Obama: McCain health plan 'radical'

Unbelievable. Sarah Palin finished her closing remarks by quoting Ronald Reagan:

It was Ronald Reagan who said that freedom is always just one generation away from extinction. We don’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream; we have to fight for it and protect it, and then hand it to them so that they shall do the same, or we’re going to find ourselves spending our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children about a time in America, back in the day, when men and women were free.

When did he say this? It was on a recording he made for Operation Coffeecup — a campaign organized by the American Medical Association to block the passage of Medicare. Doctors’ wives were supposed to organize coffee klatches for patients, where they would play the Reagan recording, which declared that Medicare would lead us to totalitarianism.

You couldn’t make this stuff up--Paul Krugman

Obama ain't right on this one. the more I read, the more I see Obama's hand in our pockets. Obama is arrogant and hoping to set the IRS up to redistribute wealth from those who earn it. What a scam. Tax credits for those who did not earn it. http://www.bop-o-rama.com
Bop some sense into Nobama!
McCain/Palin '08

What's the over / under for when McCain goes completely negative?

How DARE John McCain TRUST AMERICANS to make good decisions about their lives!

We all know that ONLY THE GOVERNMENT CAN MAKE GOOD DECISIONS. Just look at how the Government took care of Wall St.! Look at how the Government handles welfare and Chicago Public Schools and Medicare and Social Security and making America self-sufficient on energy! The Government is clearly perfect, and we just don't care as much as the government does.

It is time to let the government decide everything for us. It is too scary to decide what town to live in or what school to go to or what supermarket to shop. We are clearly incapable of deciding what car to buy or what radio station to listen to. Just ask any Democrat.

So VOTE FOR OBAMA AND LET HIM DECIDE EVERYTHING FOR EVERYONE.

Only people who want to have any control in their lives should vote for McCain.

OBAMA will force us to have MANDATORY HEALTH CARE whether you want it OR CAN AFFORD IT OR NOT. A surrogate was on the news saying it has to be MANDATORY to get the prices down. THAT IS BALAGNA ! ! !

McCain is going to allow you to shop NATION WIDE, and it's going to bring more people into the market especially with his $5000.00 credit so cost are lowered....and that will help many employers to offer larger numbers of people health care as well because they won't be stuck with the full cost...they can offset it with the money credit govt is sending us.

THE TAX ON INSURANCE that you recieve from your employer won't amount to more than a couple hundred dollars a year BUT you're also getting that $5000.00 credit every year.

The average health care insurance that you would buy OUTSIDE of an employer usually runs you $535.00 per month for a family which will cost you $6400.00 a year.....figure that MINUS THE $5000.00 credit and it will cost you OUT OF POCKET $118.00 per month...which is what most people spend on their cable bill per month.

SO, if it's THAT IMPORTANT TO YOU then YOU MAY HAVE TO CANCEL YOUR CABLE BILL but at least with this plan you have A CHOICE IF YOU WANT THE INSURANCE COVERAGE OR NOT.

I WANT AN OPTION not MANDITORY. I like my cable and I'm healthy.

The only thing that's radical in the election is how Palin is getting treated by the media. Biden makes stupid statements like President Roosevelt went on television in 1929 and you barely hear a peep out of the media on that goofy statement.

Yeah, McCain's plan offers us more choices! The choice to die of diabetes, or cancer, or sepsis, or lupus, or stroke, or pneumonia, or melanoma, ad infinitum.... His 'plan' is a joke and is almost identical to the plans his party leaders have been floating for years -- tax breaks, private insurance carriers, tax deductions, public clinics, blah blah. Sounds great to the untrained ear, but in reality is just a bunch of banana oil designed to preserve the status quo and help out his friends in the private insurance industry. Even the AMA does not support this type of "plan."

$2,500 to buy private insurance! Ha! Good luck trying to find that on the open market, assuming one can even get private insurance at all. Which, of course, one must remember, NO private insurance company is obliged to offer anyone coverage. Got a pre-existing condition or are over age 40? Good luck!

Like Obama or not, the Democratic Edwards-Clinton-Obama type health reform plan is the one that will have a chance of working. McCain's is more of the same garbage.

Obama is the only radical in this race. His ideas that he has lifted from other left-wing sources are the most radical ever proposed in American history. This, however, should not surprise anyone due to his radical associations. Obama continually lies about McCain's forward looking, progressive health care plan. Palin is right that Obama's radical left-wing terrorist allies need to be exposed. Obama still has not answered why Robert Malley, his campaign advisor met with Hamas shortley before Hamas endorsed Obama. Why does Obama support the activities of terrorist Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn? Obama is the most dangerous threat to American freedom that we have ever faced.

I might add that Obama's MANDITORY HEALTH CARE WILL COST $65 BILLION EVERY YEAR.

Both Obama and Biden are strong supporters of Israel. Further more they have the diplomatic skill to keep the peace in the world and allow Israel to live in peace and prosper. McCain will shake things up in the middle east and Israel’s security will be at risk. Obama/Biden is the sensible choice.

The NY TIMES has written an article about Obama and Ayers in which they try and explain it all away as if it was nothing. Here is a piece of and article that responds to this, and this is the site>http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/04/the-new-york-times-drops-the-ball-on-ayers-and-obama/
***********************************
So what? The issue is not who actually sat down with Barack Obama in March 1995 and asked him to become the chairman of this board. No. There are two critical, unanswered questions. First, why was an inexperienced lawyer like Barack Obama asked to chair this board? Second, why has Barack refused to discuss in detail what he did with this board and his interactions with Bill Ayers during the four years he chaired this effort?

That is what does not make sense. Obama is running for President and faces the charge that he lacks significant experience running anything. Okay, here he is chairman of a board that was responsible for raising and disbursing more that $100 million dollars and Obama says nothing about this time in his life? Why? Because he did regularly interact and exchange ideas with Bill Ayers. Look carefully at the statement issued by the Obama campaign, “they have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005.”

Got that? But they were speaking and exchanging email prior to January 2005. We also now know that Ayers is communicating with Obama through David Axlerod. Axlerod and Ayers have been in regular communication on figuring out how to manage the potential fallout from the public learning that Barack Obama for many years thought it was okay to work with and accept advice from an unrepentant terrorist. Those are uncomfortable facts and go to the essence of the charge that challenging Obama’s judgment in hanging out with unsavory characters–e.g., Ayers, Rezko, Wright. It is both troubling and reflects a bizarre lack of political acumen for someone allegedly such a gifted politician.

If you want to let the NY Times know what you think here is the address: public@nytimes.com

Obama and his fellow socialists want the government to take over the nation's health care system, 17% of the entire economic activity of the country, and McCain's plan is radical.
With the help of the treasonous mainstream media in this country, he may win the election, especially since he has a virtual lock on the 'stupid' vote.
Without that group voting in force for Dems, his party would not have won a single Presidential election since FDR. For the sake of the country, it's a shame he even has a chance.

"McCain's campaign responded with a statement that referenced a front-page story in the New York Times on Saturday about Obama's relationship with 1960s radical Bill Ayers."

- JM

"Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again."

- Sarah Palin, just 3 days ago.

It's laughable that the McCain camp wants to talk about a relationship Obama has had with someone who did something in the 1960s. But when the Obama campaign wants to point out McCain's ties to the CURRENT Bush administration, the "team of mavericks" complains that that's looking "backwards."

They may be stupid in Alaska, but this is the big time, folks.

As for McCain's healthcare plan, to quote the beautiful Sarah Palin, "...too often you're the problem so, government, lessen the tax burden and on our families and get out of the way and let the private sector and our families grow and thrive and prosper."

FACTS, people, FACTS:

1. 2001-April, the Bush administration, in its 2002 budget proposal, asserted that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is a "potential problem," and that financial trouble in these Government Sponsored Entities, or GSEs, could "cause strong repercussions in financial markets."

2. 2003, autumn, the Bush administration pushed Congress to create a new federal agency to regulate and supervise Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

On 2003-Sep-10, then-Treasury Secretary John Snow, before the House Financial Services Committee, " We need a strong, world-class regulatory agency to oversee the prudential operations of the GSEs, and the safety, and the soundness of their financial activities."

On the same day, 2003-Sep-10, at the same hearing, the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee Congressman Barney Frank (now chairman of the same committee) said in response, "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in a crisis. The more people, in my judgement, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjur up the possibility of serious financial losses, to the Treasury, which I do not see, I think we see entities which are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios, and even if there were a problem the federal government doesn't bail them out. But the more pressure there is there, the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing."

The legislation the Bush administration put forward that day was blocked.

3. Alan Greenspan, 2005-Sep-17, to the House Financial Services Committee, on Fannie/Freddie, "Enabling these institutions to increase in size--they they will once the crisis in their judgement passess--we are placing the total financial system of the future at substantial risk."

4. Alan Greenspan, 2006-Apr-6, "If we fail to strengthen GSE regulation we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis."

The same day, Democratic Senator Chuck Schummer, "I think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years has done a good job and are an intrinsic part of making America the best-housed people in the world. If you look over the last 20 or whatever years, they have done a very, very, good job."

5. Senate floor, 2006-May-25, John McCain, "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac... and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market... the GSEs need to be reformed without delay." In the Senate Banking Committee, the Fannie/Freddie reform legislation that McCain cosponsored, 100% of the Republicans voted FOR it, and 100% of the Democrats, including Chuck Schummer and Chris Dodd, voted AGAINST it. This bill that passed the Banking Committee on a straight party-line voted was blocked by Democrats from passing the full Senate. Senator Obama was silent on this legislation.

As we know now, Dodd received $133,900 in campaign contributions from Fannie/Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #1 in Congress. Obama received $105,949 from Fannie / Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #3 in Congress.

6. 2008-Sep-25, former President Clinton indicated he AGREED with Fox News assertions that Democrats are responsible for failure to rein in Fannie/Freddie--Bill Clinton told ABC's Chris Cuomo that for years, Democrats have been "resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

I'm curious if the trolls who write the anti-Obama bile here (using much the same style, syntax and punctuation) are in fact one person?

With the recent passage of the bailout -- which picks the pocket of every American citizen to rescue the corporate elite who made the mess -- we now have corporate socialism. We now have business putting pressure on government to pass legislation that puts the government at the service of business instead of the people. The bailout was probably necessary, but people who claim that no government is necessary seem to be pretty quick to support a bailout when their own dough is at risk. Hypocrisy on toast.

You don't like socialism? Then protest corporate socialism and don't be a hypocrite.

* * * * *
Posted by: that's expensive | October 4, 2008 4:40 PM
*
It will cost more than $65 billion, it will represent duplicate, inefficient government (given the existence of Medicare, Medicaid, SChip and a variety of other government medical programs), and people will still be dissatisfied with it. This will just serve as a stepping stone to a fully socialized medical system (ala Hillary care), touted as "the only answer" by all the left-flying sheeple out there. At that point, Ronald Reagan's predictions will have turned out to be true.
*
Ladies and Gentlemen, FREEDOM - and its preservation, is the basic, bedrock reason we have government. The moment the government rounds us all up, gives us an ear tag to go with the number we all get, and funnels us into a medical system that makes choices for us, and takes away half of our income (or more) to pay for it - is the moment we loose a substantial portion of our own personal privacy and autonomy. At that point, government loses its very reason for existence.
*
And why is this going to happen? It's going to happen because there are too many people in this country who lack spine, self-discipline or the urge to make their own way in the world; people who have developed a mentality of dependency upon government. It is the product of our education system that says government dependence is a good thing, as well as social inculcation to the same effect. That is not only a tragedy, it is a sin.
*
In addition, the problem with governmental intervention, in the field of health care, finances or otherwise, is that it causes "moral hazards." That is, it insulates people from having to bear the full risk or consequences of their actions. People who do not suffer those risks or consequences tend to act with less care and circumspection because they have no motivation to do otherwise. In a universal health care system, doctors and hospitals will have little motivation to be competitive in their pricing or services because they do not face the loss of business regardless of what they do. Likewise, patients in a fully funded system will have fewer incentives to keep from smoking, excessive drinking, drug abuse, eating too much or of the wrong thing, or refraining from engaging in dangerous behavior (be it unprotected sex or hang gliding in thunderstorms). They too will know they have nothing to fear about losing their coverage. All of this is bound to drive the prices of any health care system through the roof, thus burdening the many with the consequences of bad behavior by the few. That is neither an efficient nor socially acceptable result if we still cherish freedom.

* * * * *
Posted by: Jeffrey Sweet | October 4, 2008 7:40 PM
*
But we have been protesting against it, Jeffrey. Most conservatives hate the recent bailout. (Hint: George W. Bush is not a conservative.) Socialism isn't any better because it favors corporations.

Wait, a second I'm confused by RNC talking points. At the end they complain about Obama offering more government in health care, yet isn't McPalin's stance that unlike other Repubs, they are for regulation and oversight? The facts are that McCain approaches health care just as he approaches other industries. With an eye for the interests of the health care insurance companies with his admitted goal of deregulating health care like they have deregulated banking.

Obama should be careful who he calls radical. He associates with radicals and is the real radical. I don't want to pay for another govt. program. Free pre K when we don't even have full day preschool. Free healthcare to all is the end all, and another way for illegals to want to continue to come here. tax credits is the way to go, also putting a cap on these lawsuits which have driven up our cost as well as decreased our access to quality care and doctors. I support Mccain and do not agree with universal healthcare which will decrease the quality of our healthcare.

What is also scary about McCain's health care plan is that insurance companies would still be able to deny you for pre-existing conditions, or charge exorbitant rates for them - meaning just about anyone over 40 would either not be able to afford it or would be denied. Then, to make matters worse, McCain said just last month he wants to deregulate the Health Insurance business. Now that we know what deregulation has done for the economy, we can unleash its claws on health care too. And if you've ever had to apply for a private policy, buyer beware. You do your own underwriting. Then, should you have to file a catastrophic claim, the insurance company finally does its own underwriting in an effort to deny you coverage for failing to report in your application that, say, you once saw a doctor for strep thoat when you file your claim for, say, a brain tumor. Why such practices are not illegal is beyond me, because they most certainly are immoral

Why don't some of you yokels in the mainstream media tell people exactly what McCain's plan includes? If they actually knew the details of the plan, they'd agree fully that it's a "radical" plan. Come to think of it, if McCain ever read "his" plan he might even agree that it's radical.

Calling his opponent's plan "radical," Sen. Barack Obama returned to the issue of health care on Saturday in an effort to stay on the offensive as he campaigned in this traditionally Republican state.
-- wow, is Obama saying that this is TOO MUCH change?

Jeffrey> Here is one more way Obama supports socialism>

BIDEN actually told Americans that Obama not only supports adjusting the interest but ALSO ADJUSTING THE PRINCIPLE on bad loans in the Palin vs Biden debate. Here is his exact quote>

Number two, with regard to bankruptcy now, Gwen, what we should be doing now -- and Barack Obama and I support it -- we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you're paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.

That would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it from going under. But John McCain, as I understand it -- I'm not sure of this, but I believe John McCain and the governor don't support that.

There are ways to help people now. And there -- ways that we're offering are not being supported by -- by the Bush administration nor do I believe by John McCain and Gov. Palin.
*****************************
THAT'S RIGHT BIDEN>the American people are outraged by the bailout BUT to add CUTTING THE PRINCIPLE which is the PRICE OF THE LOAN THEY GOT IS FLAT OUT STEALING MONEY FROM THE BANKS ASSETS THEY ARE OWED.

It would be like a judge telling your employer that he only has to pay you a portion of what you are owed and then you have to be happy with it and make do with it. YOU WOULD GO BROKE and quick ! ! !

Look, Obama's goal is like any other Modern Liberal's goal: take power from individuals and give the government (ruling class) the power.

Everything that Modern Liberals come up with is based on the idea that things are "unequal" and must be MADE equal. So, to the Modern Liberal, everything that is good, successful and right must be torn down and everything that is evil, failed and wrong must be elevated so we come to a middle ground where there is nothing to fight over. When the anti-war people talk about "peace", thi sis what they mean. Read Lennon's "Imagine" lyrics too.

To Modern Liberals, one of the approches is to take make the governemnt run everything so they can ENFORCE everything being equal.

That's why normal reason bounces off Modern Liberals; they couldn't care less about how good things are under democratic capitalism or how their ideas will hurt people because, to them, their goals of everyone being equal are worthy and supreme.

Watch the video "How Modern Liberals Think" at YouTube: youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c

It's very, very good and explains why Modern Liberals are like they are.

Joe posted-It's laughable that the McCain camp wants to talk about a relationship Obama has had with someone who did something in the 1960s.

How about a relationship Obama had for the past 20 years until after he started running for office-

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1594786/jesus_was_a_poor_black_man_says_barack_obamas_pastor/

Both Obama and Biden are strong supporters of Israel. Further more they have the diplomatic skill to keep the peace in the world and allow Israel to live in peace and prosper. Eric4:59 PM

UH OH, SAY IT AIN'T SO JOE>

Headline News
Monday, September 01, 2008 Israel Today Staff

Biden told Israel to accept nuclear Iran

US Senator and vice presidential hopeful Joe Biden reportedly told Israeli officials three years ago that sooner or later they would have to reconcile themselves to the reality of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Israel's Army Radio reported on the remarks, which Biden is said to have made to visiting Israeli officials in his capacity as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

According to the report, Biden reaffirmed to the Israelis his rejection of military action against Iran, but also admitted that diplomatic efforts to halt Iran's nuclear program had little or no chance of success. In essence, Biden resigned himself to the idea of a nuclear-armed Iran and told the Israelis that they, too, would have to accept that outcome.

Israeli security officials on Monday expressed concern over the remarks and saw them as further evidence that if Biden and his running mate, Senator Barack Obama, win the upcoming US presidential election, Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons will be a foregone conclusion.

Israeli experts warn that it is only the real threat of force that stands a chance of convincing the mullahs and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to give up their nuclear ambitions.

John W- the thing that nobody is looking at is that every government program goes up EACH YEAR, so lets make this simple....lets say the program goes up 10% the next year. If Obama is right and the cost of his plan is $65 Billion, the next year at a minimum it will be $71 Billion and in ten years you're looking at the cost of the CURRENT BAILOUT $700 Billion a year and no end in sight of the cost going up.

DOES THIS MAKE SENSE!? Obama is not ready to lead. He doesn't understand basic economics.

12 - 5 = 7

12: As in 12000, the average value of employer sponsored health coverage.

5: John McCain's $5K proposed credit that you can supposedly take to the insurance compny to get your individual insurance

7: The difference! An insurance company is not going to give you coverage valued at $12K for $5K. Think higher deductibles, lower coverage amounts, exclusions, and every other impedent imaginable including rescinding coverage. So ask yourself when Johnny Mac gives me five, where am I going to get the other seven. Another big assumption.... an insurance company will actually be willing to offer YOU and YOURS coverage.

RFK and the fierce urgency of now ...

For those who, looking around unsatisfied with things as they are, share Robert F. Kennedy's challenge to dream of things as they never were, and say, why not?

Obama-Biden '08!

Wake up America!!!

Obama's "Universal" health-care = redistribution of wealth = socialism

Oprahma: Is it by some wild coincidence that your camp is using the word 'radical' TODAY to describe McCain's health care plan? Sarah Palin had some eerily similar interesting comments about your personal associations TODAY as well. Your campaign may pander to those that don't keep up with current events, but some of us keep up with current events.

Spector wrote:

"Like Obama or not, the Democratic Edwards-Clinton-Obama type health reform plan is the one that will have a chance of working. "

So let's see, your idea of a great plan is to radically change the way approximately 85% of the population gets coverage to account for the 15% who are uninsured. What's left out when we discuss that 15% is the % within there that opt to not purchase insurance because they are young and healthy or are willing to play Russian Roulette because they KNOW the government will bail them out and pay their costs through one of the many GIVE AWAY, oh you probably prefer I call them Entitlement programs.

I do agree we should find a way to provide coverage to the uninsured who want coverage but can't afford it, but please explain to me what does the SCHIP program, the multitude of State programs in place to provide pool coverage for those who have a difficult time getting coverage, etc., not do that this great plan presented by two of the MOST LIBERAL senators offer to fill the so called gap in coverage for this 15%? It seems clear to me that the purpose of the plans put forward by Edwards and Obama allow further government control of the health care industry. Look at how well the Medicare programs work and tell me if you want to be subject to these programs.

The other issue I have is the fact that the two senators proposing this plan are both attorneys and one, Edwards, made millions on malpractice suits against OB doctors for "causing" cerabal palsy to the point now 1 out of 4 babies are born via C section even thought many mainstream medical journals, including the AMA, have found that they were unnecessary but were performed to "manage risk" created by Edwards litigation. Not suprising is that neither addressed any kind of control of litigation by the trial lawyers of America, who own the DNC and most of the Country at this point, by putting forward caps in damages in cases where no negligence can be found on the part of the practioner. Do you realize Spector that the average MD pays HALF their top line revenue to their malpractice insurance provider. Who exactly do you think they pass that cost on to? But of course you and your liberal friends can't answer , or let's face it, don't want to answer that question, especially our esteemed senator Durbin who takes money from the American Bar Association and Trial Lawyers of America like its water.

Finally, under the so called wonderful by Spector Obama/Edwards plan say goodbye to any kind of medical innovation. Why should anyone bother. Ask the Soviet Union how Nationalized health care works.

You Chicago race baiters BEST vote for my terrorist buddy Hussein or I will bomb your mamas house!Just remember Hussein IS a terrorists best Friend! Hussein/BinBiden 08 Change you will bereave in!

It will be criminal if whatever health plan finally developed and adopted does not cover mental health which is the largest single drain on social services in the U.S to say nothing of how it tears apart families with members who suffer.

This is one of many areas where military health services are far, far and away superior to anything in the private sector. In fact, too bad more young people don't go in the military since so many of them come from screwed up or otherwise dysfunctional families. The military does wonders with young people. But in this voluntary military era, comparatively few get a chance.

Corporate America and the insurance companies will have to be dragged kicking and screening to the table about mental health.

Right on Mr. Sweet....

Indeed Republican 'bile'. We are all in today's mess because of Republican leadership (both social and economic). "Making decisions for themselves'...the American way. Let's bail out the selfish wealthy (because they 'earned it') and not be concerned with making the right decision on healthcare. Let's invade a country for purposes of oil and special interests; and then spend more money to rebuild the military. It's hard to be the greatest nation in the world when Republican's continuously dirt on the rest of the world. There's no wonder we attract the degenerates of the world...the Republican's ask for it everytime they write their 'bile'.

I think Obama should put Barney Frank or Chris Dodd in charge of healthcare, he did such a good job with Fannie & Freddie. Or better yet, how about Emil Jones or Jesse Jr.?

If you think being unable to obtain health insurance and therefore a doctor's care is "Freedom," by all means go without health insurance. There's no law on the books right now that says you have to have health insurance, except in Massachusetts.

I would bet, however, that most of you posting here HAVE a health insurance policy, most of them provided by your employer. Kiss em goodbye if McCain takes office. McCain's plan disincentivizes employer-sponsored health insurance. And taxes as income any such plan that is offered.

So your $5000 tax credit is supposed to cover your annual cost of medical insurance and care? Good luck with that! Especially if you have a family, a pre-existing condition, or are not a teenager.

Yet, the "Free Market of Medical Providers" is going to lower the cost for EVERYBODY! With magical ponies!

Look, can YOU shop around for a lower priced medical procedure when you are in pain? No? Can you tell an ambulance to take you to the lower-priced hospital when you are unconscious? Or when your child is injured?

The Wall Street meltdown is only the latest example of how FLAWED Republican faith in Free Markets Only actually is.

Radical Health Care says: "every government program goes up EACH YEAR."

And prices in the private sector NEVER rise! Like the price of gas?

The whole philosophy behind McCain's "health" proposal is that we plebians have TOO MUCH insurance! By eliminating health care coverage, you see, we will all spend our OWN money on doctors and hospitals, and therefore choose less health "products" and bring the price down.

Nice theory, til you get sick. In practice, if it is YOUR loved one, you will pay any price.

If McCain didn't vote for better benefits for VETERANS what makes anyone think he cares about THE REST OF US???

Why, comment about McCain voting against veteran benefits bills and then fail to mention all that was attached!?

Athena- General costs in the private sector (if the govt stays out of it unlike the oil business) don't go up at the same rate as govt programs....so to say that the costs go up is a mute point.

If we have more control over our health care and we're not paying for all these repetative tests that Drs and hospitals like to give us then costs will come down.

Now, Obama's plan...if you get a serious illness you best make your best stop at a funeral home to plan out your funneral because UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE almost never pays for catastrophic illnesses.

If you really think the Obama or McCain health plan is real read this FackCheck on both the Obama AND McCain Health Plans!

http://strategicthought-charles77.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-mccain-health-care-plans-fact.html