Obama: Be not afraid of health reform

Keep dissing those who attend town hall meetings, King Jerk. You continue to diss the American people at your own peril. ALL POLLS show that MOST Americans OPPOSE your health reform plans. We don't want the government in charge of health care. You said it yourself, the USPS is a mess and "Medicare is unsustainable."
THE ABSOLUTE WORST PRESIDENT EVER!

Denizens of the Swamp love their polls. So let's have one. Before you mount your soapbox, post your answers to the following 3 poll questions:
1) Do you have Medicare benefits (Y or N)?
2) If so, are you satisfied with the Medicare program (cast an N only if you have a real problem... you can get on your soapbox to amplify your response)?
3) Should Medicare be eliminated (Y or N)?

What I see as Obama's problem is that he continues to give people misinformation.

First of all, let people purchase health insurance across state lines and initiate tort reform. These two simple changes will produce tremendous reductions in costs without costing the public or the government a penny. His Bill is creating more government agencies which automatically increases costs..not reduces costs. Whenever the government starts a program with agencies the projected costs are never right, they increase in size and cost over time much more than projected.

The CBO has stated the Bill HR3200 will not save money but cost more than we presently are projected to spend on healthcare, this is run by a group that the democrats chose, are they using scare tactics?

Just remember the BS that we were given on the Stimulus Bill, who used the scare tactics to ram that "special interest pork bill" through..huh?

Don't let the venom and bad manners of Obama and ObamaCare supporters deter anyone from dissenting.

Don't let the Community Organizer-in-Chief tell you that community organizing is wrong. If community organizing FOR Obama is right, community organizing AGAINST ObamaCare is right. In fact, our Hypocrite-in-Chief is still doing his own "community organizing".

Obama's attempted intimidation will backfire.

BE VERY AFRAID OF HEALTH CARE PERIOD! You are going to the agents of the devil. A very well-known doctor, Robert Mendelsohn (from ILLINOIS), said that. It is one of the great sins of this country that will bring it down!

He sites Social Security and Medicare as great examples. Let's look at some facts:

In 1937, Social Security started out with a 2% tax on the employee's first $3,000 of income. Now we are up to 12.4% of an employee's first $106,800. So what was a $60/yr tax has now become $13,243/yr tax. In other words, the dollar value of that tax 220 times larger than when it started.

Medicare started as a .35% of an employee's first $6,600 of income. Now the rate is 1.45% on an unlimited amount of an employee's income.

Why is that - because the gov't underestimated the cost of the program, just as they do with all programs. What makes you think this will be different? This won't cost a trillion per year - do the math and at least double or triple it.

Bo states that we will be able to keep our employer plan. That is until either the employer writes a check to the gov't and says for the gov;t to cover us or the health insurance company goes under because they can't compete against the gov't who has an unlimited amount of capital.

What is the rush to pass this bill which doesn't start coverage until 2013, although the tax increases start in 2011?

Why in a 1000+ page bill is there no mention of malpractice insurance reform.

One thing to add to Senator Hatch's remark - open up the state insurance markets so more competition can foster - this will lead to lower prices.

Finally, to the medical community - especially the doctors - don't trust Obama on this; he thinks you are nothing but a bunch of mercanaries with scaples in your hands.

I know from first hand experience, the nonsense surrounding the healthcare insurance problem. I had negotiated healthcare, upon retirement, but less than a year into my retirement, by an act of state legislature, that stopped and I had to pay $580 dollars a month. That sum was taken from my pension of $1100 a month. I retired early due to an illness, to begin with, cancer. The treatment left me without the strength to continue to work. It has been a struggle to walk to the corner store. I am still in the fight with this illness, but now my premiums and out of pocket expenses are much more of a burden, than I had planned. I will not trouble you with the fight with cancer, itself. I had scans denied me, even at the recommendation of my oncologist, by the Healthcare Insurer. It was their expert opinion that I didn't need them. Obviously, their bureaucratic clerks are medical experts.
Sorry to burden you with my story, but I only present it, in order to back-up my position of actively supporting President Obama's healthcare initiative. I send his organizations, $10 or $15, occasionally, in hopes of enlightening the rest of America, as to difficulties that many, many Americans are experiencing, everyday with the American Healthcare Industry !! That is the reason that you may see my many posts. I believe President Obama's efforts are an honest attempt to solve a very serious problem, that is stalking America. That is why, I may overdo my comments, sometimes. We , as Americans, all, have a serious problem and it doesn't help if opponents of President Obama post distortions, lies and misinformation. I am not saying all of them are doing that, but the vast majority of them are, much to the detriment of our country, as a whole.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

Couple of comments on Obama's address. First, and I noticed this last week, he seems to be dropping the need for a so-called "public option" from his speeches. Not a peep about it in this address. Oversight? Maybe, but unlikely given a guy who chooses his words carefully in prepared speeches. Softening of his position on this? We'll see.

Second, the talk of people being able to keep their insurance under the House plan is not really accurate. The CBO found that the average cost to companies is 12% of payroll to cover health care, while the bill would only impose an 8% penalty if they didn't offer it. The CBO points out how some of that difference is offset, but acknowledges that at least a few million people will be forced to change when their company drops health coverage in favor of the penalty. Thus, to claim that you will be able to keep your health insurance is not really accurate.

Third, the things BO talked about in the weekly address, such as insurance companies dropping or refusing to insure people with pre-existing conditions, are areas where there is common ground. I think most Americans would be in favor of increased government regulation in these areas. The key is keeping the government in their proper role as regulators, as opposed to trying to run an insurance company.

Fourth, the things he focused on are coverage issues, which are no doubt important. What he is not addressing is spiraling costs. He hasn't connected the dots on how a so-called public option would lower costs. Indeed, Medicare is public, insures 40+ million Americans, and has done nothing to curb costs. It would seem to me that for a public option to bend the curb on costs, they would need a dominating market position to be able to dictate to providers what they will pay. That's not what BO has invisioned. At least he wont admit it if it is.

Fifth, the demonizing of private insurance companies may play well with a populist base, but I don't think making out an industry that you ackowledge being a central part of the future of health care is helpful or even necessary.

Finally, it is unfortunate that BO will not touch certain issues for political reasons. For example, the president of the AMA flat out told BO that doctors over-prescribe tests, and therefore drive up costs, to protect their rear ends from lawsuits. Obama wont touch this issue with a ten foot pole. That's unfortunate. I'm not saying that this is the primary or main reason for spiraling costs, but it is one factor out of many. To not even address it while claiming to be attempting comprehensive health care reform is disappointing. To avoid it for political reasons is even more so.

Obama to Americans:

Sit down.
Shut up.
Obey me, your leader.
Dissent is no longer patriotic.
Raise your voices only if you support me.
Hate who I tell you to hate.

It seems that many of the protesters are sincere in their beliefs, but so much misinformation and outright lies are being spread by organizations like FreedomWorks and CPR, assisted by the groups involved in swiftboating Kerry and funded by people in the health-care industry who don't want their piggy bank to get smashed. People don't realize they're being manipulated.

I would have a lot more respect for them if they offered alternatives, but they come empty-handed. The Republicans have had nearly 15 years to come up with a plan, and for at least 6 of those years, they had a majority in the legislature and a republican Pres, and still they have nothing.

IMHO, Pelosi has been the underdog for too long, and she's got to go. But republicans also have to re-learn that compromise doesn't mean you get everything you want.

Off topic, but here is something to be afraid of:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/no_20090316_4054.php

Political parties should do penance for their mistakes and just losing power is not enough. Part of that involves understanding why those mistakes were made and how to prevent them from happening again. Republicans, however, have done no penance. They just pretend that they did nothing wrong. But until they do penance they don't deserve any credibility and should be ignored until they do.

I want Republicans to admit they were wrong about Bush Jr and Cheney, accept blame for their mistakes, and take some meaningful action to keep them from happening again. Bush Jr. and Cheney should be treated as a pariahs, as Richard Nixon was for many years until he rebuilt his credibility by more or less coming clean about Watergate.

One reason this isn't happening is because the corporate media doesn't treat Republicans as if they are discredited. On the contrary, they often seem to be treated as if they have more credibility than the current administration. Just look at the silly issue of death panels and the fake corporate sponsored astroturfed Republican "protesters' at healthcare townhalls all over America. The corporate media should have laughed it out the window, ridiculed it or at least ignored it once it was determined that there was no basis to their charges.

Instead, those Republicans making the most outlandish charges are treated with deference and respect, while those that actually have credibility on the subject are treated as equals at best and often with deep skepticism, as if they are the ones with an ax to grind.

These are the very same right-wing leaning corporate media lackies who repeated, without question, word for word the Bush/Cheney/Republican lies about WMD's etc in Iraq before the initial invasion and for a long while afterwards as well.

Bush/Cheney/Republican policies failed so spectacularly, Republican candidates and officeholders are generally reluctant to associate themselves with the tarnished name of the previous administration. But Bush/Cheney policies are still those of the contemporary Republican Party. Nothing has changed. Failure and defeat haven't chastened the GOP at all, and if given a chance to govern again, Republican leaders are quite anxious to return to the exact same agenda they embraced when they were in the majority.

And the corporate media/political "mainstream" seems to think this is sane.

These same Republicans -- literally, the self-same individual people -- who were astonishingly wrong about pretty much every area of public policy in recent years, are the same Republicans who feel confident that they're still credible, knowledgeable, and correct. Not because they've changed their larger agenda or worldview, but because a brief period of time (only 7 months!!!) has elapsed.

They feel justified proposing a five-year spending freeze in response to the economic crisis. They feel comfortable pretending to be "outraged" about "death panel" policies that don't exist and that they already endorsed, promoted, and voted for in the past They have no qualms making bitter complaints about deficits and debts after having spent most of the decade increasing the size of government, increasing federal spending, and creating of some of the largest deficits in American history.

We're not supposed to point and laugh at their humiliating ideas and attacks -- we're supposed to negotiate with them.

What's more, rejected in large numbers by voters nine months ago, and after spending the last seven months acting like confused children, these same Republicans now insist what they really deserve is to be back in the majority again. Seriously.

I suppose the word that keeps coming to mind is "consequences." The Republican Party of the Bush era failed in ways few have even tried, burdening the nation with challenges and crises that are difficult to address and painful to even think about. They believe, however, there should be no consequences for this. There's no need, they say, to alter their political beliefs at all. Indeed, they see their main goal as the loyal opposition to undermine efforts to clean up the mess they left. They're the arsonists hoping to convince the public not to have confidence in the fire department.

No penance, no consequences, no self-reflection -- only the expectation that they be treated as a serious group with a credible agenda.

It's probably one of the most frustrating aspects of the larger political discourse today.

Individual issues aside, there's a temptation to turn to Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, et al, and say, "Shut your piehole, we're still waiting for that apology."

Three general guidelines for the healthcare debate:

First, whenever someone is spouting off about "communist fascism", you may ignore everything that person says from that point forward. Fascism and communism are two entirely different things, and a primary tenet of fascism is its opposition to communism. So if you think Obama is leading us to either fascist communism or communist fascism, you aren't only a paranoid, LaRouchian nut, you also don't even know what it is you're afraid of, and are just putting scary words together in the hope of stirring an emotional response among stupid people.

Second, you cannot be "against socialized medicine" and at the same time think Medicare is good. Medicare is, in no uncertain term, socialized medicine, and government run, and all of that very scary stuff. If the concept of "socialized medicine" outrages you, you are against Medicare. If you are for Medicare, then by definition there is some level of "socialized medicine" you are willing to accept, and at that point you are exactly where the entire rest of the country is, and we're merely arguing about the details.

All of the people who say that they are afraid of socialized medicine but that they support Medicare are liars. All of them. They either secretly don't support Medicare but are unwilling to say such an unpopular thing out loud, for obvious reasons, or they aren't in fact afraid of "socialized medicine" but still want to use the talking point.

This includes Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, and every Senate Republican, as well as the usual assembly of pundits and shouters and supposedly panic-stricken mobs crying in fear at town halls over the imminent Russianization of America if we undertake any meager healthcare reform whatsoever.

The third guideline: the first two guidelines are freaking obvious.

IT’S HARD TO SAY what’s more amusing, the wild-eyed Wingnutty rants from the mental midgets who make up what's left of the Republican base, at healthcare town hall meetings or the Republican leaderships attempts to portray those pre stoked, foaming at the mouth snarling sentiments as genuine mainstream anger about the president’s health care plans.

Obama, the Messiah of misinformation.

Look, if Obama is right and one of the main problems is the health insurance industry holding us "hostage," then why don't they just start a new, private insurance company and prove it?

That's very simple, risk-free, and doesn't require a thousand page bill. Just create an insurance company that acts "responsibly."

If he's not willing to go for that, doesn't it suggest insurance companies are not the true villians? And if that's the case, do we think he knows what he's talking about?

President Obama's already-solid approval ratings have started to climb again. The increase in the President's poll numbers can be traced back to when Corporate Sponsored Wingnut Teabaggers started terrorizing healthcare town-hall meetings; Americans, apparently, don't like people who quash civilized discussion by rudely screaming ad nauseam.
.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/08/10/Obama-has-6-month-approval-of-63-percent/UPI-86581249921095/

The loud Insurance Industry Astroturfed protests by the right-wing goon squads at Congressional town hall meetings are made for the media. It doesn't matter if the protests are astroturfed, or not; no "serious journalist" can resist showing, or writing about, chaotic right-wing protests. Thus the actions of a small, frustrated, and angry crowd dominate the debate the corporate media says this country is having.
.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8194485.stm
.

Rebuttal Points To The Seven Most Moronic Talking Points That The Big Insurance Lobby Has Been Feeding To The Delusional Wingnut Screamer Puppets To Repeat at Healthcare Townhalls All Over America:
------------------------------------------------------------------

"Where In The Constitution Does It Say That We're Entitled to Universal Health Care?"

** Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says the Congress must promote the general welfare of the people; how can the Congress say it is promoting the general welfare of the public when fifty people die a day that didn’t have to? Now, I know - promoting general welfare cannot be interpreted as every American is entitled to have the federal government to buy them a house, a bed, and fancy steak dinners every day; such broad interpretations would give Congress absurd powers, just as Madison correctly argued. General welfare does NOT mean the federal government has to provide us with all our necessities - because such a system would NOT be capitalism - there we agree. HOWEVER, Congress’s ability and duty to promote the general welfare under the Constitution, along with the Constitutional provision of equal protection under the law, DOES suggest that Congress has an obligation to see that people who work hard and save responsibly have an OPPORTUNITY to get those necessities; a system that has effectively been rigged over the years so that most people are one emergency away from having their insurance policy dropped and being unable to get coverage due to pre-existing condition, and given no options but death when extensive treatment is necessary, cannot be seen as consistent with Congressional duties under the general welfare clause or equal protection clause of the Constitution.

"I Believe In The Free Market!"

** I believe that competition and more choices are good for the market. A public option is one more choice, and more options are good for the consumer and good for the market. The current bills being proposed let you keep your private plan if you want, and use the public option if you choose. If the public option ends up being crap as some here think, people won't choose it - that's what the marketplace is all about - and if people don't choose the public option because private insurance is so much better, then no money in the program will be spent, and we've lost nothing; so this not a win or lose, but a win or break even, and you have to be pretty timid to be afraid of that.

"Government Care Sucks; Reform What We Have First!"

** Medicare and Medicaid are government run health insurance. They have problems, they need reform, but every poll shows that people are more unhappy with private insurance than they are with Medicare and Medicaid by double digits, and it makes sense to put out the biggest fire first. Most Americans aren't eligible for anything but private insurance anyway, so the idea that good solutions like reforming Medicare and malpractice lawuits are enough on their own is just a slap in the face.

"Big Money Interests Are Pushing The Public Option!"

** If you want to be cynical and vigilant as a citizen against big money influencing the government, YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE MONEY. On one side, there are BILLIONS of dollars at stake for the insurance companies, because they have the power to drop or deny anyone they please when they need urgent care in order to maximize their profits - of course they don’t want to give that up. On the other side, you have no financial motive that could even compare - who stands to make billions from the public option? Against the public option, you have a source of money, you have a motive, and you have planning and mass collusion by the insurance companies for decades to block any reforms, documented repeatedly by various non-partisan sources; on the other side, what even compares? Being vigilant against big money interests screwing with legislation that affects the people is VITAL, and I applaud everyone here who does so - but you HAVE TO FOLLOW THE MONEY, or otherwise, for all you know, you're fighting against the very things you think you're fighting for.

"BOOOOO!!!!"

** I'm sure that all the people yelling and booing have been lucky, they've never seen someone get denied life-saving treatment or be dropped altogether by their insurance company - or had it happen to themself. It would be easy for me to say that I hope you become one of those 14K a day who lose their health insurance so you can understand - but the truth is I hope none of you ever have to deal with that, I hope you never have to end up as one of those uninsured fifty people a day who die because they're refused the health care they needed to live.

"A Public Option Will Put Private Insurance Companies Out of Business!"

** No, not if you believe the Congressional Budget Office, who says private insurance companies will get MORE business when a public option is passed:

"I Am Against The Obamacare Bill!" -

** There is no Obama bill. Obama doesn't have a bill in Congress, or even a bill in Congress he said he supports, so if you oppose "the Obamacare bill", you oppose a figment of your imagination.

Don, sorry about your circumstaces, but there are things I don't understand. First, what legislation at the state level ended up costing you money for your health insurance? As a retiree, you should be on Medicare and you should have supplemental insurance. Most seniors do this. Second, even under Medicare, you have monthly premiums to pay.

I would like to know what you expect or believe ObamaCare will do for you?

Also, I highly disagree with your contention that Obama has our best interests at heart. Here is why?
1. He doesn't know what is in the House and Senate bills. He should.
2. He is interested in only government-run health care, despite his recent denials. His past statements and his current lies indicate this.
3. If you are sick and in poor health, more than likely ObamaCare will not help you. The Senate apparently did remove the "Death Panels," which the Dems and Mark Silva denied existed. The Death Panel still exists in the House version.
4. Ezekial Emanuel, Rahm's brother, who is an advisor to Obama on health care, has openly written about and advocated not caring for the ederly and the sick.
5, Most of the health care costs are for folks such as yourself. You and others who are not in the best of health or ederly account for 80 percent of health care costs. To cut costs, government-run health care will find you very inconvenient, if you know what I mean. You are a liability, Don. Sorry to say that, but that is what you will be classified as under Obama and government-run health care.

"More spending, more taxes, more government is not the answer," said Hatch.

Republican's complain about spending? What a joke!!!

The important spending of our nation should focus on infrastructre. That includes, education, health care, roads, etc. NOT on starting phony wars, over lies, against an "enemy" that never harmed us. Even the great conservative messiah Reagan never thought of invading or bombing Moscow or Berlin. He let the natural course of democracy take down the Berlin Wall and overthrow the Kremlin.

Want real facts? 2000: Record Surplus (thanks to Clinton)!!! 2008: Record Deficits (because of Bush)!!!

Can anyone really believe the Prez anymore? His credibility is shot as he goes around spreading disingenuous and outright false information contained in these Democract bills. I have to believe he hasn't read any of the details and these are the truly scary portions that outline a MASSIVE GOV'T TAKEOVER and not reform! There is a whole new obfuscating vocabulary involved and genuine confusing gov't double-speak. And talk about gov't intrusion into not only our medical history there is a whole new ball game involving the IRS oversight of your compliance (disclosing your tax records to health bureaucrats and personal worth). For a fairly honest assessment check out John David Lewis, a Classical Lit. Prof., at that liberal bastion, Duke Univ. He has made an honest attempt to decipher HR3200, the Pelosi/Dem/ Obama plan...go to classicalideals.com/HR3200.htm for his eye-popping conclusions and them compare what you hear from the MSM, the Dems, and Obama...you will joining the "mob" of average protesters and be accused of posting "fishy" stuff by the WH. Do not miss this!!!

According to the GOPer deather nutjobs, if Stephen Hawking had been born and raised in the UK, he would have been euthanized, the victim of Britain's National Health Service which would have deemed his life "worthless" because of his handicaps.
.
http://www.americablog.com/2009/08/stephen-hawking-proud-american.html

There was only one problem with that Wingnut deather theory: Hawking was born and raised in the UK. Indeed, he is now fighting back, crediting NHS with saving his life.

"I owe my life to the NHS': Stephen Hawking tells US to stop attacking health service
Professor Stephen Hawking has defended the NHS after its severe criticism during the American political debate over health care reforms.
The physicist spoke up for the NHS after the Republican Right in America claimed it was 'evil' and 'Orwellian' in a direct attack on President Barack Obama's plans to overhaul health care in the U.S.
Critics of the president have said his plans would introduce a 'socialist' system like Britain's.
Prof Hawking, who suffers from Lou Gehrig's disease, said: 'I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS.
'I have received a large amount of high quality treatment without which I would not have survived."
.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205953/NHS-branded-evil-Orwellian-high-level-US-politicians.html#ixzz0OGqrl0GM

I don't know what's more impressive about the Wingnut deather morons? The fact that they are willing to peddle such easily disprovable garbage with a straight face, or that they have managed to convince a few Democrats that they are worthy negotiating partners?

Some of the younger people among us might not be aware of this but the outrageous lies and fake outrage coming out of the mouths of Republican minions during a Democratic adminstration is nothing new. Republicans have been perfecting their Message of Hate for years.

This original flyer, one of about 5,000 distributed in downtown Dallas a day or two prior to the Kennedy assassination, was the creation of Republican ideologue Robert Surrey, an associate of Major General Edwin Walker, Retired. Unknown persons placed these anti-Kennedy handbills on car windshields and tucked inside racks of the two Dallas daily newspapers.
.
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/wantedfortreason.htm
.

Wake up- Obama is trying to snow ball Americans with his Onbamacare.

I'm thinking of having my kid's playroom death-paneled.

Maybe oak.

Not at all surprising that people are afraid of what they're seeing as The Health Plan. If I were paying attention to what the Republicans are spouting and believing a word of it, I'd be terrified, too! Who WOULD want to have some third-party making decisions on life and death for them or for their loved ones? Who WOULD be in favor of care being denied to old people or people who are chronically infirm?

Thing is, though, that there's a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG difference between "The Health Plan" and "What Republicans Are Telling Everybody." All those panels ARE NOT IN THE BILL, NOR ARE THEY BEING PROPOSED. It's all just what's being made up by the Republicans for their own political gain. I can't for the life of me understand why the Republicans don't stop lying and instead concentrate on the REAL problems with Obama's plan -- OR -- come up with a better plan themselves that they can sell to most of the people. They don't do either. And, while they're not doing anything to help, their partisans are shouting out people who really are trying to find out what the truth is.

Repubs don't want what's best for this country. They just want Republicans in office.

Thanks, " Mick " for presenting that reprehensible example of Republican strategy. Violence only begets violence. Our country hasn't been right, since we lost that good leader, President Kennedy.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE.NOW.

GrannyQuack,

"Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says the Congress must promote the general welfare of the people; how can the Congress say it is promoting the general welfare of the public when fifty people die a day that didn’t have to?"

Does the gov't feed us? hosue us? clothe us? Would you like the gov't to wipe your butt also?

However, for more of legal definition of what the Founders meant by the general welfare, try reading

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/08/04/congress-a-wealth-eating-virus/

Just a quick calculation to enlighten: I have a good health plan with my employer. Using my last paystub, the company's cost is $15,300 per year. Obama wants to tax employers not offering a qualified plan 8% of payroll. That means "breakeven" (company-plan cost vs payroll tax) occurs at a salary of $191,000. Can you guess what plan (my current or the govm't pool) I'll be on with OdumbaCare?

I also have two adult kids that are trying to get work in this messed-up economy. They are costing me $300 per mo out-of-pocket for their insurance. Do you really think a 22-yr old will be cheaper to insure once the general population gets figured into their bills?

This legislation is a turkey.

Gobble gobble.

More rebuttals to GrannyQuack - Which she copied and pasted from the Daily Kos,

"I believe that competition and more choices are good for the market. A public option is one more choice," - Will the playing field level or will all insurance providers have the ability to raise caoital thru printing money and hiking American's taxes? If you want more competition, tear down the walls between the insurance markets that exist at the state level.

"Government Care Sucks; Reform What We Have First!" Medicare and Medicaid are government run health insurance" - Both of these programs cost a lot more than they were originally projected and medicare is projected to go bankrupt within the next decade - unless rationing occurs.

"Big Money Interests Are Pushing The Public Option!" - Yes there is big money interest behind the pushing the public option - it has come from the Pharmaceutical Industry. Big pharma has the backing of former Congressman Bill Tauzin - who is now a lobbyist. He has been given a seat at the table at drafting of the health care bill. I wonder what happened to BO's pledge to not have lobbyist ionvolved in his administration?

"BOOOOO!!!!" - GrannyQuack would apply the Speaker Dimwit philosophy that if you disagree with the her health care bill, you must be un-American. Just shut-up you peons, the Democrats know what is best for you.

"A Public Option Will Put Private Insurance Companies Out of Business!" What the CBO does not tell you is that businesses will pay the penalty and let gov't cover their employees insurance. As far as the additional three million that will be covered by private insurance - that is probably the three million additional gov't employees that will be hired by 2016. Do you think the AFSCME will let its employees have their benefits downgraded to a federal gov't health care plan?

"I Am Against The Obamacare Bill!" - This one I agree with since BO has delegated the direction of the bill to Nancy and Harry. What I would be against is most of what BO has spoken about on this topic.

A public option as one of many means to prevent runaway gouging of Americans by insurance companies (selectivity, denial of service, yearly premium increases that dwarf inflation rates, etc) is the equalizer that will set a framework that would allow competition on a fairer basis that recognizes that decent, quality health-care is a right of all Americans, and not subject to market whims and company profits.

The realization that these changes are being threatened by lies, fear, deceit, misinformation and greed scares me silly. What frightens me most is the loss of this outrageously important opportunity for a healthcare bill with teeth and a public option in favor of a watered-down bill that is full of loopholes, and that continues to allow the raping of Americans in the name of outlandish insurance company profits.

Stealth Health?

Anytime government gets involved where it shouldn’t be involved, things usually tend to get screwed up. Indeed, anytime government gets involved in matters where it should constitutionally be involved, there’s the potential for a mess. Think United States Postal Service.

Likewise, when governmental figures campaign and campaign hard for some scheme or other and then backtrack big time on major features of that scheme, cynic that I am, I smell a rat. Think Obamacare.

In recent days, Obama surrogates seem to have backed off on two previously-essential elements of the Obama health care plan: end of life consults, aka ”death panels,” and now seem to have dumped the whole idea of “single payer,” aka government-run health care.

Today, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebellius dropped that latter bombshell in an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Nation,” saying, according to Bloomberg.com, that “government-run insurance isn’t essential to the Obama administration’s proposed overhaul of U.S. health care:” http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aRqy6w7DFAB0#.

I suspect something is awry when the Obamaites seem set to abandon that single payer, “public option,” which Obama has advocated for years while denying he has so advocated. It was the most fundamental change in his push for reform and to scrap it at this point is beyond mysterious.

Granted, other factors are in play, including . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)

* * * *
“Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says the Congress must promote the general welfare of the people; …”
* * * *
.
Posted by: grannydoc | August 15, 2009 7:13 PM
.
If that’s what your copy of the Constitution says (or that of the person from DailyKos from whom you borrowed this little tirade), then it isn’t worth the toilet paper upon which it is written. Article I, Section 8 powers are divided by semi-colons. The first semi-colon in Section 8, clause 1 does not occur until after the phrase “and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; ...” In which case, the “General Welfare” language, properly understood, was intended as a limitation on Congress’ power to tax and spend. That is, it was intended to prevent Congress from taxing or spending for any reason other than to pay for the defense or provide for the general welfare (unlike Barack Obama’s hospital earmarks). (See “The Federalist Papers,” Federalist No. 41 (Madison), where Madison debunks the claim that the language, “ … provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States" amounts to “an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare.”) Madison and Edmund Randolph (former governor of Virginia) spent a great deal of time during the debates at the Virginia Ratification Convention arguing that Section 8, clause 1 did not convey such enormous and absolute powers on Congress as are suggested by your statement. If the Constitution was ratified with this more limited understanding (and it is doubtful that Virginia or other states would have ratified unless their misunderstanding was assuaged), then that is the appropriate construction of that clause.
.
The foregoing is consistent with the original understanding that Congress’ powers were enumerated in the Constitution order to negate the exercise of other powers not enumerated. At the time, the Constitutions of the various states included no specification of powers for their legislatures. The only limitations that existed were specific restrains, such as prohibitions against ex post facto laws and the like. Thus, most people reading the Constitution would have understood that the enumeration of powers was intended to convey limitations. The Tenth Amendment was added precisely to make the Constitution explicitly say so.
.
Furthermore, even those who take the more liberal (and incorrect) view that Congress can spend for “the general welfare” apart from its enumerated powers - do not claim that the “general welfare” clause imposes some kind of duty on Congress to act (as you appear to claim). As a legislative body, Congress has the discretion to act or refrain from acting as it sees fit. Thus, even if one harbors your incorrect view, it still does not follow that Congress MUST act as you claim.
.
Let us not also forget that we live under a federal system of dual government. The federal government was initiated to handle a limited set of problems. State governments were tasked to handle the bulk of governmental duties, including preservation of the health, safety, and welfare of the people. This had been the traditional role and understanding of the division of power in the federal system from the founding of the United States until the ‘60s and ‘70s, when the federal government got into the business of health care. In which case, the federal government has no clear constitutional mandate to intervene in the health care debate. These are issues the States should be addressing. Displacing State governments from their role on this subject merely makes state governments weaker and less relevant, while also concentrating and centralizing power in Washington in a manner never contemplated.
.
I have now stepped down off of my soapbox, and Elvis has left the building.

If that is the case, " Berlet98 ", the next time you need the police, don't call them. After all, they are government and they would just screw things up, for you !!
Would you please, take notice of the nonsense you are spreading. It doesn't compliment your intelligence, nor your honesty !! Cease and desist on your mission to deny American citizens the healthcare help, a lot of us need !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

What the Hey! What is real scarey is that Newt is writing articles about health care!! HEY NEWT, WHO PAYS FOR YOUR HEALTH CARE!! WE ALSO PAY FOR MEDICARE, MEDIAID, AND THE V. A., WHERE OUR VETS GO, ALL PAID BY THE TAX PAYER!! We don't need a co-op run by the health insurance industry, what we need to do is put the health insurance industry out of business, it is just a scam and a racket, ran by racketeers. Sell me auto insurance, life insurance, accident insurance, or property insurance, health insurance is a racket that should be run by Madoff!! HEALTH CARE FOR ALL NOW, NO CO-OP, WE NEED A VIABLE PUBLIC OPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT THE RIGHT WING NUTS!! REMEMBER THAT THE REPUBLICANS NEVER DO ANYTHING FOR THIS COUNTRY, THEY ONLY DO THINGS TO THIS COUNTRY!! whiteagle38

The Special Interest lobbyists are spending $millions, spilling their lies to the American people. So many lies that they have likely disrupted any chance of Universal health care. They have lied so much about the Canada system, and paid off so many people to give birth to their lies, that the gullible population believes them. The wealthy insurers want no change, so they can ring every dollar out of a system.wrought with fraud and corruption In the long run cost will explode and only the upper class will have the money to buy care. Lose your job and even those people will join the millions out of work unable to pay for medical care for their family.
The Status Quo are selling propaganda and downright lies, across the TV, radio bandwidths. LIES! Lies and more lies about both Health care and illegal immigration. The facts are that President Obama has an objective of introducing a Canadian and European type single payer system.

In truth it's like a nationwide--MEDICARE--like all senior citizens receive now. It's only difference their will be--NO CO-PAYS, DEDUCTIONS, NO PREMIUMS AND NO PRE -EXISTING CONDITIONS. The Special interest lobbyists, who work for the wealthy health care industry, are using every means possible to derail any kind of Universal health care. We must remember the British/English, French, German, Danish and other have been well accepted by their population for decades, with no worries about bankruptcy or Debt collectors calling. My health care in England, was first class when I lived in there, without financial worries and no distractions from profiteering insurance companies.As a child and a young man I choose my doctor and received eye and dentistry visits free of charges.

I NEVER HAD TO WAIT FOR A SURGERY FOR MONTHS, AS THE SPECIAL INTEREST LOBBY TRIES TO IMPLY? EMERGENCY PROCEDURES WERE DEALT WITH IMMEDIATELY. One should remember that there a large majority of nefarious special interest groups, who enjoy the status quo and will fight with propaganda and lies against their profiteering. Another place where I lived was Australia, where the health care system is equally as great as England. One year I was employed by Australian Main Roads as a junior surveyor and stepped into a fire ants nest, ending up in hospital. Once again my cost was--ZERO--because I paid into the system. There is something very calming, without the worry of billing statements pouring through the mailbox demanding money and threatening you with an attorney.

Since the inception of the European common market and the directive of open borders for cheap labor pouring into the industrialized nations, they have been overwhelmed by the impoverished needing health care. Such conditions didn't exist before the 1960's, as the their was no mass immigration and waiting periods. In America today and since the newest waves of legal and illegal immigration, costs to medicate these people have sky rocketed who have never paid one penny into the system. Each previous government never have restricted immigration, but allowed taxpayers to pay for their health care and welfare benefits. Each year approximately 1.5 million new immigrants are granted work visas and many become public charges.

Now Obama is insisting on yet another AMNESTY, which will be even costlier to the American taxpayers, so says the Heritage foundation. American taxpayers should not have to subsidize US businesses, which has been happening for years? A large majority of pariah corporate executives, do not want any restrictions on foreign national workers, that is why they have tried to kill a mandated E-Verify identity data base, to extract all illegal immigrants from the working environment.

That SANCTUARY STATES like California must rescind illegal immigrant refuge policies. That President Obama's health care renewal plan—WILL--attract millions more impoverished people from around the world. That they can join with the 20 plus million already here, to get free medical care under the Democrats law now passing through Congress.

Observe this PETITION to STOP any health care to illegal immigrants at: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/nohealthcareforillegals

Yet another shocker; John D is again the first poster. He even capitalized "THE ABSOLUTE WORST PRESIDENT EVER!" to make his point clearer that he is an absolute hack (paid hack) for the rightwing and King of the Obama haters. How much are you paid per post, John? Talk about jerks, look in a mirror.

John W., well said. I wouldn't hold my breath for a response from "grannydoc". Parrots are good at repeating what other people said, and not as adept at giving an underlying rationale. The Swamp should clean up these cut and paste jobs or start calling itself the DailyKos II. It's the same half dozen or so cut and paste jobs on every single health care thread.

Posted by: Herbie H. | August 17, 2009 2:59 PM
.
Everything you wrote is completely correct. Whenever something seems suspiciously organized, I’ll Google some of the sentences in it. More often than not, I find the same dreck has been posted a number of other places before it ever got here. Nor is it uncommon for stuff to come here, nearly word for word, from the DailyKos. I mean, really: you would be amazed at just how much canned propaganda gets posted here from the DailyKos. grannydoc’s article came from the DailyKos with only the paragraph numbering removed. And, no, of course they can’t debate the issue if they are ignorant enough to take their cut-and-paste nonsense at face value.