Chuck Asay by Chuck Asay
- February 06, 2010
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Show Calendar
Tags: Vote the Porkers Out Add Tags
Editorials A-Z Navigation
Nick Anderson by Nick Anderson
Tony Auth by Tony Auth
About Chuck Asay
Chuck Asay sifts the events of the day through his biblical worldview and tries to persuade readers to see things his way...that rights are given by a higher authority than the governments of men, that mankind is not the ultimate arbiter of truth and that our Constitutional Republic is worth protecting. Chuck believes ideas, not politicians rule the world. He tries to protect ideas which he thinks are good and attacks ideas he thinks bring harm.
© 2010 Creators Syndicate - All Rights Reserved.
Comments (40) Jump to Comments Form
Libertarian1 said, 3 days ago
From tonight’s AP:”No, maybe he can’t. President Barack Obama, who insisted he would succeed where other presidents had failed to fix the nation’s health care system, now concedes the effort may die in Congress.”
Well the Democrats appear to have just saved $1.4Trillion
ANandy said, 3 days ago
If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.
CogentModality said, 3 days ago
Amen
jman50 said, 3 days ago
Unfortunately it IS broke and needs fixing.
oldwild said, 3 days ago
And if it is broke, as long as the fat cats are lining thier pockets, it never will get fixed. Vote them all out!
cabrobst said, 3 days ago
It is broken. Many people such as myself cannot afford to go to the doctor when they are sick, much less to have these ‘check-ups’ everyone says we should have. My sister the RN with the big fabulous house says I should have yearly check-ups, I say when Health Care passes. Republicans say when hell freezes over.
Libertarian1 said, 3 days ago
There are many people who don’t have the money for a good healthy nurturing diet. There are many people who don’t have the money for proper shelter. There are many people who don’t have the money for adequate clothing. All these problems should be considered along with health care. Are these the problems of a big central Federal government to solve? How about each state deciding what is best for their own citizens?
BTW, ask your RN sister for hard evidence that yearly checkups are cost efficient.
HOWGOZIT said, 3 days ago
Life is about choices; some chose to provide themselves with coverage, others do not until after the situation calls for it. Some are always looking for something for nothing and/or to be given to them.
Anthony 2816
said,
3 days ago
Maybe we should all just move to ANandyland, where there’s no problems with the healthcare system.
Justice22 said, 3 days ago
@oldwild, Unfortunately we can’t vote out the CEOs and board members of the insurance companies. When only 1/3 of what we spend on health care actually goes for healthcare, something is wrong.
NeoconMan said, 3 days ago
oldwild said, And if it is broke, as long as the fat cats are lining thier pockets, it never will get fixed. Vote them all out!
Ha! You can’t vote me out! You never elected me in the first place.
wbr said, 3 days ago
gov health care quality – see V A
oldlegodad
said,
3 days ago
In some areas VA is the leading edge of technology, unfortunately it is saddled with excessive bureaucrats and aging facilities. They also have the priority of caring for the new wounded vets, for which I do not fault them.
dtroutma said, 3 days ago
the toon perfectly illustrates the magic that sustained the F-22, one part made in almost every district, and it survived long past it’s expiration date.
As to VA- they do believe in annual checkups to save long-term costs due to preventable disease process. The other key point on VA is that the largest part of their audience already has “pre-existing conditions” that preclude them from getting their own “private” insurance, or individual policies. They may, or may not, be able to get into a group benefit plan other than VA.
human said, 3 days ago
Get money out of getting elected and maybe you will see some progress in these issues. As long as it takes a fortune to get elected those who are elected will be beholden to those who got them there and will keep them in office.
As far as health care in the USA it is fine if you are healthy and have money to burn, otherwise it is best not to get sick or have any need to go to a doctor like broken bones or deep cuts or other such things.
If you have health insurance in the USA it is best if you never have to use it because it is at that time that you will find out if the insurance was worth the money you spent. It does not operate like car insurance and is many times more expensive.
Ken Warren said, 3 days ago
Blue Cross is raising it’s rates by 37%.
ahab
said,
3 days ago
Richard Shelby, Republican whore for EADS,blocking nominations,obstructing everything so the companies that have given him in excess of 100,000#$slush/campain funds can do business. Republican Senator - prototype of what you guys say is best about the party. http://www.publicintegrity.org/blog/entry1932/
ReFlex-76
said,
3 days ago
“There are many people who don’t have the money for a good healthy nurturing diet.”
Food stamps!
“There are many people who don’t have the money for proper shelter.”
Section 8 housing!
“There are many people who don’t have the money for adequate clothing.”
Hmmm, right, that one’s not covered (IIRC) … yet!
“All these problems should be considered along with health care.”
Two of them obviously are!
“Are these the problems of a big central Federal government to solve?”
As the Constitution says, “Provide for the general welfare.”
“How about each state deciding what is best for their own citizens?”
No reason the states can’t help out as well. California’s Medi-Cal program has been a great supplement to Medicaid.
davesmithsit said, 3 days ago
Providing for the general welfare doesnt mean providing welfare.
NeoconMan said, 2 days ago
Right! Welfare does NOT mean welfare.
Bruce4671 said, 2 days ago
Uh, dude…reflex…california is broke and looking to the rest of us to bail them out…..yep they have good expensive programs. Don;t want to copy them……..THERE BROKE
HabaneroBuck said, 2 days ago
Dave meant providing for the general welfare doesn’t mean providing INDIVIDUAL welfare. Providing roads that everyone uses in one fashion or another is not the same as giving single moms who are shacking up food stamps.
comYics
said,
2 days ago
sssssick Bruce4671, EnglishTeacher, for his “THERE” spellage.
NeoconMan said, 2 days ago
HabaneroBuck,I’m agreeing with you and davesmithsit entirely. You’re quite right. The “general welfare” means the government should give money to things that everyone uses like roads, banks, insurance companies, accounting firms, and Wal-Marts. It is NOT meant to make Americans’ lives better. That would be godless socialism.
Bruce4671 said, 2 days ago
OH NOOOOOO!!!! Not The English Teacher!
ReFlex-76
said,
2 days ago
California Broke: Ummm, yeah, it’s called Proposition 13 (i.e. The Great 1978 Mistake).
EnglishTeacher said, 2 days ago
^^ Be afraid.
Be very afraid.
“There,” indeed!
fennec said, 1 day ago
^Oooooops! (Chuckle.)
fennec said, 1 day ago
Oooops. ET goes rogue again!!!
BTW, I think Asay is an idiot. Dunno why I even spend my time replying here except for all you other more aware guys.
Bruce4671 said, 1 day ago
There is no reason why their comments can’t be correct.
They’re just lazy. sorry ET
EnglishTeacher said, 1 day ago
Bruce4671, I agree. Therefore, I shall tell you that “sorry” needs to be capitalized as it starts a sentence. Further, it should be followed by a comma and ET needs a period following it.
Bruce4671 said, 1 day ago
MAMA!!!!
ReasonsVentriloquist said, 1 day ago
Let’s see, there is an election coming up. What should the Democrats do?
They should make it a simple up or down referendum for Single Payer!
Go for it. “It’s simple everyone, the tax is going to be $10,000 per year for a family of 4. Your current insurance cost you 30,000. Everyone is covered and the doctors and hospitals get paid just like now.”
EVERYBODY runing as a Democrat is on the same page or they lose party funding and party support! (Even if you don’t agree, if you’re not willing to help the party with this then we do need you to be gone!)EVERYBODY says the same thing. No half ways, no “public options.”
Given the choice, a majority of Americans will vote in favor of single payer. Dems win, they have a mandate from the people.
Not to mention, there is not a Fortune 500 company that wouldn’t support this!
Bruce4671 said, 1 day ago
RV: does that include people on medicare/medicade? How about people that have retired with part of their retirement being helth insurance? Is every single person, man woman and child going put in $2500? Even people on fixed incomes that don’t have an extra $2500 a year to put in? I know that me having to pay $418 a month will certainly put me on a diet…..
rekam
said,
about 22 hours ago
To reflex-76:
California’s Proposition 13, while definitely not perfect, was a grass-roots reaction to steadily rising property taxes which was forcing a lot of seniors and others on low income being taxed out of their homes. Home ownership shouldn’t be only for the wealthy.
There were some who were for more moderate restructuring of the tax situation, but our “illustrious” Legislature wouldn’t hear of it. There was a more moderate proposal made by then Senator Peter Behr. The Legislature gutted it, then half-heartedly put it on the ballot as Proposition 8, issuing dire warnings and threats about what they would do to us, the public, if we had the audacity to pass either one. The Legislature of California brought Proposition 13 on itself. As for us, being seniors, at least we were able to keep our home and keep paying the property taxes. Perhaps the principle of Prop. 13 could be kept in part by removing that protection from commercial property and keeping it on homes, but the “kicker” there would be if such protection was removed from apartment complexes, any tax increase would simply be passed on to tenants as rent increases, putting them in a bind. With the current totally dysfunctional, arrogant bunch of spoiled brats making up our Legislature, I doubt anything of value can occur.
DrCanuck said, about 19 hours ago
Think how many bloated expensive bureaucracies like Medicare, Medicaid, and VA you could get rid of if you had one universal single payer for everyone. What a money-saver!
Aw, but then all the bureaucrats would lose their piece of the pie. Naw, that’d never work.
Bruce4671 said, about 8 hours ago
I’m confused DrC. Are there premiums involved with Medicare, Medicaid and VA?
If we went to a single payer system (which I would like) would that require people that don’t pay a premium have to start?
The post by RV indicates yes. I know it would change my lifestyle to have an additional $400-$500 a month coming out of my retirement check. I can do it but I wouldn’t like it.
ReasonsVentriloquist said, about 4 hours ago
You know what Bruce, in reality it wouldn’t cost you a single extra dollar (well “reality” is a stretch)
The level of your local school taxes would drop because they don’t have to pay insurance anymore (even if they gave every employee the 10,000 raise to cover the increased tax, it’s still less than what they pay now!)
Your city, county state taxes would drop for the same reason.
The price of everything sold by everyone from auto insurance agents to Zither selling music stores would drop because the current health insurance premiums act like a VAT tax to everything you buy (food is not subject to a sales tax, but it is subject to the current “health insurance tax” that we all pay right now!)
The whole idea is that on a net basis, the cost of single payer would be substantially lower than what we’re paying, collectively, now.
And if there was a single payer system, how complicated would the billing department at you doctor’s office be? Answer; NOT complicated at all! It would be pratically automatic.
And what would happen to the economy? It would be simple to hire people and corporate America would be flush with cash from not having to pay half or more of the insurance bill!
As I said, I’m glad I didn’t have to vote in Ma. because I would have been hard pressed to vote for this Frankensteinian mish mosh “reform” package by voting for Choakley!
ReasonsVentriloquist said, about 4 hours ago
But your other point is well taken, that exceptions need to be made for those already in the “socialized medicine” pool.
Bruce4671 said, about 2 hours ago
RV: that seems to be a logical conclusion that other costs would come down. We would have to get there to see if it would really happen.
Of course, I don’t have a problem with paying for my healthcare now because I planned for it and followed that plan for over 30 years. I go, they bill the insurance and then send me a bill for what insurance doesn’t pay and I pay it. No problem.
And if the bureaucracies would be done away with(that I doubt would happen) like the Doc says, then yes, what a money saver.
SIGH - our reps need to sit down and talk, not point fingers and blame each other for failure.