Dear President Obama! We Liberals and Progressives support you! We voted for you! However, we want the Public Option. DO NOT CAVE IN TO THE Republicans and Right Wing Extremists! They will NEVER, EVER Support you! Do not listen to the Co-Op rhetoric. That is not a viable option for either side!! The Republicans will NEVER accept the Co-Op option. Why even consider it!
WE TRUE AMERICANS, WE TRUE AMERICANS THAT SUPPORT YOU... WE WANT... WE WANT: the PUBLIC OPTION!!!
YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO! YOU HAVE THE VOTES IN SEPTEMBER. Stop listening to Republicans LIES and RHETORIC!!! YOU HAVE THE VOTES!!! Vote Healthcare Reform! Include a Public Option!
God Bless America!
God Bless our President Obama!
(Mr. President: Remember, we Latinos are on your side)
Posts
82 comments:
Dee :
Congratulations for your fight, we know that you represent Intelligence and Reason in this debate, and we learn a lot by reading your posts on Health Care.
************************************
Obama is becoming a Great President
************************************
Not only the "Financial Times" ( Wow !!! ) calls Mr Obama "Felix, the Cat", the Lucky Wonderful Cat, "Whenever he gets in a fix, he reaches into his bag of tricks!" and acknowledges his economic Succcess !
Private consumer demand and new business investment are not leading the way out of the Recession -- Government demand was an absolute necessity
And the Bush Years only gave more Wealth to the Rich, and the poor "Lucky Duckies" became poorer.
White most America became poorer, the Rich became Richer with Republican Economic Ideas.
Huffington Post
New Economic Data Shows that Right Wing Economic Theory Is Simply Wrong
By Robert Creamer
August 14, 2009
New Economic Data Shows that Right Wing Economic Theory Is Simply Wrong.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/new-economic-data-shows-t_b_259540.html
Some excerpts :
Contrary to right wing theory, private consumer demand and new business investment are not leading the way out of the Great Recession -- in reality, government demand was an absolute necessity.
But the second piece of economic news tells even more about the bankruptcy of right wing economic thought. Throughout the heyday of Reagan's "supply side revolution" and Bush's tax cuts, the Republicans and the right wing intellectual establishment have hung fast to their foundational belief that tax cuts for business would create private sector jobs.
Well, the great experiment in "trickle down" economics is over and the results are in.
Milenials.com
Vicente Duque
Insurance Companies HATE the public option. They want to continue to run their scams and their monopoly over the American People.
A public option will defeat their monopoly and give the American Public a true option. We can still select Insurance Companies. We can still keep our choices.
This Co-Op option is ridiculous. The Republicans HATE IT and so do we!
So let's see. Americans who support illegal immigration are "true" Americans but those who oppose Obama's healthcare reform bill, aren't? How do you figure that? I would rather not support certain bills that have flaws than be supportive of illegal invaders in our country. Think about which is the least patriotic and in fact spits on our borders and our laws. It sure isn't objection to a flawed bill. Most all Americans want healthcare reform but many just don't think Obama's bill is the right one. Does that make them less American than you?
You same people who claim you are "true" Americans certainly opposed many things that Bush did. Do I denote some hypocricy in here? FYI, it isn't being un-American to not support everything that a president wants or does. In this case it is only the flaws in it that they oppose, not healthcare reform itself. As Ultima pointed out why has every Amendment that the Republicans have proposed been shut down by the Democrats? Is it all their way or the highway? That isn't what this country is about.
Do you have at least one honest bone in your body making appalling remarks that some Americans are not true Americans for opposing certain bills? Is there any end to your hate for conservative Americans and your one track mind that only Obama and the Democrats can be right about any issue?
You have no tolerance for any other point of view but yours and all you do is namecall and demonize other Americans when clearly you do not have the best interests of this country in mind only your so-called liberal, progessive, socialist agenda that will ultimately destroy our country. It is nutcases like yourself that make me want to fight for my country even more and our numbers are growing. Your mind is so-closed shut,full of hate and intolerance that there is no way that anyone in their right mind would classify you and those who think like you as "true" Americans. You are the destroyers of our country and the ones that will make sure our freedoms are destroyed, starting with freedom of speech and freedom to disagree to begin with.
Have you ever tried politely disagreeing with those who don't share your healthcare reform, immigration views, etc. instead of resorting to childish and immature name calling? Isn't that what kids do rather than grownups? Is that what you taught your kids and grandkids is to name call and spew hate and venom against the opposition rather than just disagreeing and stating your case with civility?
These are the things that your readers are seeing in you. Do you actually think you will gain any converts to your side when you use kindgergarten tactics in here? How many topics are you going to start with hate filled rhetoric and namecalling being used against an entire group of our society? Shouldn't you as an adult see how wrong this is?
Dear New Anon,
Did I touch I nerve with you? Why don't you name yourself. It doesn't have to be your real name. Have some courage. Call yourself John or Nancy, anything to differentiate from the other anons. At least YOU are somewhat civil and are not using profane language like your cohorts.
Yes. In answer to your question, YES. PROs are Patriots and we are TRUE Americans! We are not like your republican/right wing angry, red faced zealots, full of fury and violence. You teabaggers, deathers and birthers are NOT Patriots. You are brainwashed by the likes of Beck, Limbaugh, Malkin and Hannity. Armey,Palin and Dobbs. Yechhhhhh!!!! Such blind sheep.
If you were true Americans and Patriots, you would NOT Listen to their LIES and rhetoric. Even Ultima acknowledges they are LIARS for saying there was "Death Plan" verbiage in any version of the Healthcare reform bills.
It is Democrats who established Medicare/Medicaid, Civil Rights and and end to the Jim Crow laws. It was your sie that demonized them and called Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy and Johnson - socialists and communists as you are demonizing President Obama today.
You hide behind the flag, but you are NOT Patriots. You drive in your pickup trucks, carry the confederate flag and birthers demonize our President using racist slurs, carrying signs depicting him as a nazi/hitler or a joker.
I say SHAME ON YOU! THIS IS NOT PATRIOTISM. All of it Cowardly, Racist LIES!!
WE THE PEOPLE support Universal Healthcare/Healthcare Reform.
God Bless America!
God Bless our President Obama!
See what I mean about your stereotyping of conservative Americans? That is totally unfair. I don't drive a pickup truck (as if liberal Americans don't ever drive pickup trucks) and I don't carry a Confederate Flag. I have never referred to Obama by racial slurs or any of the other things that you are stereotyping me and most conservative Americans with either.
The only red faced and angry people I see in this blog are you and your coherts in here. Ultima has been a gentleman every time in here.
Part of patriotism is to allow all points of view and to politely disagree when appropriate, not name calling and screaming and stereotyping others as being all the same.
LOL Anon.
Why are you so afraid to name yourself. Try John or Nancy. Don't be afraid. I just want to differentiate you from the other anons.
I will give you one thing. At least you are not profane.
Please re-read my posts. I reference the Birthers, Deathers and Teabaggers. These are the people gaining their talking points from nutcases like Beck, Malkin, Hannity, Limbaugh etc. Perhaps you do not listen to them, otherwise you would know what I am referencing.
Deathers: those who believe there are "Death Panels" in any bill version of any healthbill in congress.
Birthers: those who believe Obama's officially sanctioned birther certificate is a fake and believe he was born in Kenya and is a Muslim.
Teabaggers: those that are blindlly following the talking points of groups like FreedomWorks, formed by insurance co. supported lobbyist Dick Armey.
Many of these Teabaggers, Birthers and Deathers carry signs demonizing our president (nazi, hitler, the joker)
No name calling. Just facts.
I am a proud and patriotic supporter of our President Obama. Have you tried reading his websites? Listened to his speeches? Read the summaries of the Healthcare Bills in Congress? Read both sides (PRO/ANTI) websites to understand both perspectives? Host a blog and receive both perspectives? Then decide for yourself your own point of view? I have. I suggest you try it and then let's debate. Otherwise, you appear to have a weak argument.
Do you understand?
Ok, call me Kenneth then. I don't know how to post any other way other than anonymous. I don't have a google account and none of the other options for signing in worked for me.
Surely you can't deny that you have called all conservatives racists, liars and incapable of forming their own opinions rather than being puppets to some talk show hosts. Why is that necessary? It makes your blog look bad. Even if you think that some are those things you stereotype them all that way. That is just plain wrong. It isn't polite to scream in anger these deragatory remarks all day long in your blog. It makes you look irrational and unwilling to admit that many if not most regular conservatives are not what you describe them as. You pick on extreme conservatives to make your point when they don't represent the majority of conservatives so why do you bother with them? Do YOU understand?
I have nothing against Obama even though he is a Democrat. I don't wish him to fail because it could mean the failure of our country then. Bush failed and look how that affected us all. I don't look at him as the second coming of Christ however. He is just a regular human being like the rest of us with faults and capable of making bad decisions just like the rest of us.
I want healthcare reform but I want to be sure that it will be cost effective and that we Americans will truly have good healthcare. I have listened to both the objectors and the advocators of this bill and I am still not sure about it. I don't know what arguments you are claiming that I have put forth. I haven't put out any arguments either pro or con on Obama's healthcare bill. All I am doing is weighing it and trying to understand what it will really mean for all of us and trying to keep an open mind. A closed mind is a terrible thing you see. I really wish that we Americans could be given different options on each piece of this bill and vote on them ourselves. No one could cry when the majority rules and democracy prevails.
Kenneth,
You are interesting and not profane and I am glad you stopped by. Most of my Anons are profane - therefore I moderate out their comments.
One of the reasons most people write blogs is to share their opinions and to be provocative. They are meant to be this way (think of them as FoxNews on the net)
I am Paul Revere and my blog is my proclamation to all my viewers.
I know my long time ANTIs like Ultima. We discuss and debate issues civilly.
Regarding Republican shockjocks: I do target those who have a negative message and attract a significant amount of attention, like Beck, Limbaugh, Malkin, Hannity, Dobbs, Armey, Palin, etc. I have no apologies for targetting them. They brainwash too many innocent members of the American public. They raise the anger level. I shine my lantern on them and reveal their lies.
I also expose the Minutemen for their misdeeds. I reference news articles and provide links.
My blog is my Mission of Truth. You don't have to agree.
A blog IMO should be a place where different sides of an issue can be discussed by just regular Americans. Constantly bringing up the extreme fringes on either side serves no purpose. Most Americans are not influenced by them contrary to your belief.
Screamng in bold letters and name calling when you don't even have those types of extreme people posting in your blog serves what purpose?
Expressing your opinion is one thing but do it politely rather than rudely and steretyping those in your blog as being one in the same as extremists is not being civil.
One man's truth is another man's lie. That is what I meant by a closed mind is a terrible thing. I am capable of listening to and respecting another point of view (even if they are misguided IMO) without immediately assuming they have some sinister agenda or are puppets. Are you? It doesn't appear so.
This perhaps isn't a format for me. I see where there is only one person in here expresssing a different point of view from yours and that is this Ultima fellow and he is also being accused of being an extremist and a puppet but I haven't read that from his posts. He seems very intelligent and thoughtful. He is also being steretyped by you. Suggestion, why don't you just go one on one with those who disagree with you rather than constantly bringing up those outside your blog as Beck, etc.? They aren't posting in here.
By the way, I am Kenneth aka anonymous.
Dee said :
"Regarding Republican shockjocks: I do target those who have a negative message and attract a significant amount of attention, like Beck, Limbaugh, Malkin, Hannity, Dobbs, Armey, Palin, etc. I have no apologies for targetting them. They brainwash too many innocent members of the American public. They raise the anger level. I shine my lantern on them and reveal their lies."
I agree with you Dee 100% ... There should not be any piety, clemency or compassion with these Racist Idiots ...
Add Pat Buchanam, New Gingrich and Tom Tancredo to your list of Morons in Power ( Media Time for these Cretins )
We should not be passive before this repugnant Imbecility .... There are also many hidden economic interests that these clowns represent.....
They are doing Hypocrite Gestures and Gesticulations of Patriotism to hide their own money interests of Hate Merchants.
About the weaklings and fools that follow these cretins I say :
To contradict fools, ignorants, the innocent and naive humans is unpolite, but to let them err and follow the wrong path is very cruel and inhuman.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the Scoundrel" ... Samuel Johnson
Raciality.com
Vicente Duque
Kenneth,
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Feel free to post as long as you are civil and not abusive.
Regardless of your opinion however, I speak the truth and will continue to do so on my blog, as is my right. On this particular post, I posted a letter to our President Obama about my heartfelt views on Healthcare Reform for our country.
While you may not agree with me, I have many followers that do agree with me and visit my blog frequently. I started my blog in May, 2007. My viewership has increased and now I average over 10,000 viewers per month, from every state in the country and dozens of countries across the world. The internet is a beautiful thing and I certainly appreciate living in this great country of ours where we are free to voice our opinions and share them via our blogs. I'd recommend you do the same. It is fun and provides a wealth of opportunities to meet people from numerous backgrounds.
God Bless America
God Bless our President Obama
Thank you for saying what we are all thinking!!!
I wish Obama would stop trying to please these right-wing idiots and do what is RIGHT for the country. No matter what he does, they will find something to complain about. Every single time.
Death panels, unbelievable!!! Is that the best they can come up with?!!
U.S. Rep. Vic Snyder says he thinks it would be a mistake for Democrats to oppose a health care plan if it doesn't include a government-run public insurance option.
Snyder said in a forum on health care Tuesday that he's worried that the so-called "public option" would give the federal government an advantage over private insurers.
It is natural to be skeptical about the public option. The largest existing public health programs — Medicare and Medicaid — are the main reason that the government’s long-term finances are in shambles. True, Medicare’s administrative costs are low, but it is easy to keep those costs contained when a system merely writes checks without expending the resources to control wasteful medical spending.
On Capitol Hill, the Senate Finance Committee is expected to produce a bill that features a nonprofit co-op. The author of the idea, Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota and chairman of the Budget Committee, predicted Sunday that Mr. Obama would have no choice but to drop the public option.
“The fact of the matter is, there are not the votes in the United States Senate for the public option,” Mr. Conrad said on “Fox News Sunday.” “There never have been. So to continue to chase that rabbit, I think, is just a wasted effort.”
You are so right Denise! We have enough votes to pass this bill with a Public Option.
I cannot imagine George Bush or Dick Cheney EVER making concessions to Democrats. While in office, they just bullied us into War, the Patriot Act, Outing Valerie Plame, giving the Banks and Big Business a free for all WITH NO APOLOGIES!
That is the ONE Thing WE can learn from Republicans. WE are in Office and We need to move our issues forward. That is why we elected them!!
One other thing:
Regardless of ANY / ALL Concessions the Dems make, Republicans are NOT going to vote for the bill.
They ALL want our President to Fail!
Snyder is a Blue Dog.What else do you expect from him. He "worries" that a public option is not be fair to the rich insurance companies. Oh boo hoo.
What about the 47M uninsured citizens in our country? How unfair if the broken health industry to them?
Beck motivated Town Hall Deathers ranted at Snyder. Why didn't he stand up and tell them the truth about our broken healthcare system and the 47M vs lamenting his loss of popularity with the Beck crowd?!? He needs to stand up for the people that voted him in, not Beck's crowds.
Conrad is another Blue Dog.
He should also think of the 47M.
Repubs will NEVER vote for Co-Op.
Conrad should STOP trying to please the repubs.
They are the party of No, want Obama to fail, and will never ever vote for co-op. Repubs are laughing at the Blue Dogs....the dogs with their tail between their legs.
Blue Dogs should stand up for the people who voted them in!
Insurance Companies spend 40% of their revenue on Ads and Marketing and Promotions. Plus multi millions for CEO and Management Stock Options.
Oh the hypocrisy of republicans. None of them would ever, ever vote to shut down medicare or medicaid -- Single Payer Systems.
Republicans are duplicitous!
Be careful what you wish for
The problem with Democrats:
We are far too nice.
Our Congressfolk worry about what Republicans think. They worry about the media. They worry about popularity.
What I can say about Republicans:
They have cajones when it comes to running their bully pulpit. They don't give a rip what the Democrats think. They don't give a rip about their popularity. They don't give a rip about making changes for the good of the American People or for the good of the World. They want their way and they don't give a rip what anyone thinks and they push aside whoever gets in their way!
When you think about it, what do Insurance companies do? They don't provide medical help. They are merely brokers. They have power over us. They say yes or no. They rule our healthcare, our choice of doctors, our choice of medication.
Show me one senior citizen who asks to give up their single payer option: medicare, medicaid. I say NONE.
If we have a choice, why should we be forced to pay for the ads and marketing and CEO salaries of Insurance companies personnel? Why? Take that 40% out of the equation. Bring their salaries down to earth. Allow them to compete with the public option.
Let us have CHOICE!!
For ALL of the republican naysayers and right wing extremists:
NO HEALTHCARE BILL BEING CONSIDERED HAS EITHER OF THESE TWO OPTIONS INCLUDED:
1. ABORTIONS
2. THE UNDOCUMENTED
Anyone who says otherwise is a LIAR.
Though I may not agree with these two exclusions, THEY ARE NOT IN THE BILLS!
So to ALL of you right wing extremists who say they are in, I say to you: YOU ARE LIARS!!
Dee wrote,"They are merely brokers."
So all insurance companies are bad! I guess you also want to buy your auto, life, and property insurance from a government bureacracy. That follows logically from your argument against health insurers.
Be careful what you wish for.
LOL Ulty.
You are starting to sound like Joe the Plumber!
LOL
Dee wrote, "It is Democrats who established Medicare/Medicaid..."
But then they forgot to fund these programs with the predictable result that they in total suffer from multi-trillion dollar unfunded obligations or liabilities.
Dee wrote, "You are brainwashed..."
Obamabots are like automatons; they can't and don't think for themselves, they are pre-progammed to agree with everything Obama says or does rather than examine it critically as thinking people do.
Dee wrote, "We can still select Insurance Companies. We can still keep our choices."
Another thoughtless Obamabot response. The public option will kill all private plans unless the private plans receive the same taxpayer subsidies as the public option. Who, individually or as an employer, will turn down a 20% discount on health insurance provided by taxpayer subsidies?
Dee wrote, "Insurance Companies HATE the public option."
Yes, of course they do and you would too if you were in a business that was about to be taken over by the government. Others have reason to hate the public option because their 401ks are heavily invested in insurance companies. This is just another example of the failure of Obamabots to think through the ramifications of reform proposals.
Dear Mr. President, We Americans are not on your side when it comes to the public option. You can achieve the same goal by simply outlawing the onerous practices of health insurance companies and placing them under a utility-type control to reduce costs and control executive salaries. You are exactly right when you say the public option is minor (a sliver is your word) of the total reform package.
Please also take another look at the prohibition against the participation of illegal aliens. Without a requirement to check the bona fides of every applicant to assure that they are here legally, the prohibition is meaningless.
A perfect analogy is represented by the laws we have against illegal entry into our country. Without a requirement to check the bona fides of every employee,vigorous and internal enforcement and expeditious repatriation, the immigration laws are worthless and the prohibition against illegal entry is not worth the paper it is written on. But I am sure you and the Congress knows that and figured that no one else would notice.
Without an enforcement mechanism and an explicit requirement to check the bona fides of every insurance applicant, it is not appropriate to call those who say illegals will get to participate a bunch of liars.
Dee wrote, "You are starting to sound like Joe the Plumber!"
I don't know exactly what that means but I do know that the tone of your posts would justify a much harsher judgment.
I note that you failed to address the substance of John Stossel's expose of universal health care. I guess you didn't like the looks of those long lines anymore than I did but couldn't think of a graceful way to back away from your Obamabot support of his health care reform.
Patriotic Americans want the public option. What nonsense; more than half of Americans do not want the public option according to the latest poll. Patiotism has nothing to do with the arguments about health care reform. This is just some of the kind of hyperbole you find so disgusting when it comes from Limbaugh,et.al. and you're not even in the entertainment business.
Dee wrote, "2. THE UNDOCUMENTED
Anyone who says otherwise is a LIAR."
Only a shallow thinker would overlook the fact that the prohibition against illegal aliens doesn't have a chance of working without an explicit provision for checking the bona fides of all applicants and an explicit enforcement mechanism including jail time and fines for those who commit fraud against this prohibition.
As I pointed out elsewhere, the appropriate analogy is the immigration laws which left unenforced are tantamount to no laws at all. Therefore, people are not lying if they mean that illegals will be served in spite of the prohibition because of the lack of any explicit requirement to check bona fides and the failure to provide an enforcement mechanism and appropriate penalties for fraud.
The language currently in the bill is a fraud. It will allow illegals to participate and whoever says so is not a liar.
You vastly oversimplify what it takes to preclude the participation of illegals. You are, perhaps purposely, falling for the old Congressional trick of pretending to something when in fact they have no intention of assuring effective implementation.
The option of an illegal to participate in the plan is implicit in the failure to provide adequate measures to prevent that participation and punish those who allow it.
The option of an illegal to enter this country in violation of the law is implicit in the failure of the Administration to vigorously enforce the law and take whatever steps are necessary to secure the borders, and apprehend and repatriate those already here.
While there may be no explicit permission to enter our country illegally, it is certainly implicit in the failure to enforce the law, penalize employers,
and expeditiously repatriate illegal aliens.
The same reasoning applies to illegal aliens access to health care reform measures. You are wrong about this. It is not a lie to point out that fact.
Ultima
It is clear you (as well as the birthers, deathers and teabaggers) are stuck with your opinions on Healthcare Reform.
Fine. So be it.
WE THE PEOPLE disagree with you. We WON the election and elected our officials for this purpose.
WE THE PEOPLE have the majority. This is just like the sixties. Your side opposed Civil Rights but we passed it anyway. I predict this will also happen will Healthcare Reform!
The deathers, birthers and teabaggers are clearly nutcases with their references to Nazi, Hitler, our President being a Muslim, Kenyan. They are NUTZ!
They allowed Beck to get them angry, now they are showing up at Town Meetings with assault weapons.
Your side had GW in office for 8 years. You never listened to us ONCE in the entire 8 years.
Now, I say STEP ASIDE. Your side is NOT in power. WE voted in our President and Congress. I say to the Democrats in Congress: PASS THE BILL with the Public Option!!
God Bless America!
God Bless President Obama!
Republicans are the party of NO! They want our President and America to FAIL!
I don't care what they think!
The American People have spoken!
We want Healthcare Reform. We want the public option. WE THE PEOPLE voted our President in!
The haters, the deathers, the birthers, the teabaggers will NEVER be on our side!
PASS THE BILL with the Public Option!
Dee wrote, "...are stuck with your opinions on Healthcare Reform."
Aren't we all? At the moment more Americans are opposed to the public option than in favor of it.
Dee wrote, "WE THE PEOPLE disagree with you."
Sorry but this is a lie. At the moment more Americans are opposed to the public option than are in favor of it. WE THE PEOPLE don't need or want the public option.
Dee wrote, "...are stuck with your opinions on Healthcare Reform."
Perhaps "stuck" is not quite the right word. Each of merely has his or her own opinion which we have shared with each other.
We are no more "stuck" with our opinions than the Obamabots.
Dee wrote, "Now, I say STEP ASIDE. Your side is NOT in power. WE voted in our President and Congress."
I'm not about to step aside for anyone. In spite of the Obamabots his approval rating is in decline. Surely you did not step aside when the GOP was in power, did you? Hmmmmm!
Dee wrote, "I don't care what they think!"
Right, few of the anti-America crowd want to be confused by facts.
ANTI Americans are calling our President a Nazi. Shame on them! The terrorists are cheering them!
We PRO Americans are the Patriots! We support our President! We want success for American, NOT Failure!
Step Aside! We PROs were shoved aside for the last 8 years. At least we are asking you to step aside with NO force and NO assault weapons like the freaks on your side are doing!
I am curious why you disregarded Ultima's suggestion of a different option about the public option that would achieve the same goal but perhaps in a better way. I am also curious why you disregarded his quite logical summation that since insurance companies wouldn't be able to ask someone's legal status in this country that indeed it would be a loophole for illegals to gain insurance in that way. He really has a very valid point. Can you explain how he is wrong and how it wouldn't work that way? As he said, it isn't about lies but real valid questions about that part of it.
I see you are still stereotyping him and all other Americans who have reservations about Obama's healthcare plan as all unthinking puppets again. How do you know how many Americans listen to Beck, etc. rather than thinking for themselves? I asked you before why don't you just discuss this issue one on one with the blogees you have posting in here and address only their concerns and comments rather than bringing up people like Beck when they aren't even posting in here. You assume a lot and make a lot of accusations of people without even knowing where they themselves are coming from.
No American wants America to fail and that includes the Republicans. So why do you keep saying that? Some may want Obama to fail because they don't like his politics but that isn't the same thing as making the statement that any American would want their own country to fail. Why would they want that? It would hurt us all. We all want healthcare reform but the devil is in the details.
I have read many a political blog before but I have never seen someone use the kind of tactics that you do. Be polite and not so angry and accusatory in here against the one or two civil blogees you have in here. There is no reason to get angry and accusatory of them as if they have a group puppet mindset with no valid points. Open you mind. Ultima has posed some very valid questions and concerns that you haven't addressed. Instead you go off on a rant. Why? Suggestion, stop bringing up birthers, deathers, etc. to him in response to his personal comments. He apparently isn't one of them and neither am I. One on one, by answering those concerns of those in your blog. The birthers and dealthers are not posting in here. Don't bring them up in responding to your non-birther/deathers blogees. To do so is steretyping your blogees unfairly.
Kenneth
Kenneth,
I don't know if you are naive or just being duplicitous. Obviously you have not been on many blogs. Try going to Michelle Malkins. VDare, Alipac.us, Drudge Report, Beck's site, Limbaugh's site. Listen to the zealots - birthers, deathers and teabaggers. These nutbags calling our president a Nazi and posting posters of our President as Hitler or as the Joker. Try this nutcase site: Patriot@faxdc.com that spammed me and said Euthanasia was in the Healthcare bill.
Come on Kenneth. Quit being duplicitous. The wacko extremist republican blogsites are EVERYWHERE!
Additionally re: Ultima's zany new options....LOL is all I can say.
Let's go back a few years when Dubya and Cheney advocated the wrongful left turn to Iraq. Did they listen when our side said No?
Or what about when they advocated the Patriot Act. Did they listen when we said No?
Or what about pandering to the Big Business as they are continuing to do with the Insurance Companies. Did they listen when we said NO?
The problem is, people like Ultima and ALL the Republicans did whatever they wanted over the last 8 years and never, ever listened to our side.
Now, they come up with strawdog options. Alternatives that sound like they might be good on paper but in reality, not even they will support. All they want to do is have the President FAIL. Limbaugh said so. So have many members of Congress.
I suppose you are a young guy Kenneth. You probably don't remember Gingrich's tactics during the early days of the Clinton administration. guess what. It is deja vu all over again. The party of No is still the party of NO and FAIL and so very predictable!
I say: We have wised up.
We are not falling for your same traps again!
As I asked , what have people like Beck, Malkin have to do with those posting in your blog?
What does Ultima's thoughts on healthcare reform have to do with Bush and Cheney's decisions in the past? He is only a regular American and many Republican conservatives were disgusted with that administration. He had no part in their decision making. I am a conservative myself but I can admit when the Republicans make mistakes but the Democrats make them also. What has any of this to do with Obama's healthcare reform bill and how those in your blog perceive it? Ultima had some very valid questions and concerns. Why not address them? Is it because you know that the loopholes are there and you don't want to admit it?
Again, I ask why can't you discuss this issue with your blogees one on one without bringing in the entire Republican party and talk show hosts into it and implying that they are all on one side together as puppets? We all have our own thought processes. I can certainly see that Ultima wouldn't be swayed by anything other than facts and logical concerns. You called it his opinion but it wasn't. He just pointed out the loopholes and they are there but you couldn't deny it so you just dismissed it.
Kenneth
Kenneth,
You obviously missed my analogies, but here is where you are missing my point. In fact you and Ultima are FAILING to listen to it. I believe the single payer was the best option and the public option is the next best alternative. Today, the Healthcare Industry and the Pharmaceuticals have gone out of control with costs and manipulating the system. Why? Think Monopoly. Remember the telecoms? Remember the monopolies and the outrageous prices we were paying for Long Distance and connectivity? Now we pay mere pennies for unlimited talktimes nationally and globally? The same thing is happening currently in the Healthcare Insurance industry. And the govt, especially over the last 8 years is pandering to them. That is why their bonuses have gone skyhigh. They have some of the strongest lobbyists fighting and funding all of these so called teabagger institutions. Try studying the issues. Ultima knows all I have said is the truth. Again, I don't know if you are naive or duplicitous. You may be another insurance lobbyist for all I know seeking to fool the American public.
I am not interested in pursuing some lame brained options the insurance companies and their friends are putting out there. The repubs had their chance to develop their healthcare proposals over the last 8 years. Now its our turn. The public option makes sense and will bring competitition and diversity to the healthcare insurance industry.
READ THIS 8 TIMES. PERHAPS IT WILL SINK IN.
ARGUE THE POINT.
DON'T CHANGE THE SUBJECT AGAIN.
THEN I WILL THINK YOU ARE a bit more CREDIBLE.
Great News -- ITS ABOUT TIME!!
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In the chess game over health care reform, the White House's last move was to say Democrats might use a procedural move to get a bill through without working with Republicans."
You are still an idiot. The "reconciliation vote" in the Senate you are alluding to will not allow the public option to go through, in fact it will limit the entire proposed bill to only certain parts. Thus, the Dems loose credibility and the bill looses the Dems major points. Maybe you should study a little better instead of constantly chastising Kenneth with your ignorance.
I see where you chose to not post my last remarks so let's try this again. Quoting you-
READ THIS 8 TIMES. PERHAPS IT WILL SINK IN.
ARGUE THE POINT.
DON'T CHANGE THE SUBJECT AGAIN.
THEN I WILL THINK YOU ARE a bit more CREDIBLE.
I don't think anyone would call this a civil response. I am not stupid as you are suggesting. Only a stupid person would have to read something 8 times to understand it. That remark was totally unnnecessary. Also, please point out where I have changed the subject. The subject is healthcare reform, right? Isn't that what I was remarking on?
No idea is lame-brained until you have opened your mind and really tried to understand it. One can disagree with it but have a little respect for other's ideas besides your own without belittling people. Obama said himself just yesterday that he wants input from the Republicans also. I think if the loopholes were removed from the Obama bill in its present form that many would stop being angry and support it. Isn't that what we all want? What is wrong with a compromise? We truly do need healthcare reform so let's work together on this from both sides.
If you choose again not to post my remarks or come back insulting me again then I know you don't really want to work together and there is no point in my input in here anymore. I will then understand why you have so few members in your blog posting in here.
Kenneth
Liquid,
I see you could not stay away. However, I am still going to block you since you continue to use your name-calling vs civility. Of course you like Kenneth. You two are peas in a pod. I only allowed this comment to pass because I wanted to clarify a point for you and for my readers.
Earlier I posted a quote from CNN referencing a "procedural move" the Dems may use without using the Repugs. This procedural move is called "reconciliation." This procedure scares Repugs to death. That means a bill can pass without any support from them. We have 60 votes.
Here is how it works:
Congress includes reconciliation instructions in the healthcare bill. Those instructions direct certain sub-committees to produce healthcare-reform legislation hitting certain targets by a certain deadline. Once finished, the legislation is tossed back to Committee, which staples it together into an overall Healthcare bill and sends it to the floor of the Senate for 20 hours of debate (no long filibusters) followed by an up-or-down vote.
What Liquid is saying is, he does not believe the public option would survive the reconciliation process. And, quite frankly, when you put a bill through this process, the "slap back together" process will probably eliminate some aspects, but in the end, a version of the bill will pass. Liquid thinks this will cause the Dems to lose credibility. I think Liquid is wrong. So do many others. In fact, Ezra Klein wrote in his column tuesday:
the 2004 Dean proposal, which I've been talking about lately, offers a good example of the sort of bill you could pass. Dean basically folds the Children's Health Insurance Program and Medicaid into one program called the Families and Children Health Insurance Program and makes everyone up to 185 percent of the poverty line eligible for it. He also allows people between the ages of 55 and 65 to buy into Medicare. He creates a tax credit for people in the middle.
Those changes alone would be a lot less than what we're looking at in health-care reform. They would cover, and help, many millions fewer than the House bill. But they would nevertheless help a lot of people. And they are directly related to federal programs and directly reliant on federal expenditures. Fund them through Medicare and Medicaid changes, alongside a small surtax on the wealthy, and it's tough to see anything that would give the Senate parliamentarian cause to object.
That's not a great outcome, but that's probably the best you can get in reconciliation, and it would be a step forward. And as a conceptual matter, that's probably the best way to think about reconciliation: as a place where you can aggressively expand public programs, rather than a place where you can reform the American health-care system. Depending on how you look at it, it's second, or third, or fifth-best. But it's better than nothing.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS, THIS IS WORKABLE. THE DEMS WOULD APPROVE. THE BILL WOULD PASS. THE DEM CONSTITUENTS WOULD THINK WIN! AMERICAN PUBLIC THINKS THIS IS A STEP FORWARD BECAUSE SO MANY NOT PREVIOUSLY COVERED ARE NOW COVERED.
IN THE EYES OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC REPUBLICANS LOSE - LOSE. WE DID IT WITHOUT THEM AND THAT IS WHAT REPUBLICANS ARE AFRAID OF!
Kenneth,
My, my. So sensitive for a grown man. I moderate out comments with profanity, name calling or off subject. Obviously your last comment included one of the three, hence - moderated out.
YOU STILL ARE REFUSING TO ANSWER MY QUESTION AND TRY TO SWITCH THE SUBJECT FOR ME TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OR APOLOGIZE TO YOU FOR YOUR HURT FEELINGS. No time for that so don't expect it.
The point of my blog, for this post was an Open Letter to President Obama from me saying the Patriotic Americans, especially those that support him, want a Public Option!
Dee
PS: Kenneth, stay or go. It's up to you. As I have shared, I already have a healthy following of 10,000+ viewers per month and growing. On my blog, we talk both sides of the issue and will continue to do so. No one will squelch my point of view on my blog.
Well if someone implies that you are stupid wouldn't you be offended to? I am sure you were offended since one blogee just called you an idiiot. Is there a double standard here?
I never used any profanity in any of my posts even the ones you chose not to post. Profanity is cuss words. I don't cuss.
I asked where I got off topic but you never pointed out where I did that. Why is that? I am discussing healthcare reform just like your topic states. Public option is a part of the healthcare reform bill in regards to your letter to Obama. I thought that Ultima brought forth an optional idea worth considering on the public option and I commented on that. How is that getting off topic?
You may have thousands of viewers but if you haven't noticed already not many post in here. Perhaps you should question why not? I haven't seen anyone squelching your views unless you call offering a different point of view "squelching". Yet in the very same paragraph you said we talk different views in here. Now I am really confused.
What question of yours didn't I answer? I assure you it was just an oversight then. I will be glad to answer any of your questions. Will you also answer mine?
Kenneth
Kenneth,
In answer to your two questions:
The option Ultima suggested was a bill which suggested a non-profit co-op. Is it better or more of the same? Does it stop the Health Insurers from continuing their monopoly and continuing to exclude thousands (each day) of Americans from healthcare due to "pre existing conditions?" Probably not. While it is better than status quo, it would be an option of last resort for most Democrats.
Your second question: Ultima spins and spins saying "he believes" the Healthcare plans would include "illeegals." He is wrong. None of the plans proposed include illegal immigrants. His reason? Because hospitals will not ask for citizenship papers.
Now think about what a spin this is. In order to be covered for Health Insurance by insurance carriers or by the government (e.g. Medicare) requires citizenship status, documentation and proof. No one takes it lightly. To receive your coverage card you certainly do have to produce documentation and it would be the same for the public option.
Now, for the issue Ultima is talking about. It has NOTHING to do with Universal Healthcare. He is just spinning. What he is really saying is, if an "illeegal" goes to the emergency room because his leg was cut off, will the hospital turn him away or sew his leg back on. The answer is today as it will be in the future: the hospital will not turn him away and sew his leg back on. But this has NOTHING to do with the Healthcare Reform bill.
Kenneth,
Additionally, I do allow Ultima to have a little room with his comment responses. (e.g. Obamabots, unpatriotic, mexifornia, aliens, etc.) The reason: he and I have been debating for years, even prior to my blog, back to 2006. Among all of the ANTIs, he is perhaps the most intelligent and civil.(He should be with his background) I like him to participate on my blog because he helps me improve my argument for other forums.
I moderate my blog. There are numerous ANTIs who are profane and abusive who try to participate on my blog, but I don't publish their profanity. I used to. Go back to comments prior to this year. Some of the arguments became pretty contentious. My PRO readers did not appreciate all of the negativity. So I started moderating them out. But they are still here. Now only I am forced to read them.
My PRO followers primarily agree with my posts and do not comment. We still stay connected and they email me.
WHY THE PUBLIC OPTION:
The Public Option is one option in a menu of Healthcare providers. It is there to ensure a competitive environment. No one has to pick it. It is available as a choice and will help drive down costs. It will ensure private insurers give you a good deal. This is like the deregulation of telecom. Prior to deregulation, we were paying dollars per minute. Now we pay pennies for unlimited talk times anywhere in the world.
WHY HEALTH REFORM IS NEEDED:
Insurance reform is direly needed. These reforms will make sure insurance companies can't cut you off or deny you due to pre-existing conditions, do not impose yearly caps of service and provides various consumer protections.
Insurance companies have us in a monopolistic stranglehold. 14,000 Americans lose their healthcare coverage EACH DAY! Millions are vulnerable to exclusion. And in this monopolistic environment, they have Medicare in a headlock with ever increasing, unneccessary monopolistic costs. Ex: Medicare can save $17B a year in these monopolistic costs with healthcare reform.
What Liquid is saying is, he does not believe the public option would survive the reconciliation process.
No, Every article out there is stating that PO will not go through if "reconciliation" is used. We all want a version of a bill to pass, the difference is in the wording. Ultima brings up Tort reform and various other points that would be better than what is currently proposed. Conservatives have brought up many options, except Progressives keep shooting them down. Welcome to politics.
As for staying away, I still read your posts, why else do you think I called you an idiot? You haven't changed, still as unruly and closed minded as ever.
In regards to "death panels" yes they are in the bill, not those exact words, but a panel non the less to help determine end of life choices, and as Obama has stated, maybe the blue pill is better than the red pill, cheaper too. The wording in the bill is "end of life counseling". Section 1233 to be exact. The problem is the interpretation by your side as euthanasia vs Conservatives side as meaning an analysis of the section itself.
For your reference:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html
"Having a plan that doesn't have a public option is worse than having doing nothing at all," said Congressman Weiner. "Leaving the insurance companies in charge of this is kind of like leaving a pyromaniac in charge of the fire department."
The originator of the term Death Panels:
. Sarah Palin
. Michelle Malkin
. Glenn Beck
. Limbaugh
. Hannity
. All of the Above XXXX Ding Ding
PS: "unruly" -- you obviously prefer to rule over your women/minorities. Silly silly statement!
Not EVERY article is saying PO will NOT go in if reconciliation occurs. Some do, but not EVERY. I believe, as some are saying, that some compromised, partial version will go in.(per my earlier reference)
Here's some more gratifying news:
Finance Committee to drop end-of-life provision
As you can now read, the Senate has now dropped the "end of life" provision from their Finance Committee version of the bill.
"On the Finance Committee, we are working very hard to avoid unintended consequences by methodically working through the complexities of all of these issues and policy options," Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a statement. "We dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly."
I think the biggest problem, from both sides, is that there is no actual bill yet from either the House or the Senate, only proposals. Right now the people are helping to craft these bills by the town hall meetings, letting all of Congress know what they want and they don't want in these bills. All you are doing is repeating Democrat Talking Points, ad nauseam.
Not EVERY article is saying PO will NOT go in if reconciliation occurs. Some do, but not EVERY. I believe, as some are saying, that some compromised, partial version will go in.(per my earlier reference)
Reconciliation Rules - Not Bipartisanship - Will Kill Health Care Reform
If reform gets bogged down, it will have to go through the Senate's reconciliation process. This is not good news for supporters of health care reform. In fact, it's awful news.
Reconciliation is just what the trillion dollars of vested interests who want to kill health care reform are hoping for. That's because they know something that few people in Washington have figured out: the Senate's very restrictive reconciliation rules will prevent a true health care reform bill from passing.
Has anyone here actually looked at the reconciliation process and the Byrd rule? Every committee would have to report a bill that reduced the deficit by $1 billion in five years. It would have to be deficit-neutral each year after that. It couldn't include "extraneous" material -- like all the vitally important changes to our health care delivery system. Or, if we couldn't find the savings, our grand health care reform achievement would have to sunset.
In short, health care reform under reconciliation wouldn't be health care reform at all. It would be a deficit reduction bill relating to health care. Or a reform package with an expiration date.
Now tell me, better yet please show an article that says PO will be in any reconciliation bill. I suggest you read the Byrd Rules as stated above, or better yet look to the explanation that Sen. Kent Conrad (D of ND) gave.
Liquid,
Thanks for the re-hash. We've been saying this ALL WEEK!
But it is good you are catching up.
I'm glad you support Universal Healthcare. As a small business owner, of course you support it.
We need to END the Insurer Monopoly! Once and for all!
Regarding PO -- WE NEED IT!!!
Regarding the impacts to PO through reconsiliation: we do realize there would be modifications and they may not/will not be as "good" as PO w/o rc. however, bill passage is still a very important first step and better than where we are today. One thing the repugs need to understand. WE CAN DO IT WITHOUT THEM!!!
Kenneth,
Your longer response to each paragraph of my last long response to you was totally off topic from this post. If you would like to email me discussion emails, my email is: dee_perezscott@yahoo.com
Kenneth,
Your longer response to each paragraph of my last long response to you was totally off topic from this post. If you would like to email me discussion emails, my email is: dee_perezscott@yahoo.com
Liquid wrote, "Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a statement. "We dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly."
This is a very important expression of the concerns of many about what is and what is not in the bill. Misinterpretation and incorrect implementation are what many are concerned about. As I have pointed out, the law prohibits illegal entry into our country but it occurs anyway because of the lack of secure borders, vigorous internal enforcement, and prompt repatriation and other failures on the part of the Administration. So of what value is the prohibition of illegal alien participation in the health care plan if there is no mandatory check of every applicant's bona fides, no enforcement mechanism, and no jail time and fines for fraud? That prohibition widely touted by Obama, Franks, and most Democrats is not worth the paper it is written on in HR 3200.
Grassley's remarks are the context in which the so-called myths about health care reform must be viewed. Congress will do anything to mislead us about those myths when in fact, without explicit and specific language that precludes the potential outcomes identified by the critics, those myths could become reality as in the illegal alien example.
Dee wrote, "I believe, as some are saying, that some compromised, partial version will go in."
Sen. Shumer said that PO needs to compete with private insurance on a level playing field. He did not spell out what this means. I don't see how that is possible even if government subsidies were extended to those with private insurance. The overhead and profit requirements of private insurers would still make them noncompetitive leading in short order to their demise. There are all kinds of estimates out there regarding how many of those with private insurance would ultimately end up in the PO, some as high as 119 million. I wonder how high that number would have to be to kill off all private plans.
Dee wrote, "Insurance reform is direly needed. These reforms will make sure insurance companies can't cut you off or deny you due to pre-existing conditions, do not impose yearly caps of service and provides various consumer protections."
I think there is a lot of agreement on the above. The Congress has dealt with monopolies before and can do it again but just outlawing the onerous practices you have listed above. I don't believe a public option is necessary to cure these ills. Our medical establishment -- doctors and hospitals -- are not prepared to handle another 47 million people. Surely everyone can see that this will result in some folks treating medical care as a free good thus compounding the difficulty in treating the larger number of people. Everyone should also be able to see from the Medicare/Medicaid examples that this could be a bottomless pit of additional multi-trillion dollar deficits.
Dee wrote, The problem is, people like Ultima and ALL the Republicans did whatever they wanted over the last 8 years and never, ever listened to our side."
This broad generalization is a lie. I personally wrote many letters to the Congress and the Administration during those eight years objecting to a number of things that were proposed and promoting needed measures that they were too timid or spineless to undertake themselves. Neither party is monolithic as demonstrated by the Blue Dog Dems. Republicans were generally disappointed that with control of the White House and the Congress, nothing much got done during that eight year period. It should be no surprise if the Dems break their pick in a similar fashion. This is just the nature of politics when on both sides of the aisle there are few statesmen. I admit some of my ideas would be opposed by the insurance companies and therefore by those of both parties who are in the pockets of those companies. The pall of politics and lobbyists hangs over Washington just as it did when the Republicans were in control.
I found it interesting that Sen. Hatch mentioned today that if Ted Kennedy was around he would just say, "Let's get together and work something out." That is the most positive statement I have ever heard about Ted. I don't know if he would be able to find a way out of this mess or not. Flexibility and the ability to craft reasonable compromises are what is needed and this applies to both parties. I am disappointed that some Republicans have stated they will not vote in favor of any health care reform bill. That sounds like pure politics with no regard for constituents. It may backfire on them instead of returning them to power in the congress.
I would like to see enforceable criteria or goals established for cost reduction in drugs and insurance. That probably can't be done.
Dee wrote, "Insurance Companies spend 40% of their revenue on Ads and Marketing and Promotions. Plus multi millions for CEO and Management Stock Options."
This is true of almost all major companies. You have never dealt with the question: "If a public option is good in the health insurance industry, why isn't it good for all other insurance companies and other industries?" Don't you see where this would lead logically? How do you distinguish between health insurance and other industries?
Dee wrote,"Medicare can save $17B a year in these monopolistic costs with healthcare reform."
Medicare is administered by private companies like United Health. Are you proposing that federal employment be expanded to do this job instead of contracting it out?
Dee wrote, "Dems may use without using the Repugs."
Does this mean we can refer to Democrats as "Democruds" without being deleted?
Ultima,
How many times do I have to say, THERE ARE NO DEATH PANELS IN THE BILL.
The only MISINTERPRETATIONS are from the likes of Betsy McCaughey who initiated this idiotic discussion.
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/08/i_was_wrong.php
THERE ARE NO DEATH PANELS.
THOSE THAT SAY THERE ARE ARE LIARS.
NO MISINTERPRETATIONS.
JUST LIES - FABRICATIONS.
AND ONLY THE BLIND DRONES EXCEPT THESE LIES AS FACTS.
SO LET'S CLOSE THIS.
IT IS A LIE CREATED BY THE RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS LIKE MCCAUGHEY AND PALIN!
Ultima said..Sen. Shumer said that PO needs to compete with private insurance on a level playing field. He did not spell out what this means. I don't see how that is possible even if government subsidies were extended to those with private insurance.
Ultima,
FOR A START.. they will cut the unneccessary costs they imposed on ALL of us as the MONOPOLY THEY ARE!!
Don't you get it? Or are you just pretending not to get it.
The insurance companies are a Monopoly. As a Monopoly, they are imposing on all of us outrageous pricing strategies. As long as we let them continue as a Monopoly, they will continue their tactics.
Read this 10 times.
Please let these fact sink in.
Then we can talk about it!
Another thing to READ 10 times. I have said this several times before. READ IT 10 TIMES TO LET IT SINK IN:
THERE IS NO HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE UNDOCUMENTED IN THE BILL.
WHAT YOU ARE CONFUSING IS THE FOLLOWING:
IF AN UNDOCUMENTED GOES TO AN EMERGENCY ROOM WITH HIS LEG CUT OFF, THE EMER ROOM WILL TREAT HIS WOUNDS.
THIS IS NOT INSURANCE.
IT IS TREATMENT FOR THE EMERGENCY WOUNDS FOR THOSE WITHOUT COVERAGE.
NOW DO YOU GET IT????
RE: INSURANCE CO. DENYING THOSE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS.
Ulitma said.....I don't believe a public option is necessary to cure these ills.
Ultima:
I believe you are being VERY NAIVE! Do you just WANT TO BELIEVE that they will cure their own ills? What don't you understand about the need for competition????
You are living in a dream world if you think that the insurance companies, just by their say so, will resolve their issues (including "pre-existing conditions") because they say they will correct them.
THEY NEED COMPETITION.
Having a public option WILL, in FACT, provide them viable competition.
If you don't see that then you need a new pair of glasses.
Post a Comment