicans have supported many of the same measures, including end-of-life counseling, that are being demonized by so many of them right now.

This should never have been a partisan issue. This is an important part of confronting the national economic crisis we only barely avoided and may yet see the worst of.

The inefficiency of our health care system is directly related to the lack of coverage for all. Healthcare has been shown to be cheaper, and better, everywhere that it has been made universal or nearly so.

It is a disservice to the citizens of this country that politicians who should know better are not speaking out for reform that matters and against counter-arguments that are deeply flawed if not outright lies.



And that is precisely the argument that healthcare reformers need to make. But it is one that can not easily be documented because the increase in healthcare costs is "hidden" for those who have insurance until they see deductibles and co-pays rise. And even these rises do not adequately reflect the rises in healthcare cost.

Thank you, sportinlife! I can sleep well at night once more. My next bête noire is going after those who say, "Just between you and I..." Special torments in the bowels of hell are reserved for them!!

Just to be clear Lksimcoe, the US finally went to a single claim form and standard coding system during the Clinton administration ,or at least by the early Bush II years. The HIPAA regulations, which were passed into law in the early 90s, but took some time to implement, required this, as well as standard single IDs for all providers, insurers and other players in the health care arena. In addition, physicians must be able to electronically bill Medicare if they want to participate in that program.

The really ironic thing, as many people have pointed out, is that Medicare is a single payer system that covers those individuals who would never be able to purchase individual coverage - the elderly, disabled and those with kidney failure (known as End Stage Renal Disease, or ESRD). The "public option" being proposed would simply allow people to buy into a Medicare-type system. Under Medicare, you can choose to be in the fee-for-service system, which requires copayments and deductibles, or you can join a private health plan under contract to Medicare, which normally provide additional benefits but also require you to use a more limited network. That means even the public option would not eliminate private insurers, although they would have less flexibility to deny coverage to those with high medical costs, much like the electric company cannot refuse to provide service to lower-income households, even though they have a much higher likelihood of being unable to pay the bill.

Let me also add that Medicare includes an independent arbitration board for any disputes about claims, so the insurer is not the final say in those matters.

I can tell you I am on Medicare, and I like it. Have had no major problems or issues with it what so ever. Maybe not the best insurance out there, but there could be many, many which are much, much worse. A big problem with it though, as mentioned many times, is fraud, plus the part D part which Bush added, which also cost about $800 Billion dollars and was not paid for. I have problems with people against health care reform who are bitchin about money and the defecit. Where were they years ago? Please go see G.W. about that please. Thank you.

Amen, HockeyTom. I never understood the rabid spending in Iraq and Afganistan, while our own people went without. Add to that the looney element now being displayed by some...Sarah Palin and her mysterious "death council", and some other nut who drove 200 miles to a town hall meeting in Montana, only to be quoted she doesn't want to pay for people sitting on their butts...what did she do during her drive, stand the whole way? I am very afraid of people like that with soooo much time on their hands. What is the old saying...idle minds are the devil's workshop? This whole issue has promped a circus-like atmosphere by the right-wing nut jobs. They are truly living up to their moniker.